Re: [Ugnet] RE: [FedsNet] Re: News: Critique of Obote's story
Matek, c'mon man, be real ! Is/was Obote ever for presidential term limits ? Wasn't he himself trying to do the same thing that the incumbent is trying now ? If he had had his way, Obote would be ruling for life. What you call bull crap is the history we need to learn from but which you are intent on suppressing. You UPC people really do tickle me. Kasangwawo From: Matek Opoko [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: ugandanet@kym.net To: ugandanet@kym.net Subject: Re: [Ugnet] RE: [FedsNet] Re: News: Critique of Obote's story Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 16:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Musamize: Museveni is busy trying to manipulate the Uganda Constitution so that he may rule for life!!! and instead of dealing with this fact, you are still dwelling on Obote and what Obote did or did not do some 35 years ago. You bull crap fixation with Obote is rather repugnant to say the least! Matek musamize [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr. Kibuka, Akena Adoko's article is on the web at: www.kituochakatiba.co.ug/archives.htm. This is the article that was quashed by Mr. Davies Sebukima (a.k.a. Steve Lino) -- an act rewarded by detention and accusations of sedition. The Steve Lino letter can be found at www.mail-archive.com/ugandanet@kym.net/msg00297.html. Mr. Abu Mayanja also reacted to the excesses of the 1967Constitution. Mr. Mayanja, too, was rewarded with detention and similar charges. The Chief Magistrate, Mr. Siaed, threw the charges, which were also pressed against Mr. Rajat Neogy as the editor of the Transition magazine, out of court. The judgment was published in Transition. Less well known is the fact that the 1967 pigeon-hole constitution was Nkurumah's brainchild. Mr. Nkurumah lent Obote a Senior Parliamentary Legal Draftsman, one C.V. Crabbe, who crafted that document. In those days Uganda was in essence a colony of Ghana. The details are in KWAME NKRUMAHS PRESENCE IN A. M. OBOTES UGANDA: A Study in the Convergence of International and Comparative Politics by Opuku Agyeman, Transition 48 (1975). Ill put this bwino on Fedsnet in a separate post. What befuddles me is why these articles are not at the web site of Kituo cha Katiba, which is part of the Makerere Universitys Faculty of Law, and advertises itself as East African Centre for Constitutional Development. Id hate to think that an institution of higher learning is in the habit of presenting one-sided arguments to its students, and the world, laying itself open to charges of attempting to airbrush history. M. Kibuka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sseruganda Kasangwawo, Thanks a million times; this to me exerts what I said somewhere else that there is a thin line that separates this constitution and that of 1995. I hope that a learned friend will endeavour to illustrate this thin line. Nonetheless, Akena Adoko responded to the Haji thus, in transition 33: The Uganda Revolution which took place early last year made it clear that if Uganda was to remain a democracy then it was absolutely necessary to reorganize that democracy in such a way that the characteristic benefits which generally emanate from democratic governments were not interfered with, and in such a way that certain evils such as hereditary monarchy, excessive crime, separatist tendencies, and weakness of the Central Government were eradicated, or, as far as possible, neutralized. And here come some more: The critics of the presidential powers tend to overlook two things. First, that there is also danger in failing to concentrate sufficient powers to carry out governmental functions in the hands of the executive. I would personally hate to see, once more, the progress of the country hampered by struggles for power as nearly happened last year. If advanced countries like the U.S.A. and Britain have to take precautions against this kind of situation why not countries like Uganda and other African states whose governments, because of the backwardness of the countries, have more extensive functions? Secondly the critics tend to overlook the fact that the powers vested in the President are those which enable him to control the business of government, and not necessarily to execute it himself. So overwhelming is government business that no single person can do it himself or even consent to try do so. This is why we have a ca binet and ministers in charge of various ministries, the Public Service Commission, Uganda Electricity Board, and Uganda Development Corporation etc., to help carry out certain governmental functions. In spite of this fact, that the executive powers are delegated and distributed, the vesting of such powers in the hands of one man ensures that somebody, and not an anonymous mass, must be held responsible by and directly accountable to the people of the country for the way the government powers are used. I'm currently looking for means to publish this stuff for the wider public, so one see for him/her self how confused certain minds are. Have a good day. Cheers,
[Ugnet] Where next falls Gabriell's daggers!?
Without exaggerated enthusiasm I must concur this subsequent UPCs series-production of shock therapy bewilders. Even this time around, I am not into the right or wrong. That is a matter for the UPC. My beef (I suppose the same applies to all us peripherals) is otherwise, WHAT IS IN IT FOR ME (rd. the good and bad). For, at the end of the day, their "right or wrong" affects you and I too. That is where the concept of good or bad evaluation comes in even for non-partials. Political parties make their right or wrong moves to consolidate endeavours in policy architecture. In the event they happen to usurp governance, the impact of their right or wrong acts comes pouring on us all. In that light, we are all in the shit together, be we party members or not. That applies to decisions made by all political parties (Movement, DP, UPC, FDC etceteras). Hence, it is always important to watch out for the "good or bad" impacts of internal "right or wrong" moves. I must confess I cannot help getting impressed by the UPCs awakening. With majestic perfection and bloodthirsty daggers, the party Gabriells-up at 9½ count to rise up and dagger out Deadwoods from within. They had otherwise become stumbling blocks in the resolution of the havoc in Northern Uganda. And, they would definitely be liabilities, come election. This time around, it is the apostles of illicit paramour with the FDC heeling for cover. Right or wrong, from a non-partial peripheral commonality perspective, it is GOOD. Some believers have pronounced desire to copy the Kenyan legacy. I find that analogue hazardous and indeed treacherous. Our political customs / cultures speaks against it. Whilst our Eastern neighbours have groomed political history of convergence, Uganda excelled in political schisms for schismism hallmarked by the various state coups and intrigue agglomerations. It is odd to see the UPC amalgamate with the very elements that up-rooted it. At this stage, our political parties should concern themselves more with their own respective ideological profiles. Rgds Noc´ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com ___ Ugandanet mailing list Ugandanet@kym.net http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet % UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
