Talk:Raila Odinga

Biography assessment rating comment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- -- Thesocialistesq/M.lesocialiste 01:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

If there is anyone in the politics of Kenya who should be given the leadership of the nation is Hon.Raila Odinga.Kenyans should mature above tribal politics and embrace God's love and the love of the nation.Raila has tried to bring democracy in this country through many ways.The bible says that God rewards those who do good.I therefore believe with all of my heart that the time has come that he will be rewarded by God the price he has paid to bring democratic space to everyone.The fact that Raila is a kingmaker,also proves that he can be the King hence we should give him a chance.Its very important for the Kenyans to know that God's favour is with ODM-K and whoever does not see this will be sidelined and shocked on the results of the elections this year.Its God who raise people to leadership and he is the same one who removes them when he sees that their hearts are turned away from God.God is not happy with this government because she did not keep the vows she made to the people of Kenya and also to one another.The bible says that its better you dont make a vow than making one and breakingJust as the spirit of God left Soul the king of Israel and went to David so has the spirit of God left this government and is now with the ODM-K.Its my prayer that Kenyans will not see leaders with the eyes of their tribe they come from but the eyes of God's will in the person's life,the qualities of leadership and the ability he has.We all elected Kibaki without his tribe being questions after Raila had said Kibali toshaWhy then should this come when the same Raila wants us to vote for him.The bible says thatdo to others,what you would want them to do to youAs we surpported A kikuyu man for he fitted the seat,let us also join hands as a nation to surpport this luo man Raila Odinga for he qualifies and no one can deny this.God bless you.Julius(I am currently The Netherlands resident) 4th Feb 07,14:18

The liberal democratic party under the chairmanship of the Kenyan Deputy speaker of the 9th parliament David musila existed long before the Rainbow movement was formed.Its therefore not accurate to say the party was formed by the members of the Rainbow Movement, they just joined it...Eunice-Mombasa

who cares

• though I am not a supporter of Raila Odinga its a real disgrace to see the way people edit articles and put falsehoods on sites, including this one, Kenyattas and Kibakis. Can we all be civil and just post factual statements to the best of our knowledge? Too much tribalism!--Misterk 20:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

• It is easy to slap a no-edit on the page, but this is counterproductive as someone out there must be having more information on Raila, which can add to the article's depth. We will keep checking back and any spurious changes will be reversed. Further, I might request IP address blocking for repeat defacers.

Wanyonyi 12:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

The next president of Kenya

Raila has shown more than one time that he is the man to beat in Kenyan politics. He operates in a manner which leaves his opponents bewildered. In the goverment or outside of it, he still controlls Kenyan politics like a chess board. Ladies and gentlemen we are most likely talking of the next president of Kenya.

Njoroge Kamau Mwati

I don't know. Everytime ODM-K has a rally somewhere the only thing I see is chaos and violence. The same applied for the by-elections, LDP-Elections and most of the Referendum-Rallys. I don't want to be governed by a regime of the streets. Nobody in that ODM-Group is worth to be think of as the next president of Kenya. Maybe Uhuru is the man for 2012 but I better go with Kibaki, because all this ODM VIPs who call this government corrupt were Ministers in the most corrupt government in the history of Kenya and when you compare Mois KANU with NARC than we can be happy with the changes so far...

• Wikipedia is not really the place for Kenyan political debates. Try other fora - restrict talk on this page to the quality and validity of the information on the Raila Odinga page, rather than speculation on who will be President of Kenya.

Wanyonyi 15:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

• I agree with you Wanyonyi: People should not use Wikipedia for personal attacks against others or a chat forum for Kenyan politics. We need to have factual information that is verifiable, but not personal opinions of individuals.

Mosoti

======= Misconceptions

Many people,s perception of our odm president are misguided.Raila is a charismatic leader and the only we have in our country with such a quality.He is a go getter and selfless leader who i think has mentored a lot of politician in a way.His love for football seems to rub unto others as he is a roughone.He always knows what he wants and goes for if.him being where he is now has costed him alot not like others who are just groomed and placed somewhere without earning it.That is why a general mwanachi will always identify with him.

