Sunday, January 31, 2016



Thursday, October 23, 2014
Revolutions are usually started by a discontented population.
The French Revolution was started with the help of peasants who were enslaved to work on lands they could not call their own. The country called #Uganda is weekly evicting people off their ancestral lands.

The Arab Spring was started by youth who were unemployed and disenfranchised. The country called #Uganda has some 10 million youth, people under the age of 35yrs unemployed...about a third of the population.

Why do you not remember history? The youth in Hong Kong have mounted up a descent protest and they only ask for democratic elections, not jobs, food, money, medicine or employment. You then have #Uganda where the youth have nothing. How can you think that you can stem the tide of so many unemployed hungry and angry youth?

Read your history and read it well. You keep evicting villages to get the land for oil and minerals. I am inclined that you are making a very big mistake and these things will catch up to you.

When you have 4 universities go on strike to demand to be heard, you make a very big mistake to use Tear Gas and live bullets to deal with them. Your youth are the future, pay attention to them. Remind me of this blog a year or so after you read it. The future belongs to the youth, do the right thing.

You might also want to remember Soweto (Sarafina) and Tienanmen Square. If you take everything away from the youth, then they have much to gain by fighting you because they have nothing to lose. Many will die so that the next generation of youth get a better life. Have you wondered why Beijing has not bull dozed down the young protesters in Hong Kong? Because these ones were willing to die like the Tienanmen Square kids. Precedents were set and you should pay attention. You would be foolish not to pay attention.

For God and my country.
By Martha Leah Zesaguli (Nangalama)
Moncton, Canada
Find me on Google and all social media


The two little ones took Taekwondo lessons. The oldest one can hold her own ground. So tonight I just nearly got slammed down by the little one. I had to massage her back and apparently it was hurting so she tried to punch me in the face. I stopped pretty well all her punches "your reaction is too slow mommy". But I last took Taekwondo lessons a long time ago. This little one then tells me "do not use big words like prerogative". Now this one was tough one as I had to try and find an explanation on the definition of prerogative.

Do not have kids, it is a trap. They took their Taekwondo with one Jamie in Cap Pele, Canada. What an awesome teacher and he even runs his own gymn for Judo.

I feel sorry for the boys who try to go after these girls. My teacher in Toronto was Sensei from Japan. These kids had a Canadian teacher here in our small place and never forgot a single lesson.

I now read about the Uganda Military training youth in Martial Arts. I have wondered, do they know that it is customary to give 3 warnings before you break someone's nose? Martial Arts is really for self defence, not for aggression. Kayihura is just joking.

Martha Leah Nangalama
Moncton, Canada

The writer is an IT analyst with a wide range of experience in many business and IT areas and also a former Martial Arts student.


We as Uganda youth platform would like to put it crystal clear that the arrest of our gallant general Will not stop us! 
The resilience and resolve is much more solid than yesterday, All we want is the exit of more of the same! Museveni is expired from top to bottom. He only thinks of his children and grandchildren but Not for the pearl of Africa. 
Here in we want to sound a stern warning to whoever is aiding this horrible dictator to abrogate our constitution to know that consequences are fully going to be there.  Secondly we want the international community to be fully aware that this is not a matter of a few Ugandans but Of the majority! 
We expect States like the US, UK, CHINA, and others more so the developed democracies to be able to ascertain the desire of Ugandans but Not to side with the world's sixth dictator and the second richest president in Africa if not the first! 
His riches have been accumulated from stealing and selling public property and cracking shoddy deals in state house. 
We therefore implore every upright thinking individual to weigh his or her conclusions and perception about these things which affect Uganda and critically, without bias, lest we forget.  Museveni's motives are well known.  
For now are not going to dwell on the lexicons of all this but in summation, the Uganda Youth Platform wants to take this rare opportunity to draw the attention of the whole world to begin thinking and siding with the noble cause of change for Uganda as we are tired of dictator #Museveni! 
Musevenis' leopard understanding will not derail us and we want to reassure the whole world that we shall not relent.
Gen. Sejjusa is an innocent man and his arrest must be accounted for!!!! 