[Ugnet] ] Re: News: Critique of Obote's story
Jonah: I am not against you learning your History about Obote., As a matter of fact you can learn all your one sided history about Obote until the cows come home. We have an Emergency right now in Uganda. Close to two million of our fellow citizens are living in squalid condition in the camps of Northern and Eastern Uganda. War have been ragging in Northern Uganda for now 20 years. In Western and Southern Uganda, our people are not subject to immense degree of poverty, the level of which has never been seen in Uganda. Even under Amin the people did not experience this degree of suffering. All this is going on thanx to Yoweri Museveni's twenty year rule which he wants to extend to 30 or is it 40 years. Under the circumstances, many Ugandans really do not have time to think about Obote this Obote that ...ooo Obote Y!! Good Day lady!! jonah kasangwawo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matek,c'mon man, be real ! Is/was Obote ever for presidential term limits ? Wasn't he himself trying to do the same thing that the incumbent is trying now ? If he had had his way, Obote would be ruling for life. What you call bull crap is the history we need to learn from but which you are intent on suppressing. You UPC people really do tickle me.KasangwawoFrom: Matek Opoko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Reply-To: ugandanet@kym.netTo: ugandanet@kym.netSubject: Re: [Ugnet] RE: [FedsNet] Re: News: Critique of Obote's storyDate: Mon, 16 May 2005 16:41:26 -0700 (PDT)Musamize:Museveni is busy trying to manipulate the Uganda Constitution so that he may rule for life!!! and instead of dealing with this fact, you are still dwelling on Obote and what Obote did or did not do some 35 years ago. You bull crap fixation with Obote is rather repugnant to say the least!Matekmusamize <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:Mr. Kibuka,Akena Adoko's article is on the web at: www.kituochakatiba.co.ug/archives.htm.This is the article that was quashed by Mr. Davies Sebukima (a.k.a. Steve Lino) -- an act rewarded by detention and accusations of sedition. The Steve Lino letter can be found atwww.mail-archive.com/ugandanet@kym.net/msg00297.html.Mr. Abu Mayanja also reacted to the excesses of the 1967Constitution. Mr. Mayanja, too, was rewarded with detention and similar charges. The Chief Magistrate, Mr. Siaed, threw the charges, which were also pressed against Mr. Rajat Neogy as the editor of the Transition magazine, out of court. The judgmen t was published in Transition.Less well known is the fact that the 1967 pigeon-hole constitution was Nkurumah's brainchild. Mr. Nkurumah "lent" Obote a Senior Parliamentary Legal Draftsman, one C.V. Crabbe, who crafted that document. In those days Uganda was in essence a colony of Ghana. The details are in KWAME NKRUMAHS PRESENCE IN A. M. OBOTES UGANDA: A Study in the Convergence of International and Comparative Politics by Opuku Agyeman, Transition 48 (1975). Ill put this bwino on Fedsnet in a separate post.What befuddles me is why these articles are not at the web site of Kituo cha Katiba, which is part of the Makerere Universitys Faculty of Law, and advertises itself as East African Centre for Constitutional Development. Id hate to think that an institution of higher learning is in the habit of presenting one-sided argument s to its students, and the world, laying itself open to charges of attempting to airbrush history."M. Kibuka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:Sseruganda Kasangwawo,Thanks a million times; this to me exerts what I said somewhere else thatthere is a thin line that separates this constitution and that of 1995. Ihope that a learned friend will endeavour to illustrate this thin line.Nonetheless, Akena Adoko responded to the Haji thus, in transition 33:"The Uganda Revolution which took place early last year made it clear thatif Uganda was to remain a democracy then it was absolutely necessary toreorganize that democracy in such a way that the characteristic benefitswhich generally emanate from democratic governments were not interferedwith, and in such a way that certain evils such as hereditary monarchy,excessive crime, separatist tende ncies, and weakness of the CentralGovernment were eradicated, or, as far as possible, neutralized."And here come some more:"The critics of the presidential powers tend to overlook two things. First,that there is also danger in failing to concentrate sufficient powers tocarry out governmental functions in the hands of the executive. I wouldpersonally hate to see, once more, the progress of the country hampered bystruggles for power as nearly happened last year. If advanced countries likethe U.S.A. and Britain have to take precautions against this kind ofsituation why not countries like Uganda and other African states whosegovernments, because of the backwardness of the countries, have moreextensive functions?"Secondly the critics tend to overlook the fact that the powers vested inthe President are those which enable him to control the business ofgovernment, and not
Re: [Ugnet] ] Re: News: Critique of Obote's story...CORRECTION
In Western and Southern Uganda, our people aresubject to immense degree of poverty, the level of which has never been seen in Uganda. Even under Amin the people did not experience this degree of suffering. Matek Opoko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jonah: I am not against you learning your History about Obote., As a matter of fact you can learn all your one sided history about Obote until the cows come home. We have an Emergency right now in Uganda. Close to two million of our fellow citizens are living in squalid condition in the camps of Northern and Eastern Uganda. War have been ragging in Northern Uganda for now 20 years. In Western and Southern Uganda, our people are not subject to immense degree of poverty, the level of which has never been seen in Uganda. Even under Amin the people did not experience this degree of suffering. All this is going on thanx to Yoweri Museveni's twenty year rule which he wants to extend to 30 or is it 40 years. Under the circumstances, many Ugandans really do not have time to think about Obote this Obote that ...ooo Obote Y!! Good Day lady!! jonah kasangwawo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matek,c'mon man, be real ! Is/was Obote ever for presidential term limits ? Wasn't he himself trying to do the same thing that the incumbent is trying now ? If he had had his way, Obote would be ruling for life. What you call bull crap is the history we need to learn from but which you are intent on suppressing. You UPC people really do tickle me.KasangwawoFrom: Matek Opoko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Reply-To: ugandanet@kym.netTo: ugandanet@kym.netSubject: Re: [Ugnet] RE: [FedsNet] Re: News: Critique of Obote's storyDate: Mon, 16 May 2005 16:41:26 -0700 (PDT)Musamize:Museveni is