We are people from nowhere..
Great ideas can come from nowhere.
Therefore, ....my bud. [QED]
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Saturday, August 27, 2011
Africa's Emergent Middle Class
In April 2011, AfDB published an interesting new research report on Africa's class structure, with particular reference to a burgeoning Middle Class. All key observers of the African continent -- which, suddenly, is no longer 'Dark' but resource-rich -- are, it seems, captivated by this rapidly visible class, and intrigued by what it all means for the future prosperity of a troubled Global Village.
The typical model of a class structure is a pyramid. Only in developed countries such as the US is it a diamond. Trends in Africa suggest that the diamond motif is soon to reveal itself. Not only that: the size of Africa's Middle Class, as defined, threatens to surpass in the near future, if it has not done so already, the entire population of Western Europe (or EU) -- not to mention the US itself. And it is practically neck-and-neck with China's.
There'll still be debate, of course, about real purchasing power and relative baskets of goods, but when did all that social change sneak in? How is it even possible? [Click here to read the report]
The typical model of a class structure is a pyramid. Only in developed countries such as the US is it a diamond. Trends in Africa suggest that the diamond motif is soon to reveal itself. Not only that: the size of Africa's Middle Class, as defined, threatens to surpass in the near future, if it has not done so already, the entire population of Western Europe (or EU) -- not to mention the US itself. And it is practically neck-and-neck with China's.
There'll still be debate, of course, about real purchasing power and relative baskets of goods, but when did all that social change sneak in? How is it even possible? [Click here to read the report]
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Having Been Acquitted of Fraud Charges by a Kenyan Court, will William Ruto Return to the Cabinet?
Just a day after his "triumphant" return from the first ICC hearing of the Ocampo-Six case at The Hague, Ruto had reason to be even more genuinely euphoric. A Kenyan court cleared him of fraud charges that have haunted him for eight years. The charges had forced his suspension as minister and senior member of the cabinet some months ago.
The big question now is: will he return to the cabinet? Some argue that the return, like the suspension, will be automatic, given the provisions of the constitution.
Others insist that Prime Minister (PM) Raila Odinga will have something to do with it, given the provisions of the National Accord, and should block Ruto's return. Raila is the leader of ODM, the party to which Ruto nominally belongs still, despite his very public and continuous tussle with the PM. The reasoning here is that the law gives the PM the authority to make the decision, given the National Accord that underpins the coalition government headed by the President and the PM.
At a time, in any case, when a cabinet reshuffle is deemed both in Kenya and elsewhere to be overdue, it will be difficult for President Kibaki to effect changes on the ODM side of the cabinet without Raila's concurrence.
I think Raila has, should and will claim a say on this matter. But what kind of a say should we hear from him? Many, "friend and foe", I think, expect an emphatic no from him. It would not be consistent, however, and it would not be judicious -- above all, it would not be smart to say no, despite the very troubling circumstances of Ruto's acquittal. Let the appeal process, if any, deal with that.
My advice would be: Raila should welcome Ruto back to the cabinet with no conditionalities whatsoever. In fact, he should make those intentions crystal clear to the public even before the scheduling of his next formal consultation with President Kibaki on the matter of Ruto's return.
If, after that, Ruto continues to be as deeply mean-spirited and hateful toward Raila as he has been, let him be the one to have to explain why to the nation -- and, in particular, to his Rift Valley constituents.
And if, after September 2011, the ICC hearings force Ruto out of the cabinet once again, as per the constitution, let that be yet another pulsating dynamic.
ENDNOTE: I expect Ruto's exuberance to cool appreciably in the coming months, as the reality dawns on him that he will not be the presidential choice of the emergent G7 coalition of presidential aspirants and leading politicians -- let alone Kenya's President following the 2012 elections. At best, he can only hope to be Uhuru Kenyatta's running mate. As to how many Rift Valley votes he will be able to deliver, as a running mate, to Uhuru -- that remains a one billion shilling question.
Evidence of culpability adduced at The Hague between April and September 2011, and beyond, might yet stop the Uhuru-Ruto alliance in its tracks. It is hard to imagine that Uhuru has not begun to worry how long it will take for his alliance with Ruto to begin to sour, along the lines of the one between Raila and Ruto. And Ruto's supporters must surely be wondering about the assurances they can possibly have that an Uhuru-Ruto coalition will not be a repeat of the "mistreatment" that Raila's supporters believe he has endured since 2008 at the hands of President Kibaki and his kitchen cabinet.