failures

The main word, enigma means, that which can not be explained. I say a confusion. It also means a difficulty problem, and that does sound more like Raila. He really is international for a Nigerian scholar to write his biography. I mean even his best gospel is spread, by the man himself, outside Kenya. But if I was to write his biography, I would give it a probably catchier title. How about Raila the low flying vulture in Kenyan politics! Well it couldn’t be easy for his fanatical fans to tell the likeness but really that’s all he is. Raila, who claims to be the creator of Kibaki’s presidency by his two words; Kibaki tosha! is not known to work much, but he does talk a lot. His says it’s called politics, talking, talking, talking. He is the most popular Kenyan politician, he says. By which I think he means most known and surely you pull off having your name in the papers everyday and you will, be known. It wouldn’t matter much what you do or says. He always has something for the media and when he runs out of dossiers, he pulls out his favourite card. My life is in danger! Being in the media this much then why would anyone need to read his biography. Hiyo tosha!

While he considers himself the most suitable to be Mr President after Kibaki’s term (since he didn’t get to be the executive prime minister he hoped to be), I would disqualify him from Kenya’s political scene. And that without questioning every thing he does or says which as we know is a lot, I would take just three of them, excluding coup attempts and destabilizing a government elect.(1) One, he denied Kenyans their democratic right when he led his gang of power hungries in stating that Kenyans should not read a drafted constitution, but must reject it. Without reading it. By doing so, conscious of how popular and influential he is; thus easily manipulating and misleading thousands of Kenyans to base their vote on him and his bunch, he stole one of Kenya’s most historical moments. The creation of a wholly Kenyan constitution.

This I say coz it’s my strongest believe that people should have decided without the intervention of his kind of politics, if not non for that matter. The government had done a remarkable job, which deserved recognition, to not only print the constitution but also to make it within reach of Kenyans everywhere. A lot was spent on this mentally, physically and financially. The least anyone could have down is to let all Kenyans who can read do so and make their own decision. But to incite people to burn copies of such an important document just because of a political oblivion phobia is selfish and unworthy to lead any nation! (2)Then to run off or fly off to distant lands (read west) and wash ones dirty linen in those publics, talking ill and spreading lies about ones government is low, way too low. Raila could not himself last a day politically in those countries where he goes to sell Kenya. He is lucky that Kenyans like political jokers of his kind unquestioningly.

He should by now understand that his western masters would only support or work with him for their own benefit. That’s the deal. He has convinced his followers and even himself that he is mightier than thou, the one, the only Kenya’s saviour. How about some dignity? But times are changing, a natural mystic is blowing. Slowly, maybe, but surely Kenyans even his own devoted are starting to see him for what he is. A vulture because he is (3) only after what President Kibaki is building. I prefer to listen to that who says, my aim is to make Kenya a working nation with a government of national unity. Simple. And someone has already said that and is doing it too. Raila had the opportunity to show us all how hard working he is. He, like a number of others was given a ministerial responsibility in the government (not his first). But he spent his energies in backstabbing that same government. He wasted a lot of energy in trying to bring down the same person whom he had pronounced best for the job. He probably made his worst personal mistake when he shouted Kibaki tosha! But that is probably the best thing that he has ever done for our nation. Thanks!

While he is preoccupied with the thought that he is the best Kenya will ever have, he misses the most significant signs of all his time. The fact that no Kenyan leader in his circle of ´´illuminatas“ or outside it has ever, will ever bow to, or, for him. They all know that it would be a dangerous mistake. And Kenyans have neither time nor the luxury of such a mistake. His biography?

Am yet to hear his fellow ODM princes declare him as tosha. If he is as good as he thinks he is, then how come he is not an obvious choice? The ODM leadership seem to be playing a game of waiting to see who breaks first, Russian roulette. Then things will fall apart! If am asked, the man from the lakeside should tone down and try to read the times lest he be left nothing but the noise maker he is, without an audience. Borrow a line from Saitoti ´´read my lips“ and do something honourable to attach to his résumé. Our glorious country is rising again to take its place among the stars; we can not afford a misstep, a backward move, Moi tosha! ed. We have had enough, and like the professor said ´´ there comes a time when the interest of the nation is of more importance than personal interest“. It is our patriotic duty to ensure that the leadership of our nation does not fall into the wrong hands —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.137.231.14 (talk)

Education

How could he have gone to the Otto von Guericke University of Magdeburg in 1965 when according to that article it didn't open until 1993? Timrollpickering (talk) 15:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