busy trying to manipulate the Uganda Constitution so that he may rule for life!!! and instead of dealing with this fact, you are still dwelling on Obote and what Obote did or did not do some 35 years ago. You bull crap fixation with Obote is rather repugnant to say the least!Matekmusamize <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:Mr. Kibuka,Akena Adoko's article is on the web at: www.kituochakatiba.co.ug/archives.htm.This is the article that was quashed by Mr. Davies Sebukima (a.k.a. Steve Lino) -- an act rewarded by detention and accusations of sedition. The Steve Lino letter can be found atwww.mail-archive.com/ugandanet@kym.net/msg00297.html.Mr. Abu Mayanja also reacted to the excesses of the 1967Constitution. Mr. Mayanja, too, was rewarded with detention and similar charges. The Chief Magistrate, Mr. Siaed, threw the charges, which were also pressed against Mr. Rajat Neogy as the editor of the Transition magazine, out of court. The judgmen t was published in Transition.Less well known is the fact that the 1967 pigeon-hole constitution was Nkurumah's brainchild. Mr. Nkurumah "lent" Obote a Senior Parliamentary Legal Draftsman, one C.V. Crabbe, who crafted that document. In those days Uganda was in essence a colony of Ghana. The details are in KWAME NKRUMAHS PRESENCE IN A. M. OBOTES UGANDA: A Study in the Convergence of International and Comparative Politics by Opuku Agyeman, Transition 48 (1975). Ill put this bwino on Fedsnet in a separate post.What befuddles me is why these articles are not at the web site of Kituo cha Katiba, which is part of the Makerere Universitys Faculty of Law, and advertises itself as East African Centre for Constitutional Development. Id hate to think that an institution of higher learning is in the habit of presenting one-sided argument s to its students, and the world, laying itself open to charges of attempting to airbrush history."M. Kibuka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:Sseruganda Kasangwawo,Thanks a million times; this to me exerts what I said somewhere else thatthere is a thin line that separates this constitution and that of 1995. Ihope that a learned friend will endeavour to illustrate this thin line.Nonetheless, Akena Adoko responded to the Haji thus, in transition 33:"The Uganda Revolution which took place early last year made it clear thatif Uganda was to remain a democracy then it was absolutely necessary toreorganize that democracy in such a way that the characteristic benefitswhich generally emanate from democratic governments were not interferedwith, and in such a way that certain evils such as hereditary monarchy,excessive crime, separatist t ende ncies, and weakness of the CentralGovernment were eradicated, or, as far as possible, neutralized."And here come some more:"The critics of the presidential powers tend to overlook two things. First,that there is also danger in failing to concentrate sufficient powers tocarry out governmental functions in the hands of the executive. I wouldpersonally hate to see, once more, the progress of the country hampered bystruggles for power as nearly happened last year. If advanced countries likethe U.S.A. and Britain have to take precautions against this kind ofsituation why not countries like Uganda and other African states
[Ugnet] Sudan allows Ugandan forces to operate in southern region ...COMMENT
Sudan allows Ugandan forces to operate in southern region By Frank Nyakairu KAMPALA - The Sudan government has renewed the protocol allowing Ugandan forces to operate in southern Sudan to fight rebels of the Lords Resistance Army. The new agreement was signed on Sunday in the Sudanese capital, Khartoum where Uganda's Defence Minister, Amama Mbabazi led a high-ranking delegation. Uganda backed the anti Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) opposed to Khartoum and Sudan backed the LRA in the early 1990s.A communiqué, signed by Mbabazi and the Sudanese Defence Minister, Maj. Gen. Bakri Hassan Salih, stressed the desire "of enhancing mutual understanding between the two countries.""Under the new era of the peace achieved in the area, the two parties agreed to extend the period of the protocol between the government of Sudan and the Government of Uganda to June 30, 2005," the communiqué said.The first agreement allowing UPDF to enter Sudan was signed in March 2003 and has been r enewed several times since. UPDF forces in southern Sudan have achieved little in the past two years.The Army Spokesman, Maj. Shaban Bantariza, said the UPDF has reduced the LRA, which was in thousands to hundreds over the last two years."Today the LRA in Sudan has between 150 and 200 fighters and in Uganda between 50 and 100. When we went to Sudan these fellows were in thousands," Bantariza said yesterday by telephone.He said the LRA leader, Joseph Kony "is between Acholi Bur and Nisitu in Southern Sudan."They have probably learnt of this protocol so they are trying to cross the red line and come back to Uganda to ask for another ceasefire," Bantariza said.Please do not ask us to give it to them because last time they used it as a lease for life to unearth arms and carry out attacks," he said. The LRA, which has its major bases in southern Sudan, has been fighting the government since 1988. Things that wanna make you say h!! If the LRA has it's bases in Southern Sudan.. and at most, according to Bantarazi there are only 150-200 rebels remaindingin "LRA" camps in the Sudan, is the UPDF telling Ugandans and members of the International Commuinty that with over 40,000 armed men of the UPDF and heavy fire power( including tanks, Mambas, APC,Helicopter gunships, Bazookas e.t.c) the UPDFCANNOT defeat this said "rebels" ?and this is the mighty UPDF we have been lead to believe! Bantarazi Twale Eri Yoko Yoko! Olinba Ani Gwe!!! Matek Kony and his four top commanders are being investigated by the International Criminal Court for possible crimes against humanity.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Ugandanet mailing list Ugandanet@kym.net http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet % UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
[Ugnet] Uganda Opposition Fears Another Ban On Parties