Lip service - #Uganda

The phrase Lip Service is used in business and politics as identifying a problem that affects people and then convincing them that you will fix that problem.
Uganda pays far too much lip service to the issues which matter to the population.
  1. Uganda parliament has many women in parliament so we are women friendly.  Until I read one of them in media saying "Mbabazi cannot come and campaign in Busoga because he is not an inlaw".  Listen sister, if you have a crash on that man, sort it out privately and not in the media.
  2. Uganda has improved education and now gives UPE and USE plus many universities.  Aha, except you think that the best jobs they qualify for after getting that degree is working as maids, sex slaves or house boys.  This one is also something that needs its own chapter.  I saw some kids learning under trees?  How is your education looking now?  In Canada, a kid in P1 can have an iPhone 5s and a laptop.  Your kids do not even have kibiriti.
  3. Wealth Creation.  This has been one of my passions.  Until I looked into who gets the money to create wealth?  Do I need to give you examples from your own media?  Funds stolen.
  4. Medical care - Uganda has built many hospitals and health care centres.  First of all, this regime has not built any hospitals since Amin and Obote (RIP).  Your health centres are non funded, no paid staff, no medicine or equipment.  And the ones which used to be good like Bududa Hospital is a Death Trap.  OR, do you want to look at the story of when NSWC shut off the water to Mulago and some 60+ died?  In any case, you fly people to Germany to have babies or to Nairobi to get malaria treated.
  5. Peace and sleep.  Now this is where the government has to explain how Christopher #Aine vanished with no trace.  Or better still, explain to us how many bodies washed up on the beaches of Lake Victoria in December 2015.
  6. Sleep - pray tell us how Charles Rwomushana got arrested, Allan Kitonsa and now Gen. Sejusa.  Enjoy your peace.
The writer is an ardent follower of Uganda politics, with IT work experience, Job migration and recruiting.
Ugandans must wake up.  I respect Gen. Museveni tremendously but I think the people around him are lying to him.
Martha Leah Nangalama
Moncton, Canada
Find me on Google+, Facebook and on all social media using my names.
All my opinions are mine and mine alone and do not reflect on my employer, any organisation I am affiliated with or this site you might be reading this post from.  YOU CAN NEVER ARREST AN IDEA.


One of my friends from Mexico wrote an article and tagged me in the post. This is key for people who work in Media and for Social Justice. When do you draw the line to protect the public from gross human rights violations? The reality is if it hurts you too much to look at the images or videos, then do something to stop these atrocities. This is not about the shock element in Media. It is about you realising that your comfort zone is not for everyone. So many of you support despotic killers in the world but dare not look at images of those they kill. Share shocking images so that we can all wake up. The average reader is intelligent enough to read propaganda from a real story of suffering.

A few days ago, my dear friend Martha Leah Nangalama (Nangi) posted an image of a woman being sexually tortured. She did it to show the dreadful things that are happening in her beloved Uganda. I wrote a comment expressing my opposition to such graphic images been shown, by saying they constituted yet another violation of the victim's dignity. She replied by asking how else could the world know about this if it were not for the pictures. Although we do not agree on the means, we are both determined to help put an end to such horrific crimes, be it Uganda, Mexico, or any other corner of the world. This is not an easy nor pleasant debate, and I've kept thinking about it non-stop.

here was no blood, no violence, no panic. Just a little boy’s body washed ashore, one of thousands of victims of the refugee crisis unfolding along the borders of Europe. Yet the images of Alan Kurdi lying on a beach at Bodrum, Turkey, published in September, provoked fierce debate in newsrooms and on social media about whether the sight of a dead toddler was too distressing to show—or too important to ignore.

Several frames were available. Some showed Kurdi’s body face down on the beach; others showed a policeman cradling the boy in his arms. In France, Libération was criticized for not printing the photographs at all. In Germany, Bild received so many complaints for publishing a photo on its back page that it removed all images from its September 8 issue to make a point. “We must force ourselves to look,” wrote Julian Reichelt, editor in chief of “Without pictures the world would be more ignorant, the needy even more invisible, more lost. … Photographs are the screams of the world.”