• I don't know, but number of biographies, including his personal website and websites of the most reliable kenyan newspapers state that he went to that university [1], [2], [3]. Personally I don't understand German, but de:Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg history section mentions something about 50's and onwards. Julius Sahara (talk) 16:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Judging by the Babelfish translation it seems the university is the end product of several mergers and Odinga went to the Technical University, Magdeburg. I'll modify the text to clarify this. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Controversy

The controversy of Odinga signing a secret MoU with NAMLEF was big news in Kenya and relevant to current events. This article has been repeatedly deleted as POV, but it is NOT. Bear in mind that POV is inherent in any controversy. The article is objective, and the reader must decide the POV. The sources sited are legitimate. One is a local Kenyan news agency, and the other is an association of Christian Churches whose link is purely used as reference for the reader to view the alleged MoU. Sanctu7 (talk) 16:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not a secret that Raila signed a MOU with a certain muslim group. But the one posted on EAK website is not only a fake, but also a hate leaflet. Therefore posting it here cannot be considered being neutral point of view. Secondly, Evangelical Alliance of Kenya is a deeply religious organisation and not a credible source on this issue anyway. Julius Sahara (talk) 19:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. One of the fundamental reasons for the controversy was that the alleged original MoU was not revealed to the public therefore by definition making it "secret". Notice I said alleged, and notice I said contorversy. It's no lie that this was a contorversy and that it was a noteworthy item that bears relevance to Odinga's bio. Nobody at this time truly knows what happened because there's no irrifutable proof on either side. I draw no inferences on whether the document is a hate leaflet or not. It's just news. Are we then to merely throw away any news that's considered possibly offensive? Only censors do that. Moreover, since when does a religious organization like the EAK not have the right to have an opinion? This notion seems ludicrous, especially since this was at least partly an issue of religion. I invite you to craft an article on the subsequent MoU, if not done so already. Perhaps we can work together on it.Sanctu7 (talk) 03:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I already added a section Raila_Odinga#Signed_deal_with_Muslims a few days ago. Does that cover it sufficiently ? Wizzy…☎ 06:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

obama odinga

http://eakenya.org/newsevents/article.htm?id=8

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7176683.stm

http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/290390

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57363

some of these links suggests that obama help fund odinga. is it true and should it be in the article. i just am surprised that this would not be considered a conflict of interest to USA, shouldn't this be all over the news ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.80.96.75 (talk) 07:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

None of those links says anything about Obama funding Odinga, and that rumor has been disproved [4]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xaoiv (talk • contribs) 11:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Elected or Appointment Prime Minister?

In the article, in the first line of the first paragraph, it says about Mr. Odinga "... he has been elected Prime Minister in Kenya on 14 April 2008 ..."

I think this should be amended to reflect the fact that he was appointed, as well as improve on the gramatical structure of the sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Silverandcoffee (talk • contribs) 00:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Relationship to Obama

Surely we can have a better sourcing of this? The BBC article does not confirm the claim, it just states that Odinga made it. How hard is it to confirm that Odinga's mother was Obama's father's sister? john k (talk) 20:10, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Odinga is certainly not Obama's first cousin. Obama's uncle has explicitly denied any blood relation to Odinga. I have edited the article to add this fact. Xaoiv (talk) 09:22, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "Obama" :
  • b
  • [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7176683.stm Odinga says Obama is his cousin], [[BBC News]], 1/8/08.
• "multiparty" :
  • Center for Multiparty Democracy: [http://www.cmd.or.ke/images/Politics%20and%20Paliamenterians%20in%20Kenya.pdf Politics and Parliamentarians in Kenya 1944-2007]
  • b

DumZiBoT (talk) 00:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed.--R.Schuster (talk) 09:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Obama connection