Uganda Opposition Fears Another Ban On Parties Email This Page Print This Page VisitThePublisher'sSite The East African (Nairobi) May 9, 2005 Posted to the web May 17, 2005 David KaizaNairobi Political parties in Uganda have expressed fears that they could once again be banned by the government following the passing of the motion on the referendum, which allows the Electoral Commission to hold a plebiscite to change the political system. Opposition politicians say the motion, passed early last month, contravened parliamentary rules. The referendum law clears the way for the Electoral Commission to organise a poll in July asking the population to free or not to free political parties. The same referendum is also likely to ask the electorate to lift the two-term limit on the presidency. Opposition leaders have already said they will not take part in the referendum. "The referendum law means that President Yoweri Museveni wants to ban parties for another five years and beyond," Chapaa Karuhanga, co-ordinator of the Group of Six (G-6) opposition parties, told The EastAfrican. "We know that he is not interested in opening up. He wants the referendum so he can say that he wanted to free political parties but the people of Uganda said no." President Yoweri Museveni banned parties in 1986, limiting their operations to their headquarters only, but last November a constitutional court allowed them to operate. Passing the referendum law was a hard-fought exercise, which took parliament the whole of April. When at first it was put to a vote, the motion failed to go through because parliament did not have a quorum. Only 147 votes were drawn in support of the motion and 17 against. By that time, it was considered that there would be no referendum. But the government later moved to have the no-vote overturned, through a "reconsideration." By the time a fresh round of voting was put forward, the 230 Movement supporters in parliament - including military MPs, who had not been around the first time - were all present. Opposition MP and leader of the Conservative Party, John Ken Lukyamuzi, told The EastAfrican that the manner in which the law was passed is a sign of what will follow. "A signal has been sent out that the process of setting up a single-party state has started." "It's likely that parties will be banned," Wafula Ogutu, spokesman for the opposition Forum for Democratic Change said. "That's because the president is interested only in the Movement and he is using all resources and state machinery to make sure that that happens." Mr Ogutu said that if President Museveni had been honest about political reforms, he would not have pushed for a referendum law to be passed while the constitution clearly provided for a change of system to be carried out through parliament and districts as cheaper alternatives. He also said that the transition period would then have been started in early 2004, with civic education coming long before campaigns started. Mr Karuhanga said that all actions since1986 showed that parties were never a part of the system envisaged by the Movement. "The first legal notice Museveni gave when he came to power in 1986 was that he would ban parties; he followed that with mchaka mchaka (political education courses) by which he indoctrinated the population that parties are bad. In 1998-99, when he announced a referendum on political systems, he should have given parties at least a year to canvass for support. He gave us 45 days. Throughout, he has never shown any willingness to dialogue with the opposition." However, the opposition says that whichever way the referendum goes, they will go ahead with the opening up of national offices and holding rallies. Relevant Links East Africa Legal and Judicial Affairs Uganda Human Rights The Democratic Party says that it has so far sold half a million membership cards. The Uganda People's Congress said it had spent over Ush100 million ($55,000) in opening new offices and registering members. FDC is in the process of opening 56 national offices and, according to its headquarters, it intends to print 10 million membership cards. Additional reporting by Barbara Among Discover Yahoo! Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing & more. Check it out!___ Ugandanet mailing list Ugandanet@kym.net http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet % UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
Re: [Ugnet] There are other sufferers in the North
Musamizi: Instead of denying and dismissing Eddy Mulindwa's assertion that the UPC Government constantly and over a great deal of time remitted funds to Kabaka Edward Mutesa for his maintenancewhile the Kabaka was in exile in London, a better intellectual approach to challenge Mulindwa's assertionwould be to call upon Mulindwa to provide evidence to prove his assertions. Mulindwa would then do some "digging" so tosay, of the public records in the Ministry of Foreign affairs in Kampala or Finance, for that matter...and then bingo.. post his findings on this Uganda net for all to see !!! but no! ..instead you are shooting your mouth dragging in Obote.. I hear Obote living in Zambia..Obote this Obote that Obote Yoo!!! You people simply cannot reason..you can not in simply logical analysis!!! Matekmusamize [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr. Kipenji: I always think and identify as a Muganda before anything else -religion, politics, gender, education, inclusive. So, I do not find it strange, neither do I take offence, nor do do I feel slighted if anyone else does so. IMHO, to do otherwisewould be putting the cart before the horse. The hogwash that "Let us talk about the 1966 problem with Mengo. Sir Edward Muteesa left Uganda for United Kingdom. Obote as the Uganda president instructed Bank of Uganda to send money to Sir Edward for upkeep. That is why Sir Edward did not end up on a welfare line in United Kingdom." is just that: unadultered Grade Z hogwash and sophistry generated by asingularly contorted mind. We all know that Obote was did not endup in a welfare line while in Tanzania. So, should we conclude that this was due to General Idi Amin's "generosity" in "instructing" the Bank of Uganda to send money to Obote for upkeep? From which account, and who was paying? Likewise, we all know that Obote did not endup on welfare in Zambia after being kicked out of power by the Okellos. We also know that Obote has never worked a day in his life in Zampia (and, for that matter, in Tanzania). Why then don't we sing the praises of Okello, and Museveni for similarly instructing the Bank of Uganda to send money for Obote's upkeep courtsey of the pizanti, aka "common man"? What is good for the goose ... MusamizeOwor Kipenji [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are other sufferers in the north With due respect I found Yoni Okwera-Olok's letter: "Let the Government prove it does not hate the Acholis" very bothering and a true example of the problem we have in our nation today. Mr Okwera must remember to always be a Ugandan before he thinks as an Acholi. Many of his facts are not true and we need to throw away passion on this issue so that we can see through the web of Okwera's lies. Only then can we try to plant nationalism in our nation. Okwera must remember that Uganda has gone through very hard times during the Movement. Ombaci happened in West Nile, Mukura was in eastern Uganda, Kibwetere was in western Uganda. Yes, northern Uganda has had the largest suffering under the Movement. But northern Uganda is not only a land of Acholis, so let us not play a tribal game here. The last time I checked, Uganda had a people called Langis. Can Okwera tell us today that Langis are not in camps? It is quite wrong for us to get a problem in our nation and we tribalise it. The example Okwera-Olok uses of Obote and Buganda is equally false, for Buganda has never enjoyed power in Uganda than under both Obote's governments. Yes, Okwera has a right to hate Obote, but he must as well recognise that the most powerful ministers in Obote's government were actually Baganda. Okwera-Olok must remember the names of powerful Baganda like Eriya Babumba, Apolo Kironde, Luyimbazi