Liz Sly, Beirut bureau chief for The Washington Post, tweeted one of the photos—and was surprised by criticisms that she was violating Kurdi’s dignity. “That puzzled me because I spend every day looking at these images of death,” she says, “and anyone in the region does, anyone who covers Syria—at least half a dozen pictures of dead children every day. Perhaps we’re violating their dignity by not publicizing them and having them die in silence in the dark.”

With the ongoing conflict in Syria and Iraq, frequent mass shootings in the U.S., and terrorist incidents such as the massacre in Paris, newsrooms are faced with constant decisions over the use of graphic or distressing images. What rules, if any, should news organizations follow when deciding whether to publish such images? Has the easy availability of graphic content on social media numbed audiences to tragedy? What effect does the production and consumption of such images have on journalists, editors, and their audiences? And does publishing emotive pictures like that of Alan Kurdi risk tipping stories from reportage into advocacy?

Yet the discussion is also familiar. Many of the most iconic news images of the last 100 years—a 9-year-old girl fleeing a napalm attack in Vietnam; the burned Iraqi soldier who died climbing from a car in the first Gulf War; Richard Drew’s “Falling Man” who jumped from a World Trade Center tower on 9/11; the dead passengers of the downed Malaysian Airlines plane in Ukraine—have been accompanied by debates about the ethics of their publication. Part of their power stems precisely from the fact that they show moments of pain and death usually hidden from view. It’s difficult to look at these images, and difficult to look away.

Photographers, of course, are on the front line of determinations about when, how, or whether to take these kinds of pictures. Gary Knight, co-founder of the VII Photo Agency, makes a distinction between taking distressing photographs and distributing them. Capturing an image and publishing it are separate decisions, he argues: “If you’re performing that role as a photographer or journalist, as some sort of witness or commentator, I think you need to record those things. But I don’t think that they need to be published.” Once the photograph is taken, Knight believes, a consultation needs to begin between the photographer and the editors. For Knight, the way an image is framed and publicized is just as important as the content of the image itself.

Perhaps the most persistent questions about how images of violence and death are framed are whether they dehumanize their subjects and whether they prioritize the suffering of certain groups over that of others. Michael Shaw, a California-based clinical psychologist and founder of the Reading The Pictures blog, calls this the dilemma of “the Western gaze”—a process by which deaths and disasters are unconsciously split into those that matter more and those that matter less.

In the wake of the November 13 terror attacks on Paris, social media users questioned why a bombing in Beirut on November 12 (which killed 43 people) did not receive the same level of media attention. “When my people died, no country bothered to light up its landmarks in the colors of their flag,” Elie Fares, a Lebanese doctor, wrote on his blog “Their death was but an irrelevant fleck along the international news cycle, something that happens in those parts of the world.”

“Photographs are the screams of the world”
Alexey Furman, a Ukrainian photojournalist now studying for a master’s degree at the University of Missouri’s School of Journalism, felt a similar dynamic while covering the Euromaidan uprising and subsequent Russian annexation of the Crimea in 2014. He felt uneasy seeing American colleagues taking photographs of dead Ukrainian fighters. “As a photographer, I didn’t like or dislike [the photographs]. But as a citizen, there was a storm happening inside me … It was painful to see my people dead and just corpses there in the middle of a field, [photos] being taken by anyone.”

Rhonda Shearer, who runs iMediaEthics, a nonprofit site that investigates media ethics, says her organization’s investigation into images of the 2007 assassination of Pakistan leader Benazir Bhutto suggests Western media do treat dead Westerners differently. Many U.S. news outlets, including The New York Times, printed photographs from the Bhutto killing showing piles of dismembered corpses alongside a man wearing a brown jacket who was crying and gesturing. Although “Brown Jacket Man” was on the scene for more than an hour, iMediaEthics found that none of the Western journalists present discovered his name or if he was, as the captions later suggested, a “Bhutto supporter.” “If you transpose that onto an American scene,” Shearer says, “that would just never happen.”