Edits about Sen. Obama's 2006 visit to Kenya and his "campaigning" for Odinga have been removed. The reference sourced by the editor has since been discredited. [5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.197.115.166 (talk) 06:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Not sure why you keep removing this information. Your arguement is not related to the information posted. I posted information stating Obama campaigned for Odinga. Your resource only talks about the fact if he knew what circumstances he traveled to Kenya. That is your argument. I do not question this arugment in my post. I only state that he was in Kenya and he did campaign for Odinga. Under what circumstances he did it for are not in question. Odinga's campaign was largely influenced by the Obama's visit and him visiting and campaigning for Odinga is a commonly known by everyone. Again I am not questioning if he knew of Odinga's corrupt political connections only that Obama did visit Kenya in August 2006 and he did campaign for Odinga. This is the purpose of the picture. There is no question about this occuring. Stop removing my information and posting a link to a site that talks about his reasons for going there. We all know he went there and campaigned. Why he did it is not challenged by my post. Again the fact that Obama went there and campaigned for Odinga largely influenced Odinga getting elected and this information should be posted and made public. Why he went there is in question, the fact that he went there isnt. The New York Sun is also a valid resource but the site you provide is a rehash of information by an unreliable source from god knows where. If you have information from a Valid reource please provide it before you just delete information. Per Wiki rules that is not the proper way to remove or modify information on here. --Xinunus (talk) 05:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I have added two additional sources backing my post. One is a CBS video showing Obama in Kenya with Odinga campaigning for him. All three sources are valid. Please stop removing my post. It is important information and should be posted on Odinga's wiki entry.--Xinunus (talk) 06:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The sources you insist on returning to this article have been dis-credited. Merely saying the New Yorks Sun is a valid resource does not qualify the content it published in regards to their articles on Obama's links to Mr Odinga[6]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimemia Maina (talk • contribsKimemia Maina (talk) 18:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Please do not remove sourced material. I've added a comment at User_talk:Julius_Sahara#Removing sourced material. Nsaa (talk) 22:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I have three valid sources listed including one of a video from CBS showing his trip to Kenya in support of Odinga. All three sources are credited news organizations. You’re removing my information when other citations on this site come from less creditable sources. Not sure of your motivation but there is no reason to remove this information. Obama was a large influence on Odinga's run for President and this information should be listed here. I am not challenging Obama's reasons for going only the fact that he did go to Kenya and he did campaign for Odinga. This is a widely known fact and is not in question by anyone but you. I have been relisting my information for the past 4 days and if it continues to be removed I will have to get an admin involved in monitoring this site. Wiki rules state you must discuss the removal of information in the discussion page before its removal. This opens a discussion up on the topic and the clearing up of any misinformation. If you just delete information without discussing it you will risk looking like your vandalizing the Wiki entry. Please stop deleting my information. I have three sources from well known and valid news organizations and if you have a problem with them give specifics of why you don’t think the source is valid. Just saying you don’t agree with the news organization doesn’t prove your point, it only shows bias. --Xinunus (talk) 02:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The only thing your sources prove is that Obama did meet with Raila Odinga when he visited Kenya in 2006 and that certain members within Kenya's government at the time attempted to pass it off as An endorsement of the latter's own presidential campaign. They do not prove or even attempt to prove with any kind of credibility however that there is any truth to any of those allegations. Furthermore as I have already pointed out on my own talk page I have NOT ever removed sources attached to any articles on Wikipedia without stating a reason.Kimemia Maina (talk) 20:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I would call it a duck. --Xinunus (talk) 16:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

It could be a goose lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kimemia Maina (talk • contribs) 14:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

If your going to change well sourced information and add information you have to give sources. That is the way it works here. Please stop modifying the post without providing a source. If you can add a source then the problem is solved. --Xinunus (talk) 13:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Why do people continue to remove sourced material on this wiki site? --Xinunus (talk) 20:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Obama connection, WP:NPOV, WP:LIVE, WP:V, WP:WEB

WP:NPOV - This is the same thing as WP:LIVE. There is nothing biased about this post. It states facts about a trip Obama made to Kenya. This is a "Neutral point of view". This does not apply.

WP:LIVE - This post is well sourced and provides three reliable sources. One of these is an actual CBS video showing Obama with Odinga on multiple occasions during his trip to Kenya. This does not apply.

WP:V - This post has three reliable sources. This does not apply.

WP:WEB - There is no advertising in this post. This does not apply.