Zaake, Kalule Ssetaala, Keefa Ssempangi, Sam Mugwiisa, Bidandi Ssali. Let us talk about Attorney Generals like G. L. Binayiisa or even Nkambo Mugerwa. Governors Bank of Uganda like Mubiru, Kikonyogo, Leo Kibirango. All these were very powerful Baganda during Obote's government. Let us talk about the 1966 problem with Mengo. Sir Edward Muteesa left Uganda for United Kingdom. Obote as the Uganda president instructed Bank of Uganda to send money to Sir Edward for upkeep. That is why Sir Edward did not end up on a welfare line in United Kingdom. Baganda did not organise any means for maintenance of their exiled King. What is interesting is that this money continued flowing into the same account through Amin's era, up to today, because the instructions are still on Uganda papers. When Obote came back to Uganda, as a President and a minister of finance, he did not cancel those instructions. We must be very careful when we make false public statements to push our agenda. Okwera-Olok's claim that Obote hates Baganda is totally unfair. If he did hate them, Miria Obote should have been a Langi or an Acholi. This is the mother of Obote's children. By all means we have a problem in northern Uganda and no one will debate that. But this problem is the same
[Ugnet] Rebels Seem Intent on Civil War in Iraq
Rebels Seem Intent on Civil War in Iraq By PAUL GARWOOD, Associated Press Writer Mon May 16, 5:27 PM ET BAGHDAD, Iraq - Civilians shopping at street markets, worshipping at mosques and mourning at funerals have become the prime target of insurgents in a two-week spree of carnage that many people think is linked to efforts by foreign extremists to plunge Iraq into civil war. . At least 489 people, most of them civilians, have been killed by bombings and other insurgent attacks since Iraq's new government was announced by Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari on April 28. Now, with the bodies of 50 men found shot to death by unknown assailants and dumped across the country over two days, fears are rising that foreigners like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi may be making headway in their campaign to turn Iraq's fractious communities against each other. There are worries the unexplained killings in Baghdad and other cities could be a result of angry Shiite and Sunni Muslims retaliating against each other's communities in frustration over two years of unrelenting insurgent attacks. Religious leaders also have been singled out. Shiite cleric Qassim al-Gharawi died in a drive-by shooting in western Baghdad last week. Quraish Abdul Jabbar, a Sunni cleric, was reported shot dead and his body dumped behind a mosque in northeastern Baghdad on Monday. "We are approaching a situation that is unstable, of a war of all against all, complete chaos, where the government is ineffective, the security is ineffective, and anybody can be killed at any time by anybody," said Kenneth Katzman, an expert on the Persian Gulf region with the U.S. Congressional Research Service. The Jordanian-born al-Zarqawi, leader of Al-Qaida in Iraq, made his intentions clear in a letter obtained and released last year by the U.S. government saying that causing sectarian fighting between Shiite and Sunni was the best way to undermine American policy in Iraq. Most of the insurgent attacks aimed at civilians have been in neighborhoods whose residents are predominantly from Iraq's Shiite Arab majority or their Kurdish allies. Many insurgents are thought to be from the formally dominant Sunni Arab minority, but many Iraqis blame foreign extremists for the assaults on civilians. "This shows that the terrorists are in their last period. They weren't able to violate the security zone and therefore they started targeting schools, markets in order to kill civilians," the new defense minister, Saadoun al-Duleimi, said at a news conference Monday. Al-Duleimi, a Sunni Arab, said insurgents killed 230 civilians last week alone, while only 13 Iraqi soldiers and policemen were slain. The government's efforts to quell insurgent violence and keep Iraq's religious and ethnic communities from splitting could be complicated by the close relationship between the Interior Ministry, headed by Shiite leader Bayan Jabr, and the Badr Brigades, the militia of Iraq's leading Shiite group, the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq. Concern was raised when the militia, once regarded as terrorist by U.S. officials, cooperated with security forces to capture four Palestinians and an Iraqi wanted for a bombing Thursday that killed at least 17 people at market in a Shiite neighborhood of Baghdad. Al-Duleimi, the defense minister, has said he won't merge militias such as the Badr Brigades and the Kurdish Peshmerga into Iraq's army. The United States has called for the militias to be disbanded. Despite the violence and communal frictions, Katzman, the analyst at the Congressional Research Service, doesn't yet see Iraq tumbling into a sectarian war. "Some would define this as some kind of civil war, but we don't yet have entire distinct camps across the country opposing each other," he said. Iraq's influential Shiite leaders, particularly Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, are also playing a key role in tamping down resentments that could erupt into civil war. Laith Kuba, spokesman for al-Sistani, said Shiite retaliation against Sunnis over terrorist attacks could jeopardize the Shiites' new role as the strongest political group. "There is an awareness among Shiites now that we have the larger presence in the country, run the state and can benefit most" from peaceful relations, Kuba said. Shiites, who make up 60 percent of Iraq's 26 million people, were oppressed under Saddam Hussein' name=c1> SEARCHNews | News Photos | Images | Web' name=c3> Saddam Hussein, then emerged from the Jan. 30 elections with the biggest bloc in the National Assembly. They have allied with Kurds, who also were oppressed by Saddam, but have included Sunnis in the government in an effort to ease Sunni discontent over losing power. One factor working against the effort by foreign extremists to foment civil war is the widespread belief among Iraqis that homegrown anti-U.S. insurgents, either fervent nationalists opposed to foreign occupation or former Saddam loyalists angered by their fall from
Re: [Ugnet] There are other sufferers in the North
