Honestly, I did not “factor in” the possibility that an article I wrote about Ambassador Purity could generate this kind of fierce debate. If you ask me, the article was intended to lament the distance between Purity and Wakenya vis-à-vis the Swedish bureaucracy especially within the diplomatic community. Another surprise was the possibility that Beryl Otumba, a Kenya-Stockholmer, would creep into the debate to attack me “for insulting Purity” without being specific or producing evidence.
Personally, I am disappointed that so far, Beryl has failed to respond to my challenge that she present alleged “insults” directed at Purity because everything I have written about Purity can be retrieved from the archives of this very blog. The articles have not been deleted and, in the face of her serious allegations, it is only civil that I make this kind of request.
I am disappointed because such a presentation could, probably, accord me an opportunity to re-examine my approach to Ambassador Purity with respect to my critique at KSB. An accusation of “insult” on the person of a Plenipotentiary is, by any stretch of the imagination, grave and if it cannot be demonstrated “beyond any reasonable doubt” or substantiated with hard evidence, the accuser runs the inevitable risk of being charged with the incorrigible crime of malicious “witch-hunting”.
Even in the field of Rhetoric (which I studied at Södertorn University) you do not make a claim without evidence if you want to retain your credibility and respect. As a “fellow traveler” who has studied Political Science at the same University, Beryl should know and understand that within the confines of academic debate, you do not state a fact without presenting a basis.
In my attacks against Purity, I normally present the facts and consequently, if Beryl directs accusations of “insults” at the Ambassador, the onus is on her to either present the facts to support her claim or give references. Since she has failed to do so, my friend Beryl needs to either withdraw her unfounded claims or keep her peace forever. If she must protect Purity’s image, she needs to do so without dragging my name into the defence.
Having said that, the worst surprise during this debate has been the anti-Beryl vitriol that has sprouted prominently and the enormous support I have received from fans and supporters alike. In fact, I thought that I am fighting a “one man battle” with Purity but from what I learn, I seem to be speaking on behalf of a silent majority. This is good news.
Regardless of what has been said about her, Beryl remains a friend of mine and since this debate started, we have talked on the phone. I know her as a steadfast, intelligent and promising Kenyan woman who knows and understands her priorities. I also know her as a responsible mother of two, a wife of a respected friend of mine and, most importantly, an ambitious young Kenyan lady who will stop at nothing to get what she wants. We do disagree in opinion but this is normal. In fact, it wouldn’t be surprising to find us taking coffee at a shop in town even after developments at KSB because my differences with her do not boarder on the personal.
I think that the petrol fuelling this debate is the perception by commentators that Ambassador Purity Muhindi is fundamentally indefensible. This position is informed by the fact that there is nothing to show to sustain the view that Purity has had a successful career as a diplomat. What is available is a plethora of failures, some of which have been well documented by me at KSB.
To some extent, I pity Beryl because of the unexpected and negative reactions which have not only questioned her credibility as a supporter of Purity but also cast aspersions on her character as a whole. For observers who do not know Beryl or those who do not understand her general demeanor, it would be preposterous to antagonize her on the basis of sporadic comments being spewed anonymously at KSB.
The dilemma is that at KSB’s comments section, anything goes under the banner of Free speech. Kenyans in Stockholm have already spoken. They refused to allow me to write about the Kenya-Stockholm society without the benefit of independent comments by the very people I passionately write about and, as a democrat, I responded and opened the comment section. Unfortunately my multiple appeals to commentators for moderation have fallen on deaf ears.
To get back to the point, I thought it would be appropriate for me to take a clear position on the current debate so that I am not misunderstood in the face of a torrent of comments emanating from an innocent article I penned.
I will continue to study the trend because it is in doing so that I also learn. My last appeal is for commentators to stick to facts, raise the debate level, remain sober and exploit the space at KSB to positively advance the interest of Kenyans in Stockholm.