The big question now is: will he return to the cabinet? Some argue that the return, like the suspension, will be automatic, given the provisions of the constitution.
Others insist that Prime Minister (PM) Raila Odinga will have something to do with it, given the provisions of the National Accord, and should block Ruto's return. Raila is the leader of ODM, the party to which Ruto nominally belongs still, despite his very public and continuous tussle with the PM. The reasoning here is that the law gives the PM the authority to make the decision, given the National Accord that underpins the coalition government headed by the President and the PM.
At a time, in any case, when a cabinet reshuffle is deemed both in Kenya and elsewhere to be overdue, it will be difficult for President Kibaki to effect changes on the ODM side of the cabinet without Raila's concurrence.
I think Raila has, should and will claim a say on this matter. But what kind of a say should we hear from him? Many, "friend and foe", I think, expect an emphatic no from him. It would not be consistent, however, and it would not be judicious -- above all, it would not be smart to say no, despite the very troubling circumstances of Ruto's acquittal. Let the appeal process, if any, deal with that.
My advice would be: Raila should welcome Ruto back to the cabinet with no conditionalities whatsoever. In fact, he should make those intentions crystal clear to the public even before the scheduling of his next formal consultation with President Kibaki on the matter of Ruto's return.
If, after that, Ruto continues to be as deeply mean-spirited and hateful toward Raila as he has been, let him be the one to have to explain why to the nation -- and, in particular, to his Rift Valley constituents.
And if, after September 2011, the ICC hearings force Ruto out of the cabinet once again, as per the constitution, let that be yet another pulsating dynamic.
ENDNOTE: I expect Ruto's exuberance to cool appreciably in the coming months, as the reality dawns on him that he will not be the presidential choice of the emergent G7 coalition of presidential aspirants and leading politicians -- let alone Kenya's President following the 2012 elections. At best, he can only hope to be Uhuru Kenyatta's running mate. As to how many Rift Valley votes he will be able to deliver, as a running mate, to Uhuru -- that remains a one billion shilling question.
Evidence of culpability adduced at The Hague between April and September 2011, and beyond, might yet stop the Uhuru-Ruto alliance in its tracks. It is hard to imagine that Uhuru has not begun to worry how long it will take for his alliance with Ruto to begin to sour, along the lines of the one between Raila and Ruto. And Ruto's supporters must surely be wondering about the assurances they can possibly have that an Uhuru-Ruto coalition will not be a repeat of the "mistreatment" that Raila's supporters believe he has endured since 2008 at the hands of President Kibaki and his kitchen cabinet.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Marshall McLuhan's Four Laws of Media
McLuhan, the media sociologist/guru who coined the term 'Global Village', propounded Four Laws of Media which capture a veritably spiraling dialectic -- a quaint, never-ending, forth-and-back cyle of Synthesis-Antithesis-Thesis-Synthesis -- of media technology and segmented social life.
I read the Four Laws as follows:
1. EXTENSION/AMPLIFICATION: As they come to the fore, new media technologies extend the reach of certain pre-existing capacities of Mind and aspects of Body.
2. REVERSAL/'COUNTER-DIALECTIC': All media revolutions embody the trigger or potential for reverse motion (a counter-dialectic); that is, for a step-back from the gains they represent -- for a reset to a bygone era.
3. RETRIEVAL/RECURRENCE: Newly-invented media tend to resuscitate the senses, skills and/or sensibilities which the displaced technological order had dulled,'suppressed' or obscured.
4. OBSOLESCENCE: New media in effect coopt certain older modes of communication even as they declare them 'obsolete' and render them ineffective; and they do so because the latter do not allow themselves to disappear entirely, even as the impression of something altogether new takes root in the landscape.
PostScript: Do read this 2012 paper:
Sandstrom, Gregory.2012. "Laws of Media -- The Four Effects: A McLuhan Contribution to Social Epistemology" Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 1 (12): 1-6
I read the Four Laws as follows:
1. EXTENSION/AMPLIFICATION: As they come to the fore, new media technologies extend the reach of certain pre-existing capacities of Mind and aspects of Body.
2. REVERSAL/'COUNTER-DIALECTIC': All media revolutions embody the trigger or potential for reverse motion (a counter-dialectic); that is, for a step-back from the gains they represent -- for a reset to a bygone era.