Mr. Matek, 1. Obote started this madness in Uganda when he made his power grab back in late 1960s. So to discuss Ugandas problems today one needs to, at least, cast a cursory glance in his direction. Today, when we talk about IDPs in Northern Uganda, we need to remember that the originator of this device of authoritarianism in Uganda is none other than Milton Apollo Obote (aka MAO). He perfected in the infamous"Luweero Triangle". 2. Mr. Mulindwa, apart from not being exactly renowned for basing his arguments on facts, let alone providing a scintilla of factual evidence to support for them, started this thread, when he stated: Let us talk about the 1966 problem with Mengo. Sir Edward Muteesa left Uganda for United Kingdom. Obote as the Uganda president instructed Bank of Uganda to send money to Sir Edward for upkeep. That is why Sir Edward did not end up on a welfare line in United Kingdom . How come you are not on record for asking what this has to do with the present situation in Northern Uganda, or even complaining how events of 1966 at Mmengo being too remote to have any bearing on the misery in Northern Uganda today? Given what has transpired since, when one reads newspaper accounts of the day, one cannot help but be impressed by the Late Kabaka Muteesa IIs near prophetic -- but unheeded warnings that Obotes single-minded pursuit of absolute power at all costs would cause Katanga in Uganda, i.e. plunge Uganda into chaos. (At the time the Katanga region was in considerable turmoil, hence Ssekabaka Muteesas use of Katanga as a metaphor for chaos.) Like he would remind his friends, Obotes favorite quote and motto is (from John Miltons Paradise Lost see www.literature.org/authors/milton-john/paradise-lost/): It is better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven. In the end, Obote got his wish I suppose, spending about 3 years in exile for every year he was in power, albeit in comfort, being wined and dined courtesy of some hapless pizanti taxpayer. That said, however, Id like to invite Mr. Mulindwa to provide us with whatever shred of evidence he can muster to support his contention that somehow Obote gave Ssekabaka Muteesa II financial assistance of any kind, at any time of His (Muteesa II) life. Matek Opoko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Musamizi: Instead of denying and dismissing Eddy Mulindwa's assertion that the UPC Government constantly and over a great deal of time remitted funds to Kabaka Edward Mutesa for his maintenancewhile the Kabaka was in exile in London, a better intellectual approach to challenge Mulindwa's assertionwould be to call upon Mulindwa to provide evidence to prove his assertions. Mulindwa would then do some "digging" so tosay, of the public records in the Ministry of Foreign affairs in Kampala or Finance, for that matter...and then bingo.. post his findings on this Uganda net for all to see !!! but no! ..instead you are shooting your mouth dragging in Obote.. I hear Obote living in Zambia..Obote this Obote that Obote Yoo!!! You people simply cannot reason..you can not in simply logical analysis!!! Matekmusamize [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr. Kipenji: I always think and identify as a Muganda before anything else -religion, politics, gender, education, inclusive. So, I do not find it strange, neither do I take offence, nor do do I feel slighted if anyone else does so. IMHO, to do otherwisewould be putting the cart before the horse. The hogwash that "Let us talk about the 1966 problem with Mengo. Sir Edward Muteesa left Uganda for United Kingdom. Obote as the Uganda president instructed Bank of Uganda to send money to Sir Edward for upkeep. That is why Sir Edward did not end up on a welfare line in United Kingdom." is just that: unadultered Grade Z hogwash and sophistry generated by asingularly contorted mind. We all know that Obote was did not endup in a welfare line while in Tanzania. So, should we conclude that this was due to General Idi Amin's "generosity" in "instructing" the Bank of Uganda to send money to Obote for upkeep? From which account, and who was paying? Likewise, we all know that Obote did not endup on welfare in Zambia after being kicked out of power by the Okellos. We also know that Obote has never worked a day in his life in Zampia (and, for that matter, in Tanzania). Why then don't we sing the praises of Okello, and Museveni for similarly instructing the Bank of Uganda to send money for Obote's upkeep courtsey of the pizanti, aka "common man"? What is good for the goose ... MusamizeOwor Kipenji [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are other sufferers in the north With due respect I found Yoni Okwera-Olok's letter: "Let the Government prove it does not hate the Acholis" very bothering and a true example of the problem we have in our nation today. Mr Okwera must remember to always be a Ugandan before he thinks as an Acholi. Many of his facts are not true and we need to throw away passion on this issue so that we
[Ugnet] Zimbabwe Frees 62 Coup Suspects
May 16, 2005 Zimbabwe Frees 62 Coup Suspects By MICHAEL WINES JOHANNESBURG, May 15 - Zimbabwean authorities on Sunday belatedly freed 62 suspected mercenaries whom it had jailed 14 months ago after their jet stopped in Harare, apparently to pick up weapons for a coup in Equatorial Guinea. The coup's collapse in March 2004 created an international sensation. Its sponsors remain unidentified, but a number of well-known figures, including the British soldier of fortune Simon Mann and Sir Mark Thatcher, son of Margaret Thatcher, the former British prime minister, were said to have been involved. The 62, all but one South Africans or Namibians, were convicted of immigration and weapons violations. They were to have been freed in March after serving two-thirds of their 18-month sentences, Zimbabwean newspapers reported, but the government repeatedly delayed their release. News services reported that one of the 62, a man from Zimbabwe, remained there after his release. The rest were escorted across the South African border, looking wan and gaunt. The men apparently were to have been the muscle in a plot to seize power in Equatorial Guinea, on Central Africa's west coast, whose dictator, Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, became rich on oil discoveries in the mid-1990's. Most of the nation's 500,000 people are destitute. Equatorial Guinea arrested an additional 18 to 20 suspected plotters, and claimed that the attempt had been supported by a political opponent in exile in Spain, Severo Moto. Mr. Moto has denied involvement. South Africa charged that the scheme had been financed partly by Sir Mark, a South Africa resident and a friend of Mr. Mann. Sir Mark denied knowingly supporting the plot, saying he believed that he was investing in an air-ambulance business. But in January, he pleaded guilty to supporting foreign military activities and paid a $500,000 fine. Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.___ Ugandanet mailing list Ugandanet@kym.net http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/ugandanet % UGANDANET is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
[Ugnet] Logic of Female Orgasm