Okoth Osewe
About the Author
Jaduong Osewe,
There are reasons that make your space respectable.Its been an honour to be one of the victims of negative comments,however we as Kenya Stockholmers should not loose sight of the reason why you opened up this blog.It is my belief ,that with patience ,you will find grounds to add other sections for topical discourses.I am so relieved that you as the person who gives us a place to vent , took the case for and against Beryl without being emotional and insulting.Thats the way its supposed to be.Anthony Odera
Well stated Osewe. For the umpteenth time, can Beryl Otumba substantiate her claims that you insulted Ambassador Muhindi? I guess her input was more of chiding you, rather than straightening certain facts. She should have stuck to proving that Purity was part of the church ceremony, instead of dragging other pointless matters that generated a whole new angle of assessing her persona.
Beryl got more attacks because one commentator called Caroline singled out her behavior that borders upon sycophancy.
Beryl is on record elsewhere as having stated that Awuor (Purity’s former deputy) was after all promoted to become the new Kenyan High Commisioner in Zambia, despite having been attacked several times (possibly at KSB). She did not mention KSB, but the statement was an obvious: so what? She is moving way up despite…
Caroline and Eva Larsson assessed Beryl’s character in order to let readers know where she comes from in her ‘loyalty’ to Purity. Osewe made it clear that she was bold enough to use her name to support her. Quite daring, considering that she did not have a solid ground in case of Osewe’s more superior fire power, meaning facts.
Eva Larsson also did a number on Beryl by presenting a sophisticated analysis of her character which is competitive, yet arrogant and demeaning. She is the type that sneers upon other Kenyans of a “lesser social status”. KSB archives indicate that Purity is the same, especially in the way she handles Kenyans socially.
Osewe, you are the accomplished writer you are. See how you join the threads successfully to bring a perfect analysis on Purity and Beryl.
On Purity’s vitenge, why should Beryl and a few supporters waste their time challenging Osewe’s opinion, yet Michelle Obama (world’s most powerful first lady) is always dressed down by Fashionistas for her bad choice of clothing during certain important occasions?
Purity is a public figure in Kenya-Stockholm, so writing about her as long as their is no insult should be in order. Osewe, keep writing about her biased nature of meeting Kenyans.
Beryl should be reminded of Purity’s rotten treatment of Njenga, Cheruiyot (her former staff member), the former Luhya cook she sacked, and the selective way of attending Kenyan functions. Attending Kajuju’s function was probably more out of being from the same tribe, than anything else.
Purity should be recalled!!!!!
I fully agree with Vera that criticising Purity’s vitenge is not an insult. Many times world leaders are criticised by the fashion police yet they continue working. Chancellor Angela Markell was once criticised for wearing a low cut dress showing her upper chest (boobs) but did that change the fact that she is one of the most powerful world leaders? No. So who is Beryl to think it is an insult to mention the worn out vitenge of Mama Purity?
Beryl should use her time on more important things other than bootlicking Purity.
Can Beryl let me ito the inner circle or Purity, although am not an aviator. I think free food and drinks would elevate me socially. Anyway Osewe, you’ve made a good review of this online drama. Beryl’s missing in action, not replying.
I commented on the earlier on the Purity-Beryl debate and KSB edited it with these remarks: Naturally, your mail has been edited because I am legally responsible for your dirty remarks. If you have stronger balls, use yr ID then throw abuses because then, you will personally take responsibility. As long as you cannot do so, you will not name names and hurl matusi here.
To set the record straight, my comments then were nowhere near the tripe being published as “free speech” on KSB. My query was to whether the KSB moderator was a kitenge expert or wearer of kitenges as to determine his expertise on the subject (Feel free to edit this comment too). Obviously that remark hit a raw nerve with the moderator and censorship was a fact. Would changing my handle to John or Peter be indicative of personally taking responsibility and therefore giving me the go-ahead to hurl matusi to my heart’s desire? But the discrepancy in this mode of reasoning only re-enforces the notion that apparently hurling matusi at others is fine as long as the KSB moderator is not the target. Why then has the moderator not edited Caroline or Msema ukweli comments, even the rest that are virtually tearing each other to bits?