In response to the iMediaEthics report, a photographer contacted Shearer to contest that assertion, pointing to the photographs of 9/11. But Shearer contends that very few images of dead Americans were published after that tragedy, the most graphic image in the mainstream media being Todd Maisel’s New York Daily News photograph of a severed hand. Images of people jumping from the twin towers were also rarely published in the U.S., and “people jumping,” Shearer says, “that’s clean shots compared with what I’m sure photographers have, which are the smashed bodies at the bottom of the World Trade Center, which is more what we saw in the Bhutto killing.”

Some argue that the cumulative effect of these editorial decisions is to perpetuate Western exceptionalism. Cultural critic David Shields, who analyzed about 1,000 front-page images of war from The New York Times for his book “War Is Beautiful,” says that “photo editors are looking for photos that reify received notions about war and battle and heroism and masculinity. It’s hard to resist the interpretation that this is the distribution of ideology by other means.” He points to recurring tropes—children juxtaposed with friendly, father-like soldiers or iterations of the Pietà from Christian art. “There is an ancient tradition of brutal and more truth-telling war photography,” Shields says. “If you only read The New York Times, you’d think war is heaven or, at worst, war is heck.”

In 2010, Time published an arresting cover image: Aisha, an Afghan teenager who had her nose and ears cut off by the Taliban. Kira Pollack, Time’s director of photography, explains that one of the considerations staffers took into account when debating whether to use the image was the effect on Aisha of becoming “iconic,” particularly since she still lived in Afghanistan at the time. “There are all these other things that go into these discussions,” Pollack says. “What happens when children see these pictures? That’s a conversation that we have at Time as well, because our audience is our families.”

The magazine published Aisha’s picture on the cover, with a provocative headline: “What Happens If We Leave Afghanistan.” For some, that wording tipped the piece into advocacy. The picture and headline became an argument for continuing American military involvement in the region.

The Kurdi pictures also made a polemical point, even if an uncontroversial one: a call to action in the face of Europe’s refugee crisis. Many who defended publication of the images cited this moral imperative. Knight is unconvinced. “I’ve been making pictures like that all my life, and very rarely did any of them make a difference,” he says. When the European Journalism Observatory looked at pre- and post-Kurdi coverage of immigration in three newspapers in each of eight European countries, it saw that “positive humanitarian stories about migrants” rose after the photos ran, but within about a week had decreased to pre-Kurdi levels. However, a study by the Visual Social Media Lab, backed by Google, found that social media users did change their language after the picture was published—the majority switched from using “migrant” to “refugee,” and this effect persisted for at least two months.

The Post’s Sly sees the reaction to the Kurdi picture as an argument for the publication of more distressing images, not fewer. She’s disappointed that the “Caesar” images—which were smuggled out of Syria by a military policeman code-named Caesar, and which allegedly show torture victims of the Assad regime—were not published widely. “I’m not sure it helps you to understand how intrusive this war is if you’re not seeing how violent it is and you’re not sharing that sense of horror and outrage that the people in the region are,” Sly says.

Many journalists working in the Middle East, where images of death and violence are more common on TV and in other media, echo the point. “In places like Latin America and the Middle East, people are more open to seeing images of suffering,” says photographer Andrea Bruce, who has worked in Iraq and Afghanistan. “It’s not labeled as an intrusion but more often proof of a wrongdoing by a government or military.”

Jeff Bauman, in wheelchair, praises images of the Boston bombing for “showing the world the truth”
Jeff Bauman, in wheelchair, praises images of the Boston bombing for “showing the world the truth” Charles Krupa/Associated Press

While some experience being photographed as a violation, others see it as a validation—a crucial recognition of a wrong. In Ukraine, Furman recalls arriving in the village of Mykolaivka during fighting with pro-Russian separatists. An angry crowd that believed the Ukrainian government was responsible for shelling the village confronted him. A man grabbed him and took him to a bombed apartment building where a body lay in the rubble. “The community wanted me to get this picture out,” Furman says. “They wanted the world to know that this is what happened in their small town that no one ever talked about in international coverage.”

Jeff Bauman, who lost his legs in the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013, made a similar point in The Guardian last year. Charles Krupa, the Associated Press photographer who took pictures of Bauman and his injuries as he was being rushed from the scene in a wheelchair, apologized for doing so. “I told Charlie that I understand now, like I didn’t then, that he was helping us that day, in the best way he knew how,” Bauman wrote. “He was showing the world the truth—that bombs tear flesh and smash bones—and making the tragedy real.”