3. RETRIEVAL/RECURRENCE: Newly-invented media tend to resuscitate the senses, skills and/or sensibilities which the displaced technological order had dulled,'suppressed' or obscured.
4. OBSOLESCENCE: New media in effect coopt certain older modes of communication even as they declare them 'obsolete' and render them ineffective; and they do so because the latter do not allow themselves to disappear entirely, even as the impression of something altogether new takes root in the landscape.
PostScript: Do read this 2012 paper:
Sandstrom, Gregory.2012. "Laws of Media -- The Four Effects: A McLuhan Contribution to Social Epistemology" Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 1 (12): 1-6
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Questions of a Life: Haiku
Will it rain or shine?
Be my baby safe n'yo hands?
Where'd Time go 2 die?
Be my baby safe n'yo hands?
Where'd Time go 2 die?
On the Incident Command System (ICS) as a Model of Response to Emergencies and Disasters
In their search for ways to improve the effectiveness of their work through cutting-edge models or templates, disaster managers will quickly come across the idea of the Incident Command System (ICS).
ICS is obviously a much-touted integrated solution, but a solution for what? ICS was never intended to prevent or reduce the occurrence of incidents -- emergencies or disasters of various kinds -- but to respond optimally to them after they had occurred, whenever and wherever. An incident is something that has occurred, or is occurring. To a degree, of course, an incident can also be taken to mean something ("just") about to occur.
The task of preventing incidents from occurring, however, is the task of those charged with prevention or, in a specific sense, mitigation. Mitigation here alludes to proactive or pre-emptive measures taken to minimize the impacts of incidents before they actually occur, even when their occurrence is much anticipated -- that is, "around the corner".
An evaluation of ICS must therefore be restricted to its applicability or effectiveness in responding to incidents, not in preventing them.
Yes, you can minimize mortality and alleviate morbidity through appropriately designed, timely and effective responses to incidents which are on-going or have already occurred. However, the important point here is that ICS was never meant to prevent incidents that lead to injury, death and/or destruction of property from becoming such incidents in the first place.
UPDATE: ICS link updated on March 6, 2018
ICS is obviously a much-touted integrated solution, but a solution for what? ICS was never intended to prevent or reduce the occurrence of incidents -- emergencies or disasters of various kinds -- but to respond optimally to them after they had occurred, whenever and wherever. An incident is something that has occurred, or is occurring. To a degree, of course, an incident can also be taken to mean something ("just") about to occur.
The task of preventing incidents from occurring, however, is the task of those charged with prevention or, in a specific sense, mitigation. Mitigation here alludes to proactive or pre-emptive measures taken to minimize the impacts of incidents before they actually occur, even when their occurrence is much anticipated -- that is, "around the corner".
An evaluation of ICS must therefore be restricted to its applicability or effectiveness in responding to incidents, not in preventing them.
Yes, you can minimize mortality and alleviate morbidity through appropriately designed, timely and effective responses to incidents which are on-going or have already occurred. However, the important point here is that ICS was never meant to prevent incidents that lead to injury, death and/or destruction of property from becoming such incidents in the first place.
UPDATE: ICS link updated on March 6, 2018
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
Kenya: The Presidential Ambitions of William Ruto and Uhuru Kenyatta
I am not sure that the 2012 presidential ambitions of William Ruto and Uhuru Kenyatta will survive the ICC trials at The Hague.
If they do, however, only Kenyatta or Ruto -- of course not both -- can conceivably become president. Ruto has already asked Kenyatta to support his presidential bid in 2012. Kenyatta has not said yes. Kenyatta's supporters, I imagine, find Ruto's call unbelievably presumptuous, and expect that it is Ruto -- with a lesser pedigree (OMG!)-- who will have to give way to Kenyatta, perhaps being rewarded with the VP's slot. And of course it is hard to see why Ruto thinks he deserves to be Kenya's president in 2012. He is one of the most toxic politicians that Kenya's political culture has ever produced.
Ruto and Kenyatta, who belong to different political parties, will not agree on the number 1 slot, even after many posturings, as time runs out, about a Raila-finishing grand alliance of political-parties.
What then? Both Ruto and Uhuru will run for president, with Raila Odinga as the one to beat. Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka and Eugene Wamalwa, neither of whom seems to have much of a chance right now, will join the fray. After much provocation and belittling, Musalia Mudavadi will opt to remain Raila's running mate, which is their best chance for eventual victory.