I have to commend Tony Odera aka Ean Woud Luo since he is the only person urging the rest to be civil and seek a better forum to iron out their personal differences. For that he has been heavily punished with insults. For what it’s worth, Tony displays the kind of class lacking in the majority of Kenyan-Stockholmers by refraining to respond in kind. Matusi is matusi whether directed to the moderator or any other person regardless of what handle is used and by whom. If the moderator is and was genuine in his opposition to matusi he would have definitely have acted by now. The moderator may retreat and deny responsibility with justifications of allowing free speech or claim it to be a result of allowing comments on KSB. However it is certainly very evident that extreme bigotry is rife on KSB and its cousin hypocrisy follows close behind.
Then of course one begins to reflect on the situation that has arisen as a result of this free for all. The moderators appeal to commentators to stick to facts, raise the debate level, remain sober and exploit the space at KSB to positively advance the interest of Kenyans in Stockholm comes at a time when the debate turned septic. Irreparable damage had been done and the fire brigade is being called out when the house has burned down to ashes. The timing of this appeal is debatable and it’s sincerity questionable. Funny though, I thought the piece was all about the Kenyan Ambassador being sidelined at Princess Victoria’s wedding. It has since been established that the article was about Purity, and more so to ridicule her, but then why did the moderator allow the vicious attacks on Beryl to continue unabated? Is this a covert attempt at settling scores with Beryl by giving Kenyans an opportunity to nail her to the cross? Could it be a hidden attempt at returning censorship at KSB by first allowing a free for all, then using that as basis for the return to the undemocratic modus operandi of the days of old?
Or maybe I am just slow-witted and don’t get it? Is it all one big misunderstanding?
KSB: I do appreciate your attempt to investigate the state of censorship at KSB. There is definitely a misunderstanding which I need to clear. When I cut down your posting, I also challenged you to >use yr ID then throw abuses<. So far, not even Beryl has come up with my alleged "insults" of Purity. Remember that you were not insulting "anybody". You were insulting His Excellency plus His Highness, President of KSB aka moderator bin notorious Okoth Osewe aende nyumbani KSB ifungwe kabisa, (a chap who has never insulted anybody here) then you still expect a platform at KSB. If I do that (and to borrow from Caroline) I would be having a single cell of a brain.
The target audience which participates at KSB affairs are Kenyans in Stockholm who know each other quite well. Some abuses are based on personal knowledge of individuals and if the victim is named and well known, the standard of censorship has been elevated and serious insults are not permitted. It must be appreciated that KSB is also evolving. You say Beryl has been insulted here without examples. FYI, a lot of Beryl’s enemies have insulted her using personal histories but all these insults have been censored (or whole comments deleted) with some censorship having been X-ed (XXX) right on the text so what are you talking about?
I know you are not “sleepy brained”:- I do not know who Caroline is neither do I know who Msema ukweli is. Legally, neither of these personalities can sue KSB for matusi because both of them could be using handles. In this kind of case, they can fry each other as much as they want under free speech without KSB having to worry about legal action. Taking a “Peter” or “Paul” handle does not lead to taking responsibility. You can even call yourself “Okoth” but this will never make you “Okoth Osewe”. But, if you call yourself “Raila Odinga”, arguing that it is a handle, this may not be enough and proceeding to insult people may be questionable under the rules of ID theft. It is a bit complicated and I may not be able to explain everything here.
When you suggest that I may be having scores to settle with Beryl, I may as well begin to question whether you “have a teaspoonful of a brain” or whether you are the “last in your clan born without a tail”. This is because I have publicly released a statement to clarify my position in this debate and my perception of Beryl whom I think is one of the most brilliant Kenyans in Stockholm. Our families in Stockholm are close and I have even been to the home village of Beryl’s hubby in Kenya where I was well treated during an overnight stay. I hope this will shut you down. If you still don’t get it, then may be, you were once at a mental hospital where a lot of drugs may have been tested on your brain (Caroline at KSB 20100630!).