--Xinunus (talk) 21:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

The NY Sun article is an opinion (even the url proves it), API is a blog and Youtube is user-sent videos. None of them is anywhere near reliable. Therefore the "Obama connection" section is essentially unsourced and will be removed. Julius Sahara (talk) 07:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

As Xinunus points out, none of the policies are violated. It's a sourced fact (and no opinion in this section). Nsaa (talk) 09:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You didn't even try to refute the facts I mentioned. Julius Sahara (talk) 09:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

All these policies are violated! Read WP:NPOV, WP:LIVE, WP:V and WP:WEB carefully. If you still don't understand ask again, but refrain from reinserting. -- R.Schuster (talk) 11:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Please specify. This source (The New York Sun)is solid "In August 2006, Mr. Obama visited Kenya and spoke in support of Mr. Odinga's candidacy at rallies in Nairobi. "[7] and this cover the section removed. Is there any doubt about him vivsiting Odinga? Nsaa (talk) 11:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

This is not a New York Sun-article, it is the personal opinion of Mr. Daniel Johnson! Even the url proves it: "www.nysun.com/opinion/...". By the way, where exactly in this "source" is stated, that the photograph in question shows Mr. Obama campaigning for Mr. Odinga? IMHO, the most important guideline in this case is WP:LIVE. A statement like this has the potentiality to discredit the involved persons and has to be avoided. -- R.Schuster (talk) 12:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Is it the personal option of Mr. Daniel Johnson (a renowned journalist) that Obama was at a rally by Odinga? Nsaa (talk) 07:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course, what else? --R.Schuster (talk) 08:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I think CBS is a good enough source [8] confirming that Obama has been on rallies by Odinga. Removing this is removal of a fact, not any opinion. There's noe doubt about that (CBS footage). Also Chicago Sun-Times has an article about it and confirms it. Is it acceptable to change the support claim and reinsert it as

;Obama Connection In August 2006, Mr. Obama visited Kenya and spoke at rallies in Nairobi for Mr. Odinga's candidacy as president.

...

References

Regards. Nsaa (talk) 16:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Your source is youtube, youtube is not a reliable source. Please point me to correspondent article on CBS, or any other reliable source. Again: blogs, personal opinions and youtube-videos are no reliable sources. Find an official statement from their homepages, a press-release or similiar. So far, WP:LIVE applies: "Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion, from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space." -- R.Schuster (talk) 20:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Reference

So you assess that it's a claim that Obama was in Kenya at a rally by Odinga? The Chicago Sun-Times published the article Senator rebukes Kenya's corruption, August 29, 2006, by Lynn Sweet saying "Obama appeared with opposition leader Raila Odinga -- a Luo running for president -- at stops on Saturday in his father's native district.". And an airing is a reliable source. We don't need a Google hit using material in references. CBS2 has aired it and this should be good enough. So no WP:BLP policy has been broken here as you claim. I will reinsert the paragraph. Nsaa (talk) 07:39, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Beside the fact that Lynn Sweet is a columnist ("Many columnists are strongly opinionated."), and thus poorly sourced still applies, I can neither see the photo in this article, nor a confirmation, that Mr. Obama is campaigning for Mr. Odinga. I urge you to follow the guidelines, especially WP:LIVE, and remove this paragraph immediately from the talk page, too. -- R.Schuster (talk) 08:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Read the suggested text again. It's not stated that Obama campaigned for Odinga. I removed that claim. Please read again. And there's no apparent link between "Many columnists are strongly opinionated." and "poorly sourced". Is it so that The Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Sun-Times allows theirs Columnists and journalist write false statements about Obamas whereabouts? And someone has faked a CBS2 news report and posted it to YouTube? The text can be redone and written better. No doubt about it, but we shouldn't remove soured facts (no claims about him supporting or anything else like signing papers, giving money etc.). Nsaa (talk) 12:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I read again and the statment is "...spoke at rallies in Nairobi for Mr. Odinga's candidacy as president". Sorry, even if we ignore WP:V and accept youtube and interpretations of journalists as reliable sources, the only thing in evidence is, that Mr. Obama said something in presence of Mr. Odinga. Maybe I missed something, but I could never hear Mr. Obama "speaking for Mr. Odinga's candidacy as president". In fact, it is not even proven what kind of rally it was nor when and where the photo was taken or where it originates. Why is there no transcript of Mr. Obama's speech? Why is there no press-release or an official statement from the involved parties? A statement like this has the potentiality to discredit the involved persons and has to be avoided in respect of WP:LIVE. --R.Schuster (talk) 13:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Dispute filed

Since it is obvious that there are too different opinions in the interpretation of the guidelines, I filed a dispute at WP:BLPN#Raila Odinga. --R.Schuster (talk) 14:10, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The definition of campaigning means this: a series of coordinated activities designed to achieve a goal. Obama appeared several times with Odinga while Odinga was running for President. Odinga is a political candidate. So we have the cause: Odinga's presidency and two: appeared multiple times to suppose Odinga. This is campaigning. Not sure what your definition of campaigning is? --Xinunus (talk) 23:19, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

My definition of campaigning is not the topic. The topic is, that there are no sources for the statement "In August 2006, Mr. Obama visited Kenya and spoke in support of Mr. Odinga's candidacy at rallies in Nairobi."'