None of the candidates will win outright. There will be a run-off, and it is likely to be between Uhuru Kenyatta and Raila Odinga. Mudavadi would have calculated this eventuality all along.
It is in the second roud that the real hustling for votes will begin, with all sorts of alliances being brokered, broken and remade in quick succession. Kenya will never have seen such. The world will be entranced...
[More to come]
If they do, however, only Kenyatta or Ruto -- of course not both -- can conceivably become president. Ruto has already asked Kenyatta to support his presidential bid in 2012. Kenyatta has not said yes. Kenyatta's supporters, I imagine, find Ruto's call unbelievably presumptuous, and expect that it is Ruto -- with a lesser pedigree (OMG!)-- who will have to give way to Kenyatta, perhaps being rewarded with the VP's slot. And of course it is hard to see why Ruto thinks he deserves to be Kenya's president in 2012. He is one of the most toxic politicians that Kenya's political culture has ever produced.
Ruto and Kenyatta, who belong to different political parties, will not agree on the number 1 slot, even after many posturings, as time runs out, about a Raila-finishing grand alliance of political-parties.
What then? Both Ruto and Uhuru will run for president, with Raila Odinga as the one to beat. Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka and Eugene Wamalwa, neither of whom seems to have much of a chance right now, will join the fray. After much provocation and belittling, Musalia Mudavadi will opt to remain Raila's running mate, which is their best chance for eventual victory.
None of the candidates will win outright. There will be a run-off, and it is likely to be between Uhuru Kenyatta and Raila Odinga. Mudavadi would have calculated this eventuality all along.
It is in the second roud that the real hustling for votes will begin, with all sorts of alliances being brokered, broken and remade in quick succession. Kenya will never have seen such. The world will be entranced...
[More to come]
Friday, March 11, 2011
Friday, February 18, 2011
Kenya: House Speaker Marende's ruling on President Kibaki's list of nominees
Yesterday's ruling by Kenya's Parliamentary Speaker, Kenneth Marende -- in which he returned to sender the President's list of nominees to four powerful positions provided for in the new constitution, and crucial to its timely implementation: Chief Justice (Judge Alnasir Visram), Attorney General (Prof. Githu Muigai), Director of Public Prosecutions (Kioko Kilukumi, William Ruto's ex-lawyer) and Controller of Budget (William Kirwa, allegedly a Ruto man) -- is not a victory for the Prime Minister, Raila Odinga, though it seems amply so. Ruto has lately become Kibaki's own preferred/de facto/secret Prime Minister, whose advice is heeded and whose suggested nominees (unlike Raila's) are actually nominated.
The Prime Minister acquiesced in the President's rush to short-circuit due process in a double-edged, silent, but ill-advised war -- a war against the Hague's ICC (via a gullible, bird-of-a-feather, African Union and, wishfully, the UN Security Council itself) and a war of his own succession (in which, as was clear to any adult, Raila was to be the biggest loser).
The PM had hoped that, sitting just the two of them, they would cut the cake into two even-handed parts. Bad idea. That is not Kibaki's style. The PM should have known that from the flawed February 2008 power-sharing deal, which cost him a lot of erstwhile friends, which continues to haunt him to this day, and which, ironically, PNU has been increasingly turning to its unprincipled advantage in the ever-shifting coalition landscape. The two "Princials" did consult, but obviously did not reach a consensus. Raila pulled away. The President, who appears hostage to the Ocampo Six chose to press on (needlessly, if you forget the O6)with his list.
Despite threats, Speaker Marende has done the right thing by urging the President and Prime Minister to do things right. He has asserted:
Worryingly, there is no guarantee that the PM would himself have done the right thing, had he been in President Kibaki's shoes these last 30 days or so. It is just that it was Kibaki's move to make, and in the eyes of many, it seems, the President made a blatant KKK move. If the CJ couldn't be his "preferred choice" (a Justice Kariuki?), then better a middle-tier Kenyan Indian (Judge Alnasir Visram) any day than someone more senior who happens to be from Nyanza -- or another middle-tier Judge from "Western", or even Mungatana's Pokomo group, if you like.