Kenyadamubut… you have always struck me as a smart commentator until this latest entry which makes me think otherwise. Since you commented on the previous thread about “Purity’s marginalization”, you must have grasped the core of Osewe’s argument, which was basically a swipe at Purity. Many interpreted it as humorous, sarcastic or satirical. Beryl took it a notch higher by vigorously defending Purity, which was interpreted as sycophantic.
My point is, with the above, you should have by now realized that there is not much ado in this for you to question Osewe’s expertise in vitenge. I think you can do better.
I also feel offended by this statement: “Tony displays the kind of class lacking in the majority of Kenyan-Stockholmers.” Such a sweeping line can draw flaming because you have already underrated Kenyans in general. You should then be boxed into a corner as a recent stupid commentator with the handle “Adongo” who claimed that Luos were tribalists.
What do you mean by CLASS? What class does Tony Odera have? Are you discussing Kenyans at KSB or in real life? As I noted in the beginning, your previous entries were appealing except this one. You do not expect respect if you do not offer it. I will not dress you down, but will request that you take care of how you observe others, because you could be assessed equally.
Mr. Moderator thank you for your prompt informative response, the lack of censorship in my latest posting is quite refreshing. However, it is apparent that you have become somewhat flustered and it would seem you are not accustomed to being effectively challenged. Pleasantries observed let me give my rebuttal.
Did I really insult His Excellency plus His Highness, President of KSB aka moderator bin notorious Okoth Osewe as you allege? I did not at anytime write that Osewe aende nyumbani KSB ifungwe kabisa, you must have mistaken me for one of your other many critics. All the same, I hesitate to call you a lair but may I request a reprint my first comment verbatim on KSB for all to see and read? Let the truth out of the shadows for a change on your blog. As you quite correctly state, some abuses are based on personal knowledge of individuals and if the victim is named and well known, the standard of censorship has been elevated and serious insults are not permitted. That is not in contention, but a fact. But however this statement does give illumination as to what goes at KSB:
1.Insults are allowed.
2.Insults based on personal knowledge of individuals are allowed.
3.Serious insults are not permitted, just the minor ones.
4.Policy is not to elevate the standard of censorship in regard to minor insults.
There is no doubt at all in my mind, and many others, that Beryl has been thoroughly insulted on KSB. Asking me to give examples is just comical on your part or to put it frankly, an attempt at playing the fool. That doesn’t wash. An insult is an insult, whether one writes that Mr. X barks all the time or writes that he is a dog. Potato’s potatoes. You do not shy away from delivering hefty insults yourself. For example, you write that you question whether I “have a teaspoonful of a brain” or whether I am the “last in your clan born without a tail”. That’s an insult right there. You have not only targeted me but the whole of my clan. Then further on you quote what Caroline had written (Caroline at KSB 20100630!) that If I still didn’t get it, then may be, I was once at a mental hospital where a lot of drugs may have been tested on my brain. This naturally to enable you to claim that you were just quoting Caroline, but the insult has been wrapped and delivered as intended. Publicly releasing a statement to clarify your position in this debate and your perception of Beryl is quite contradictory to your modus operandi on KSB. Moreover your narration of how your families in Stockholm are close and being to the home village of Beryl’s hubby in Kenya where you were well treated during an overnight stay, maybe interesting in certain quarters but is hardly of any real relevance. Even siblings insult each other and yet share parents and a homestead.