If I missed something, please point me exactly (with quotes) to the sources which confirm:

1. "In August 2006"
2. "Mr. Obama ... spoke in support of Mr. Odinga's candidacy"
3. "at rallies" (what kind of rally was it? The context implies an electoral campaign)
4. "in Nairobi"

And, by the way, there is no need to yell in your edit summaries. -- R.Schuster (talk) 08:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

You may want to read WP:OR. When you have to explain start definining what is and isn't campaigning that's definitely OR. What we need are reliable secondary sources saying that Barack Obama campaigned for Raila not your own personal opinion based on your interpretation of what is and isn't campaigning Nil Einne (talk) 08:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

OBAMA CONNECTION

Please state here why you think these three sources are not valid:

1) Daniel Johnson with "The Sun Times" - (dont say its an editorial because its not, an editorial is stated so at the beginning of the news article)

2) Paula Abeles with "African Press International"

3) Mike Flannery with "CBS NEWS" - this is a video showing Obama in Kenya on multiple occasions campaigning for Odinga.

--Xinunus (talk) 21:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, 1) there is no columnist named Daniel Johnson at the Sun Times and the link provided is not to the Sun Times' website but to an "archive" site that anyone can post anything to. 2) This is a blog, nothing more. Giving yourself a fancy name like "African Press International" doesn't make you legitimate. 3) We don't use YouTube videos as refs for factual material. They are unreliable (as well as violating copyright). --Loonymonkey (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Xinunus meant New York Sun. Not sure where you going with this, it is an obvious typo. Daniel Johnson is a journalist at the New York Sun. The African Press International is a REAL paper in Africa. One of the latest ones there. Not sure why your making fun of it. YouTube is a site just like Flickr to host video, one of the largest sites to host videos. Linking it there doesnt mean anything. The video is obviously from CBS2 in Chicago and the fact that it is hosted on YouTube is a null point. Its a source and a viable source. Not sure why your against every one of these sources when there are other sources on the Odinga site that are less creditable. Should we start picking away at those now? If we did there would be nothing left of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanripwinkle (talk • contribs) 03:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, we should remove all poorly sourced material from the article, "whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable". Everything about the reliability of the sources has been discussed ad nauseam, just read the whole discussion here. Beside all this, how is it possible that someone spoke in support of Mr. Odinga's candidacy in August 2006, if he was appointed as presidential candidate not less than one year later, namely in September 2007? --R.Schuster (talk) 09:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Controversy section to work on

Before continuing the edit-war you should work the details out here. I think the IP has a point but is in need of some help regarding editing in WP. Assuming good faith, it is the proper (and nice) way to handle this. Don't you think so? Regards, --Floridianed (talk) 21:11, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, good solution, thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.209.22.245 (talk) 22:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Section in question starts here:

In response to Odinga's widely praised role in leading the African criticism of Robert Mugabe's brutal behavior during the presidential elections in Zimbabwe, [9], in July 2008, Mr. Charamba, the permanent secretary at Zimbabwe's information department accused Mr. Odinga of being responsible for the death of thousands of kenyans after the 2007 Kenya general election. Recalling the post-election violence in Kenya earlier this year, Mr Charamba said: "Raila Odinga's hands drip with blood, raw African blood, and that blood is not going to be cleansed by any amount of abuse of Zimbabwe." [10] Obviously, Mr. Charamba, who is the chief person responsible for defending Robert Mugabe's despotic regime in Zimbabwe, is not a trusted international source. In fact, Prime Minister Odinga called for peaceful protests to Kenya's fraudulent elections. [11][12]

Obama Did Not Camapaign for Odinga

Any video "proof" does not show Obama campaigning for Odinga. What it does show is that Obama spoke in front of Odinga. But the subject matter of which Obama spoke about was not a campaign endorsement for Odinga. He was talking about the safety of AIDS/HIV testing.

For more information, for more on this visit the following link: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/corsis_dull_hatchet.html --Spikeleefan (talk) 20:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)