So it seems like Raila's voctory; but the victory, if it is, is pyrrhic. The toxic level in Kenya's political landscape continues to rise, as we approach 2012. The ICC and Ocampo clearly remain our best safeguard against our collective, suicidal, "darker side" as a nation. Anyone who does not see the blood-letting that is to come with the ICC taken out of the 2012 succession equation, has lost the power to reason coherently -- and lost touch even with common sense.
When Marende referred the Kibaki list to two House Committees, some ten days ago, he was roundly condemned as timid and spineless. But the wisdom in that move is that he allowed s considerable amount of national debate to take place. Many stakeholders availed themselves the opportunity to take a stand. Massive national consensus has built up, it seem clear to me,and Marende's ruling both reflects it and has been aided by it.
Was I sure then, absolutely sure, that Marende would make the ruling that he has no made? No. You can never be that sure. But I believed, based on the circumstances of the case and his previous rulings, that that was the only decision that he could make -- had to make.
So whose victory is it? First, the people of Kenya in their many ethnicities -- who are all too often ambushed with political decisions they have little time to reverse. Second, the new constitution -- which Kenyans are determined to implement and to have in its fullness. It is a victory, too, against impunity, ethnic myopia and lingering traces of an imperial presidency.
The Prime Minister acquiesced in the President's rush to short-circuit due process in a double-edged, silent, but ill-advised war -- a war against the Hague's ICC (via a gullible, bird-of-a-feather, African Union and, wishfully, the UN Security Council itself) and a war of his own succession (in which, as was clear to any adult, Raila was to be the biggest loser).
The PM had hoped that, sitting just the two of them, they would cut the cake into two even-handed parts. Bad idea. That is not Kibaki's style. The PM should have known that from the flawed February 2008 power-sharing deal, which cost him a lot of erstwhile friends, which continues to haunt him to this day, and which, ironically, PNU has been increasingly turning to its unprincipled advantage in the ever-shifting coalition landscape. The two "Princials" did consult, but obviously did not reach a consensus. Raila pulled away. The President, who appears hostage to the Ocampo Six chose to press on (needlessly, if you forget the O6)with his list.
Despite threats, Speaker Marende has done the right thing by urging the President and Prime Minister to do things right. He has asserted:
Consultations are not made if the House receives the list on which there is open disagreement between the President and the Prime Minister. As such, it is unconstitutional and the unconstitutionality cannot be cured by this House.
Worryingly, there is no guarantee that the PM would himself have done the right thing, had he been in President Kibaki's shoes these last 30 days or so. It is just that it was Kibaki's move to make, and in the eyes of many, it seems, the President made a blatant KKK move. If the CJ couldn't be his "preferred choice" (a Justice Kariuki?), then better a middle-tier Kenyan Indian (Judge Alnasir Visram) any day than someone more senior who happens to be from Nyanza -- or another middle-tier Judge from "Western", or even Mungatana's Pokomo group, if you like.
So it seems like Raila's voctory; but the victory, if it is, is pyrrhic. The toxic level in Kenya's political landscape continues to rise, as we approach 2012. The ICC and Ocampo clearly remain our best safeguard against our collective, suicidal, "darker side" as a nation. Anyone who does not see the blood-letting that is to come with the ICC taken out of the 2012 succession equation, has lost the power to reason coherently -- and lost touch even with common sense.
When Marende referred the Kibaki list to two House Committees, some ten days ago, he was roundly condemned as timid and spineless. But the wisdom in that move is that he allowed s considerable amount of national debate to take place. Many stakeholders availed themselves the opportunity to take a stand. Massive national consensus has built up, it seem clear to me,and Marende's ruling both reflects it and has been aided by it.
Was I sure then, absolutely sure, that Marende would make the ruling that he has no made? No. You can never be that sure. But I believed, based on the circumstances of the case and his previous rulings, that that was the only decision that he could make -- had to make.
So whose victory is it? First, the people of Kenya in their many ethnicities -- who are all too often ambushed with political decisions they have little time to reverse. Second, the new constitution -- which Kenyans are determined to implement and to have in its fullness. It is a victory, too, against impunity, ethnic myopia and lingering traces of an imperial presidency.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Bonde Cliff: Haiku
Sun-baked, wind-swept. Dream.
Is how you peel that matter.
Dove's verse. Two too fars!
Is how you peel that matter.
Dove's verse. Two too fars!