I find it quite sadistic and distasteful to provide someone’s enemies with a forum for character assassination. You cannot claim ignorance in this matter since you are well aware that the enemies of both Beryl and Odera post comments providing personal histories. You have plainly stated as much and are at pains to explain that these insults have been censored having been X-ed (XXX) right on the text, but just happen to leave enough clues so that the intended audience can decipher the juicy story (opps!). Or maybe I am so confused due to the drugs that may have tested on my brain?
May I be so humble as to pose a question? I understand from your publicly released statement clarifying your position in this debate that you have studied Rhetoric at Södertorn University. Accordingly you do not make a claim without evidence if you want to retain your credibility and respect. However, what is your take on ethics? Do they figure anywhere in your perception of how debates should be conducted and as to how information dissemination should be directed? I ask the question because I find KSB seriously wanting in this respect. Can someone retain credibility and respect bereft of moral principles?
Auma, thanks for the compliments and threat of being cornered like Adongo. I do not post comments to please anyone, just write plainly and voice my opinion. But my dear, my comments stand. Tony has shown some class unlike other commentators. He has been provoked and attacked and didn’t resort to petty, cheap insults to get back at his hecklers. That is a CLASS act in my book.
KSB: You might want to engage in polemics but it doesn’t change two things. You cannot bring out the “insults” against Beryl so there is nothing to work with. Secondly, you are using a handle and I am using my real ID. In as much as I would like to engage you (time allowing), we are at different levels because while you are dealing with me, I am actually dealing with a ghost. I have to leave for an appointment with brother Tengo in Märsta. I will deal with you when I return and when I have the time because you seem to be having a nut to crack with me under the guise of investigating censorship. Do not hold brief for Beryl because she is capable of defending herself. As you blubber here, we talk on the phone. In the meantime, try to develope a sense of humour and look at the Caroline “tit-bits” from that context. Don’t be sleepy brained.
Moderator, I do engage in polemics and believe it is what differentiates as from the animal’s kingdom amongst other attributes. I will not split hairs with you over providing evidence of insults as you have provided prime examples in your retorts. Moreover, I am not holding brief for Beryl, or any other person for that matter, and she is quite capable of speaking her own mind. My comments mirror the situation as it is. Ghosts abound on KSB comments section so this isn’t a unknown phenomenon or a creation on my part. I just going with the standards set by my fellow Kenyans, the difference being that I never engage in insults aka mud-slinging.
I have changed by handle to Patrick Shaw for your convenience and dealing with my lively comments. Point of information, I am not investigating censorship so the nut I am trying to crack with you is just imaginary or enforced notion. I simply posed the question as to the credible possibility that the run of the debate was indicative of being a ruse to return totalitarianism at KSB. I look forward to your dealing with me on your return from brother Tengo in Märsta, perhaps the trip will aid towards the impetus required to enhance the shadowy recesses found on KSB. As I previously urged you, let the truth out of the shadows for a change. Be forewarned though, I will only respond to mature dialogue and commentary that is without bile. My sense of humor has never been better, and I consider myself quite the chirpy fellow but draw the line however when insults and abuse are seen as humorous. I honestly find it rather distasteful and demeaning. That is why the “tit-bits” from Caroline did not register since I mentally flushed them down the poop-shoot where they belong. I will try to keep myself alert by using smelling salts to counter act the sleepy brain syndrome.
KSB: Kenyadamubutabroad aka Patrick Shaw, I am back to base. As a literary style, polemics can be very interesting and entertaining if driven without malice. I was a bit in a hurry when I responded to your post. As promised, I am now back to address your concerns.
I find it difficult to engage you seriously in this debate if you are not willing to follow the basic rules of a healthy and honest debate. The thrust of your concern is your perception that I have been allowing “insults” in the direction of Beryl while the departure point of my retort is that so far, no such insults exist. My second argument is that the insults have not passed through because of active censorship. The problem I have with you is that if you cannot provide references to these insults, then there is nothing to debate about.