The publication of graphic images from Syria has become particularly vexed as so few journalists are working in the region. Most of the images from the country are taken by activists and can be hard to verify and interpret. Others are straightforward propaganda from jihadist groups. ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) fighters film many of their killings in high definition, adding logos and graphics and distributing them through their online magazine, Dabiq, Twitter, and other social media.

ISIS videos follow an approach also used by the Taliban, which once banned photography but now has its own video production unit, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, which runs its own TV station. Images of atrocities—and of civilians killed by Western military action—are key tools of propaganda and recruitment, according to Susie Linfield, a professor at New York University’s Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute and author of “The Cruel Radiance: Photography and Political Violence.” The images can be especially effective because they are often broadcast to people who are illiterate, Linfield says, “who have no access to newspapers, so this is their main source of information, this constant flood of atrocity images.”

The ubiquity of graphic images has lent fresh impetus to worries that disturbing photographs undermine public support for military actions carried out in their name. Canadian photographer Paul Watson’s images of a dead American soldier being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu in 1993 catalyzed President Bill Clinton’s decision to pull U.S. peacekeeping troops out of the country the next year. Osama bin Laden later said the unwillingness of the U.S. to tolerate military casualties demonstrated “[its] impotence and weaknesses.”

Discussions of the effects of graphic images tend to focus on those upset or offended by them and less so on those who might like them too much. In the wake of repeated mass shootings in the U.S., some journalists have expressed concern that media coverage could be exacerbating the phenomenon. A week before the Kurdi pictures began to circulate, social media was also the place where many saw the fatal shooting of Virginia news reporter Alison Parker and camera operator Adam Ward by a disgruntled former colleague. The shooting happened during a live television broadcast and was also filmed by the shooter himself, who was holding a camera just above his gun. Soon after the killings, he uploaded the footage to Twitter and Facebook. Both social networks had an auto-play feature, meaning that thousands of users ended up watching a snuff video without choosing to or having any warning about the content. Both social networks quickly deactivated the shooter’s accounts. The next day, stills from both Ward and the shooter’s videos appeared on front pages. In Britain, the tabloid The Sun used a frame that showed the moment he fired, the muzzle flash from the gun visible.

Linfield argues these images should not have been published. In October, Mother Jones published a cover story about efforts to stop the mass shootings. In a related article online, national affairs editor Mark Follman reflected on how news coverage of such incidents affected vulnerable young men, arguing that sensationalist reporting was both encouraging would-be killers to act and to make their crimes more spectacular. “Forensic psychologists have come to understand, by interviewing these people—the ones who survive—they know they are very aware of the media attention they will get,” Follman says. “It’s what they want. It’s a certain responsibility that the media has now that we know that, not to engage with that any more than we need to in order to report forensically for the public interest.”

Follman argues that media organizations need to make sure that photographs they publish of such killers and their crimes do not contribute to their self-mythologization. He contends that, in the case of the man who shot U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and others in Tucson in 2011, it would be better to use a neutral yearbook photograph rather than the mug shot that was seized on by the press. “There’s an argument to be made not only that it’s not necessary, but it’s potentially damaging the people who emulate [him],” Follman says. “They see that this guy is memorialized with this deranged, smug grin on his face.” Similarly, he suggests journalists think carefully before using images of the gunman who killed nine people in a church in Charleston, South Carolina, waving a Confederate flag and wearing white nationalist symbols, taken from his social media profiles. Some argue we should go even further: following a shooting in Roseburg, Oregon that left 10 dead, including the gunman, Douglas County Sheriff John Hanlin refused to name the perpetrator when briefing the media. “I will not give him the credit he probably sought prior to this horrific and cowardly act,” he told reporters. Several media organizations have followed suit, with The Washington Post publishing on December 5 a long read about one of the Roseburg survivors without once mentioning the gunman’s name.