Tuesday, January 04, 2011
Out of Africa: A Comment on Dr. Alice Roberts' "The Incredible Human Journey"
On December 28, 2010 (as part of my holiday fare), I watched for the first time, on BBC Knowledge (relayed by DSTV), Alice Roberts' documentary titled "The Incredible Human Journey".
This is not the first TV account of human migration out of Africa, based ultimately on qualitative evidence -- evidence gleaned, as in certain earlier accounts, in part from archaeology, anthropology and climatology; but mostly from DNA databases. And because it is not the first, it lacks that indelible "first teller's" aha moment that some of us have already been exposed to (and told and retold in lectures). Nevertheless, it remains an incredible rendition, in its own right, of our ancestors' drive, weed-like, at once single-minded and unintended, toward world "domination"; a drive to claim and take possession of an entire planet -- and beyond the planet, going "forth", who knows?
Her documentary adds refreshing twists (and certain images) to the broad, paradigm-shifting, technicolor script:
Such as the chain-reaction (or a sort of kalausi) of human movement -- up and down, east and west, round and round -- that went on for millennia within the African continent before the original "China Syndrome" moment was reached; and with it, the release.
Such as the journey through Turkey and up the Danube (wonder if they gave an ancient name to that river as they rowed and remarked upon its convenience) into greater Europa.
Such as sailing down the west coast of the Americas, after a long, but always driven, wandering through Siberia's permafrost -- into the northern badlands and, farther (across the equator once again), into the deep jungles of the South. [Or was it simply a hugging and not letting go of the coastline, rather than dedicated sailing, perhaps enticed by the sudden abundance of (sea) food, and discouraged by the rugged hilliness of Alaska? I ask this because I wonder: Where and when would necessity have prompted this branch of migrants (not being, I suppose, the ones who rowed up the Danube) to invent and develop sea-faring technology (hardware and software) during the thousands of years that they lived deep in Siberia?]
The documentary is in turn testament to the grandeur and connectedness of Ms. Roberts' own awe-inspiring, passionate, umbilical journey.
And I would like to share it with you (click here to see)
Postscript: Sorry, just found out that the video is no longer available on YouTube. Instead, a DVD version can be purchased online ~MY, April 28, 2012.
SEE SAMPLE OF THE BOOK HERE: Alice Roberts' (2009) The Incredible Human Journey: The Story of How We Colonised the Planet. London: Bloomsbury
This is not the first TV account of human migration out of Africa, based ultimately on qualitative evidence -- evidence gleaned, as in certain earlier accounts, in part from archaeology, anthropology and climatology; but mostly from DNA databases. And because it is not the first, it lacks that indelible "first teller's" aha moment that some of us have already been exposed to (and told and retold in lectures). Nevertheless, it remains an incredible rendition, in its own right, of our ancestors' drive, weed-like, at once single-minded and unintended, toward world "domination"; a drive to claim and take possession of an entire planet -- and beyond the planet, going "forth", who knows?
Her documentary adds refreshing twists (and certain images) to the broad, paradigm-shifting, technicolor script:
Such as the chain-reaction (or a sort of kalausi) of human movement -- up and down, east and west, round and round -- that went on for millennia within the African continent before the original "China Syndrome" moment was reached; and with it, the release.
Such as the journey through Turkey and up the Danube (wonder if they gave an ancient name to that river as they rowed and remarked upon its convenience) into greater Europa.
Such as sailing down the west coast of the Americas, after a long, but always driven, wandering through Siberia's permafrost -- into the northern badlands and, farther (across the equator once again), into the deep jungles of the South. [Or was it simply a hugging and not letting go of the coastline, rather than dedicated sailing, perhaps enticed by the sudden abundance of (sea) food, and discouraged by the rugged hilliness of Alaska? I ask this because I wonder: Where and when would necessity have prompted this branch of migrants (not being, I suppose, the ones who rowed up the Danube) to invent and develop sea-faring technology (hardware and software) during the thousands of years that they lived deep in Siberia?]
The documentary is in turn testament to the grandeur and connectedness of Ms. Roberts' own awe-inspiring, passionate, umbilical journey.
And I would like to share it with you (click here to see)
Postscript: Sorry, just found out that the video is no longer available on YouTube. Instead, a DVD version can be purchased online ~MY, April 28, 2012.
SEE SAMPLE OF THE BOOK HERE: Alice Roberts' (2009) The Incredible Human Journey: The Story of How We Colonised the Planet. London: Bloomsbury
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)