When I threw the Caroline “tit-bits” on your door step expecting that you would imbibe the intended humour, you picked them up with alacrity and added them in your amoury then used them to demonstrate that I was hurling insults in your direction albeit in disguise. You proceeded to rubbish the humour potential of the “tit-bits” and I could sympathize with your technique because it favoured your stand-point. Why can’t you also lift the Beryl “insults” and use them to enforce your arguement, given that all the comments are still intact at KSB? If you cannot do so, I cannot consequently engage you at the intellectual level because then, there is no praxis. I am sure that even informed observers who have access to the Beryl comments will question your sincerity in claiming that I am allowing the insults if they don’t exist.
Another issue which I find spurious is your apparent belief that changing handles will move the goal posts during debate. A handle is a handle regardless of the number of times it is changed. I still don’t understand what you intend to achieve by changing your handle but let us wait and see. I had indicated that changing a handle to a more human one does not elevate status but you still proceeded to adopt the “Patrick Show” handle. In the meantime, if you cannot address the core issues which could form the basis of an informed exchange, engaging you seriously will be like boxing into the void and I will be left with no option but to ignore your postings. The best I will be able to do is to smile from a distance.
Kenyadamu: You have toned down your initial allegation of “many Kenyans” to “unlike others” in your response. You also cited some “insults” Osewe had unleashed on you. However, “lack of class” according to me, still falls into the category of insults, depending upon one’s interpretation.
We come from a socially stratified background (i.e. Kenya) and some may be offended when referred to as “lacking class”. I still repeat that your choice of certain words is equally demeaning.
Mr. Moderator my compliments on your well presented rebuttal. I do echo your sentiments on polemics without malice, something I personally strive to maintain.
Auma, how one behaves towards others is indicative of the class one has. The moderator and I have crossed swords and had heated salvos but he and I chose to engage by stating our positions clearly without any emotional outbursts. Thus the debate doesn’t spiral out of control and we do not find ourselves in the cesspool many other commentators seem to prefer. If you note carefully in my comments to him above I have ceded to his argument, in essence agreeing to agree to disagree without going out of the scope of our debate by name calling or attempts at ridiculing his person. This is what Odera has been saying albeit in other words and it is my contention many commentators on KSB don’t see the wood for the trees in this respect. Therefore if we assume commentators had some schooling of sorts what differentiates them is their class, which you correctly identified as social stratification, and is often mirrored in how one expresses themselves. Education will only take one so far; it is how that education is applied when interacting with others that provides insight into just what class of individual one is dealing with. Like it or not, the majority of Kenyan-Stockholmers fail miserably when put to the test. Auma, that should now explicitly explain my comment about Kenyan-Stockholmers lacking class. Since you were offended, I can only offer my commiserations at this juncture.
Kenyadamu my point is don’t play the angel that also sneers at others yet proclaims civility.
KenyaDamuButAbroad: Now that this debate is coiming to an end, let me give you a piece of my mind. Osewe has put you to test and found you wanting. You could not point on clear “insults” just as Beryl did not, when challenged by others. As stated by Osewe, anything goes at KSB; meaning that there is no censorship when commentators “do each other in” as long as they do not offend the general atmosphere of engagement.
You picked on other issues that Osewe challenged you to substantiate upon, all in vain. What I found ironic was for you to “cut and paste” your retort (comment # 7), then post it at another Kenya-Stockholm blog. I interpreted this to be a precautionary measure, just in case Osewe “censored it”, so that your next thread could justify your claims that he is selective in editing. However, Osewe posted it verbatim, thereby doing a Raila Odinga on you (referring to his acceptance of the Presidential system in the new Kenyan Constitutional debate). You then got confused by his concise retort that again challenged your claims of insults.
Subsequent references by “Auma” on your sugar-coated insults mentioning Antony Odera as a person of “Class” were not convincing, thereby portraying you as judgmental about many Kenya-Stockholmers.
Tony’s social problems and his low standing are well known in Stockholm, so there is no way you can use him as an example of one with “class”, even in the context of KSB comments. Although the topic is about Purity, there have been interjections by sympathizers like Beryl supporting her.