The lack of context on social media adds a new wrinkle to the debate about publishing graphic photographs

The use of graphic images should prompt many questions in a responsible newsroom. Is the image’s news value or public interest greater than the potential negative impact on the subject? Does it bolster an existing narrative about a conflict? If so, does it do so consciously and fairly? Does it dehumanize its subjects or draw the world’s attention to their plight? Could the image be used as propaganda or drive a vulnerable person to commit a crime? If so, is it still essential to the story and therefore should it be published anyway?

There are no easy answers to these questions, and even highly ethical, conscientious journalists will disagree over particular cases. Bradley Secker, who has worked in Iraq, Syria, and Greece and been published in outlets including The Independent, The New Republic, and The National in the United Arab Emirates, believes news organizations can address these concerns in part by giving audiences as much context as possible alongside the photographs. “As long as the image captions are accurate and the image itself hasn’t been manipulated, there is little room for propaganda,” Secker says.

Reading The Pictures’s Shaw cites the Pulitzer-winning work of Craig F. Walker, who spent a year photographing an Iraq War veteran for The Denver Post and accompanied the images with extended captions. This is a way not just to mitigate the reductive nature of photos, Shaw argues, but to create a richer, more nuanced form of storytelling. In contrast, he criticizes website photo galleries because they strip away context.

Social media complicates the equation even further. Should a graphic image be appended to a tweet, when there is so little opportunity to provide context? Should social media companies disable auto-play for videos to avoid inadvertently displaying snuff videos in people’s timelines?

For Time’s Pollack, discussions about graphic or distressing images matter because those images often resonate most with audiences. Jerome Sessini’s haunting pictures of the dead passengers of MH17, a plane shot down over Ukraine, were the most viewed on Time’s Lightbox section last year, attracting nearly 12 million pageviews and 900,000 unique visitors.

The appeal of Sessini’s photographs highlights an uncomfortable truth: For all the outcry, there is clearly an audience for these kinds of images. As a photographer, Gary Knight argues that audiences need to ask themselves their motivations for viewing such images, just as the media must interrogate its reasons for publishing them.

Knight tells the story of returning to London from an assignment in Bosnia in 1997 and being asked by Newsweek to cover the aftermath of Princess Diana’s death, which was initially blamed on paparazzi pursuing her car through Paris. Outside Buckingham Palace, “I got a lot of grief from the public for being a photographer,” he recalls. “I was blamed, collectively, for killing Princes Diana. And I thought, these are the women who are buying the Sun and the Mirror and the Mail, and all these newspapers that were hounding Princess Diana.”

Barbie Zelizer, professor of communication at the University of Pennsylvania and author of “About to Die: How News Images Move the Public,” suggests that, despite new technologies that make graphic images easier to capture and share, the controversy hasn’t changed much over the years. “The images we are getting, and the debates which greet them, are very much the same as they’ve always been,” she says. She offers a simple, though far from infallible, test in deciding whether to publish. Is the photo central to the story? If the story cannot be told without it, the image must be published, no matter how distressing it might be, she argues.

Alexey Furman believes that graphic images only work if they make the reader want to know more about them, rather than instantly turn the page. “We have to produce images that the world will be ready to spend some time with, and read the captions, and look again, and observe.”