May 17, 2005 A Critic Takes On the Logic of Female Orgasm By DINITIA SMITH Evolutionary scientists have never had difficulty explaining the male orgasm, closely tied as it is to reproduction. But the Darwinian logic behind the female orgasm has remained elusive. Women can have sexual intercourse and even become pregnant - doing their part for the perpetuation of the species - without experiencing orgasm. So what is its evolutionary purpose? Over the last four decades, scientists have come up with a variety of theories, arguing, for example, that orgasm encourages women to have sex and, therefore, reproduce or that it leads women to favor stronger and healthier men, maximizing their offspring's chances of survival. But in a new book, Dr. Elisabeth A. Lloyd, a philosopher of science and professor of biology at Indiana University, takes on 20 leading theories and finds them wanting. The female orgasm, she argues in the book, "The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Science of Evolution," has no evolutionary function at all. Rather, Dr. Lloyd says the most convincing theory is one put forward in 1979 by Dr. Donald Symons, an anthropologist. That theory holds that female orgasms are simply artifacts - a byproduct of the parallel development of male and female embryos in the first eight or nine weeks of life. In that early period, the nerve and tissue pathways are laid down for various reflexes, including the orgasm, Dr. Lloyd said. As development progresses, male hormones saturate the embryo, and sexuality is defined. In boys, the penis develops, along with the potential to have orgasms and ejaculate, while "females get the nerve pathways for orgasm by initially having the same body plan." Nipples in men are similarly vestigial, Dr. Lloyd pointed out. While nipples in woman serve a purpose, male nipples appear to be simply left over from the initial stage of embryonic development. The female orgasm, she said, "is for fun." Dr. Lloyd said scientists had insisted on finding an evolutionary function for female orgasm in humans either because they were invested in believing that women's sexuality must exactly parallel that of men or because they were convinced that all traits had to be "adaptations," that is, serve an evolutionary function. Theories of female orgasm are significant, she added, because "men's expectations about women's normal sexuality, about how women should perform, are built around these notions." "And men are the ones who reflect back immediately to the woman whether or not she is adequate sexually," Dr. Lloyd continued. Central to her thesis is the fact that women do not routinely have orgasms during sexual intercourse. She analyzed 32 studies, conducted over 74 years, of the frequency of female orgasm during intercourse. When intercourse was "unassisted," that is not accompanied by stimulation of the clitoris, just a quarter of the women studied experienced orgasms often or very often during intercourse, she found. Five to 10 percent never had orgasms. Yet many of the women became pregnant. Dr. Lloyd's figures are lower than those of Dr. Alfred A. Kinsey, who in his 1953 book "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female" found that 39 to 47 percent of women reported that they always, or almost always, had orgasm during intercourse. But Kinsey, Dr. Lloyd said, included orgasms assisted by clitoral stimulation. Dr. Lloyd said there was no doubt in her mind that the clitoris was an evolutionary adaptation, selected to create excitement, leading to sexual intercourse and then reproduction. But, "without a link to fertility or reproduction," Dr. Lloyd said, "orgasm cannot be an adaptation." Not everyone agrees. For example, Dr. John Alcock, a professor of biology at Arizona State University, criticized an earlier version of Dr. Lloyd's thesis, discussed in in a 1987 article by Stephen Jay Gould in the magazine Natural History. In a phone interview, Dr. Alcock said that he had not read her new book, but that he still maintained the hypothesis that the fact that "orgasm doesn't occur every time a woman has intercourse is not evidence that it's not adaptive." "I'm flabbergasted by the notion that orgasm has to happen every time to be adaptive," he added. Dr. Alcock theorized that a woman might use orgasm "as an unconscious way to evaluate the quality of the male," his genetic fitness and, thus, how suitable he would be as a father for her offspring. "Under those circumstances, you wouldn't expect her to have it every time," Dr. Alcock said. Among the theories that Dr. Lloyd addresses in her book is one proposed in 1993, by Dr. R. Robin Baker and Dr. Mark A. Bellis, at Manchester University in England. In two papers published in the journal Animal Behaviour, they argued that female orgasm was a way of manipulating the retention of sperm by creating suction in the uterus. When a woman has an orgasm from one minute before the man ejaculates to 45 minutes after, she retains more sperm, they said.
Re: [Ugnet] RE: [FedsNet] Re: News: Critique of Obote's story
Kasangwawo So Matek now is the entire UPC people? Em Toronto The Mulindwas Communication Group With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy Groupe de communication Mulindwas avec Yoweri Museveni, l'Ouganda est dans l'anarchie - Original Message - From: jonah kasangwawo [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: ugandanet@kym.net Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 8:12 AM Subject: Re: [Ugnet] RE: [FedsNet] Re: News: Critique of Obote's story Matek, c'mon man, be real ! Is/was Obote ever for presidential term limits ? Wasn't he himself trying to do the same thing that the incumbent is trying now ? If he had had his way, Obote would be ruling for life. What you call bull crap is the history we need to learn from but which you are intent on suppressing. You UPC people really do tickle me. Kasangwawo From: Matek Opoko [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: ugandanet@kym.net To: ugandanet@kym.net Subject: Re: [Ugnet] RE: [FedsNet] Re: News: Critique of Obote's story Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 16:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Musamize: Museveni is busy trying to manipulate the Uganda Constitution so that he may rule for life!!! and instead of dealing with this fact, you are still dwelling on Obote and what Obote did or did not do some 35 years ago. You bull crap fixation with Obote is rather repugnant to say the least! Matek musamize [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr. Kibuka, Akena Adoko's article is on the web at: www.kituochakatiba.co.ug/archives.htm. This is the article that was quashed by Mr. Davies Sebukima (a.k.a. Steve Lino) -- an act rewarded by detention and accusations of sedition. The Steve Lino letter can be found at www.mail-archive.com/ugandanet@kym.net/msg00297.html. Mr. Abu Mayanja also reacted to the excesses of the 1967Constitution. Mr. Mayanja, too, was rewarded with detention and similar charges. The Chief Magistrate, Mr. Siaed, threw the charges, which were also pressed against Mr. Rajat Neogy as the editor of the Transition magazine, out of court. The judgment was published in Transition. Less well known is the fact that the 1967 pigeon-hole constitution was Nkurumah's brainchild. Mr. Nkurumah lent Obote a Senior Parliamentary Legal Draftsman, one C.V. Crabbe, who crafted that document. In those days Uganda was in essence a colony of Ghana. The details are in KWAME NKRUMAH'S PRESENCE IN A. M. OBOTE'S UGANDA: A Study in the Convergence of International and Comparative Politics by Opuku Agyeman, Transition 48 (1975). I'll put this bwino on Fedsnet in a separate post. What befuddles me is why these articles are not at the web site of Kituo cha Katiba, which is part of the Makerere University's Faculty of Law, and advertises itself as East African Centre for Constitutional Development. I'd hate to think that an institution of higher learning