As usual, another non-creative Kenya-Stockholmer recently hijacked this topic plus that of the “Ailing Old Man” to gain traffic. You also posted the comment I refer to there. Although you have the freedom of expression and cross posting, the blog I refer to is known to plagiarize and extrapolate on matters that affect Kenya-Stockholmers without shame, having picked the original ideas from KSB. It also means that the owner indirectly subscribes to skewed favoritism (towards Purity), without neutrality. KSB has had previous “Blog Wars” with most of the defunct or the only other blog within Kenya-Stockholm, and there was a complete stop in literally copying what was happening at KSB, until these recent two major threads.
Kenyadamu, although you ‘play’ impartial, there is veiled froth chocking you when it comes to viewing KSB and its overall operations, especially on the comment section that you query Osewe concerning censorship. Other closed and current blogs not only queried Osewe, but also condemned him for not opening up the comment section, thus concluding he was undemocratic. Now that it is open, you allege that he partially accepts insults. Osewe has systematically called for restraint at KSB, long before tonny knew that KSB existed and you have to go to KSB’s archive to prove me right. He challenged you on various fronts, yet you played the “saint”. You want all to believe you are painstakingly showing that Osewe could have been at fault “smearing Beryl, yet attacking her” in his contribution to her input in this debate. You were being intellectually dishonest and you failed to live up to expectation.
Anyway, to recap, Osewe repeated that KSB has various levels of “censorship” and you would not expect him as the blog owner, to publish baseless allegations. Osewe is doing Kenya Stockholers a good job and in as much as he needs to be criticised, such criticism should be valid and not based in hear-say. You emerged as just another mud-slinger posing as an intelligent voice seeking to bring a sense of reason at KSB. I hope that in future, you will be more careful because I will be watching you. Don’t be like the proverbial cleric preaching water and drinking wine.
Get your facts right and present your arguements in a manner that does not leave your back open otherwise I can see that you are very promising and clear-minded. You can raise the level of debate here but so far, you have underperformrd. You can do better. Remain calm and avoid repeating yourself.
Hello folks,
This is to “Mjumbe” its nice to know that l have some standing in siciety ,be it”low ” or “high”.What really matters is the way we treat one another ,so l would urge you “Mjumbe” to not insult someone without cause please,it is not moral , its beyond the pale ,l have never ,and will never insult without being faulted. The kind of man in me is civil ,if you have any beef with somebody face them upfront.The kind of post you have entered makes others who have smart ideas not want to be associated with this blog,and that in itself defeats what Osewe intended this space to achieve.Come to me and we disscus what your problem is.You stating what you do not know,and, even if you know my status so what good is it to make ado about it.You achieve nothing and end up petty and cheap.If you feel in the mood top insult me again ,do not expect any reply because l am not in your level.Thanks Ean Anthony Odera
Tony take a pill chill and enjoy the summer.You can’t take such matters and the commentator seriously.Life has more interesting things.
Hello ,
Khamisi its always so nice to have minders ,l will take my pill and chill ,but without prejudice ,also take one ,l think we should ahve a mchongowano section on this blog .CREATIVE HUMOUROUS MCHONGUANOSS.Would be a nice way to vent .Thats a nice one Ean Wuod Luo Odera
Yes Antony, but remember that “chill pill” is for taking it easy and not the real pill. Too much “stress” without a break makes u a dull boy. KSB is a joint for venting, while face to face meetings at “dens” make us bond more.Don’t read zaidi ya the eye meets here, otherwise it gets deeper into your mind unnecessarily. See how Osewe leaps forward with every challenge he comes across at KSB, notwithstanding Ambassador Purity’s debate with Beryl and the rest. Don’t be attached to KSB comments!
Tony, take time off to watch the World Cup instead of sulking her at KSB.Buy a Vuvuzela and make some noise to ease up the choking tension.