is in the habit of presenting one-sided arguments to its students, and the world, laying itself open to charges of attempting to airbrush history. M. Kibuka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sseruganda Kasangwawo, Thanks a million times; this to me exerts what I said somewhere else that there is a thin line that separates this constitution and that of 1995. I hope that a learned friend will endeavour to illustrate this thin line. Nonetheless, Akena Adoko responded to the Haji thus, in transition 33: The Uganda Revolution which took place early last year made it clear that if Uganda was to remain a democracy then it was absolutely necessary to reorganize that democracy in such a way that the characteristic benefits which generally emanate from democratic governments were not interfered with, and in such a way that certain evils such as hereditary monarchy, excessive crime, separatist tendencies, and weakness of the Central Government were eradicated, or, as far as possible, neutralized. And here come some more: The critics of the presidential powers tend to overlook two things. First, that there is also danger in failing to concentrate sufficient powers to carry out governmental functions in the hands of the executive. I would personally hate to see, once more, the progress of the country hampered by struggles for power as nearly happened last year. If advanced countries like the U.S.A. and Britain have to take precautions against this kind of situation why not countries like Uganda and other African states whose governments, because of the backwardness of the countries, have more extensive functions? Secondly the critics tend to overlook the fact that the powers vested in the President are those which enable him to control the business of government, and not necessarily to execute it himself. So overwhelming is government business that no single person can do it himself or even consent to try do so. This is why we have a ca binet and ministers in charge of various ministries, the Public Service Commission, Uganda Electricity Board, and Uganda Development Corporation etc., to help carry out certain governmental functions. In spite of this fact, that the
[Ugnet] Uganda: A long-standing leader's mixed legacy
Uganda A long-standing leader's mixed legacy Apr 14th 2005 | KAMPALA From The Economist print editionUganda's president, Yoweri Museveni, thinks he is the man to safeguard his own admirable legacy. Is he? THE man who brought peace and growth to Uganda, President Yoweri Museveni, has been in power for 19 years. The constitution says he must retire next year, but his supporters are clamouring for him to stay. Parliament may amend the constitution to allow him to. Is this a good idea? How many rulers, anywhere, have done a good job during their third decade at the helm? Lee Kuan Yew, offers Moses Byaruhanga, an adviser to Mr Museveni. Good answer. Anyone else? Julius Nyerere, offers Sam Kutesa, Mr Museveni's foreign minister. This is less convincing. The leader of Tanzania (and earlier, Tanganyika) between 1961 and 1985 may have united his country, but he also bankrupted it by forcing peasants into collectives. And the world's longest-serving heads of government are almost uniformly awful. Africa's senior five are true dinosaurs: Omar Bongo of Gabon, Muammar Qaddafi of Libya, José Eduardo dos Santos of Angola, Teodoro Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. His supporters insist that Mr Museveni will be different. To be fair, his record so far has been impressive. When he seized power in 1986 Uganda was a wreck, having endured a decade-and-a-half of murderous tyranny and civil war under Presidents Idi Amin and Milton Obote. Mr Museveni restored order. His pragmatic, business-friendly policies unleashed a sustained economic boom. And his government has had more success than any other in curbing AIDS. Small wonder that western donors love Uganda. Those donors have complaints, however. Although Mr Museveni allows a reasonably free press, he has long suppressed multi-party politics. His excuse was always that parties would be tribal, and therefore dangerously divisive. In 2003, under pressure from donors, he relented and said he would lift restrictions on parties. Various parties now operate a bit more freely. Parliament, which is dominated by Mr Museveni's National Resistance Movement, is expected to vote soon on whether formally to adopt a multi-party system. Well and good, but Mr Museveni's people are also hoping to take this opportunity to get rid of presidential-term limits. Voters who want more political freedom may also have to accept that Mr Museveni can keep on running. Mr Museveni's spokespeople say he has not yet decided whether to run again, but the masses, who drape themselves in dry banana leaves to show their support, are eager for him to carry on. That's a little disingenuous: Mr Museveni has sidelined former allies who advised him to retire, and he has not picked a successor. Donors are worried. This matters, since aid inflows are equivalent to about half of the government's budget. Mr Museveni talks of the need for Uganda to wean itself off aid, but he has shown few signs of turning down the cash. The economy continues to grow quite fast; a recent slowing was largely due to unfavourable coffee and oil prices. But if donors were to grow disillusioned and turn off the taps, the shock would be immense. Regimes that stay in power too long are usually corrupted. Mr Museveni's is nowhere near as bad as its predecessors, but neither is it a paragon. The public payroll is bloated, as is the cabinet. Voters, especially rural ones, expect cash handouts before elections. In April, Mr Museveni promised to curb corruption in the army, where what he called weevil officers pocket salaries of soldiers who are dead or have deserted. Amama Mbabazi, the defence minister, says that the army has now been all but purged of such ghosts, and that the officers responsible will be punished even if they have political connections. Another concern is that even if the laws governing political dissent grow more liberal, the state's attitude to dissidents is often anything but. Human Rights Watch (HRW), a lobby group, reported last year that opposition activists were routinely tortured. Typically, they were taken to secret safe houses and beaten with hammers or forced to lie under running taps with their mouths open. An informal survey at one prison where political prisoners are held indicated that 90% had been tortured, according to HRW. Mr Kutesa dismisses the allegations and denies that the government tortures anyone. Even Mr Museveni's approach to fighting AIDS has come under fire. HRW claims that, under pressure from the United States, Uganda has forsaken the old, successful message of ABC (Abstain, or Be faithful, or use a Condom). Instead, HRW says, the government now emphasises abstinence above all else. Ugandan evangelicals, including Mr Museveni's wife, campaign against condoms, arguing that their promotion encourages promiscuity. But the government denies that it has abandoned condoms or changed what it calls a balanced policy. Thanks to stability and Mr Museveni's