Major Twaha M Mukiibi, the External Coordinator of Free Uganda liberation platform has issued this stament primarily targetting our Brothers and Sisters of the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces (UPDF).
The major who is a tested liberation fighter, having been a commander in in one of the liberation groups that fought in the Luweero Bush war, is reminding the young people in the UPDF that Museveni has violated all the principles and aims of the Luweero Bush War, and so the UPDF must now join the Peoples Struggle and not support a man who is not a democrat and who is instead arresting political opponents.torturing and killing innocent citizens, etc.
Below is the full statement by Major Twaha M Mukiibi, the Special Coordinator of Free Uganda.
Major Twaha M Mukiibi. External Coordinator Free Uganda. 31/01/2016
The arr*est and detention of Gen. David Sejusa the chairman of Free Uganda must act as a wake up call for the men and women in uniform If those who went to the bush intended to fight for the re establishment of democratic rule in Uganda. If you went to fight for the protection of free speech. If you went to the bush for the purpose of defending the country against any form of dictatorial rule, then what took you to the bush has never been achieved. The bush war was triggered by Dr Milton Obote's rigging of the 1980 elections. At that time it took a few men to mobilise what turned out to be a protracted guerrilla war against the UPC regime of Dr Obote.
Amongst those who were the pioneers of the war against Obote was Gen. David Sejusa formally known as Tinyefunza. Before joining the guerrilla war, Gen. Sejusa was working as a police officer in the Uganda police. As a serving police officer David Sejusa was not deterred from joining the struggle for his country's national democratic salvation just because he would be braking the law. He went and committed himself to the struggle against Obote's misrule. That was 36 years ago.
The Sejusa of that time had the determination of fighting against dictatorship and the Sejusa of today still has the same commitment of protecting his beloved country against a repressive dictatorial regime that is determined to keep itself in power by rigging the 18th February elections.
Being part of the so called 27 men who initiated the NRA (National Resistance Army) Gen. Sejusa has a right to question what the leadership of the NRM is trying to do to the country he loves, the country he fought for, the country he lost 'Part of His Leg' for. As a principled Ugandan, Gen. Sejusa does not want to see our country being dragged further back to the days of Dr Obote or the days of Gen. Idi Amin.
Museveni want to muzzle Gen. Sejusa because Sejusa is the only freedom fighter within the UPDF who has proved that he is not a PLASTIC General like many who are clearly aware that our country is being mislead but have decided to hide behind their fake ranks. I call them 'Fake' because those who hold and wear them hold no power at all. We know that within the UPDF the power is concentrated in the hands of Museveni, his brother Salim Saleh and his son Brigadier Muhozi Kainerugaba.
These other Generals' like Kahinda Otafire, Elly Tumwiine, Wamala Katumba, Charles Angina, Ivan Koreta, David Muhoozi, Robert Rusoke, Fredrick Mugisha, and others seem to have no resolve to defend what we all sacrificed our lives for during that guerrilla war. Their silence about what is going on in the country is a clear sign of collusion in the on going dictatorial tendencies of Museveni.
Free Uganda understands that many in the UPDF are not happy with the way Museveni has deviated from the principles that took them to the bush. However, their impotence will continue as long as they continue to accept their current status quo. A status where Generals' have to be submissive to a Brigadier just because he happens to be the president's son.
This is what Gen. Sejusa the chairman of Free Uganda is trying to show these other generals. That our country needs them to wake up. That the citizens of Uganda want them to join Gen. Sejusa in the effort to liberate Uganda from dictatorship.
When the men of the guns went to the bush in 1980 to fight Obote's election rigging they appealed to the civilian population of Uganda to join and support the struggle.
In 2016, the civilian population of Uganda as they prepare for the February 18th elections calls upon the men in uniform to join them in a peaceful transition of power from the NRM dictatorship to a democratically elected government of national unity.
As the power to change the democratic system of our country lies in the hands of the Ugandan voters, the power to change the status of the UPDF officers and men lies in the hands of the men and women of the UPDF by standing hand in hand with the civilian population of Uganda by rejecting to be used by Museveni against the people.
When the Arab Spring arrived in Egypt and the people came out on the streets to reject Mubaraka's dictatorship, the Egyptian army didn't interfere. The Egyptian army sided with the people. In Tunisia the army sided with the people. So it makes sense to expect and advise the UPDF to side with the people.
The people of Uganda want to assure the UPDF that they must have nothing to fear as democratically voting out the NRM doesn't mean voting out the UPDF. The people of Uganda appeal to the men and women of the UPDF to support Gen. Sejusa in his bid to protect Uganda's democracy.
The February 18th election is not a liberation for the civilian population only, it a liberation that will also free the men and women of the UPDF and give them a proper sense of pride as their individual achievements will begin to be respected in the actual sense.
Free Uganda understands the unhappiness of many officers who are marginalised by certain characters within the UPDF who are below their ranks just because they belong to a certain click.
This is what General Sejusa is fighting against. To protect the people's votes, to protect the army's integrity. To protect the country's future political stability. To protect what he fought for - what he lost part of his leg for.
Gen. Sejusa will rather die than compromising his democratic principles by not keeping quiet and let the dictator rig the February 18th elections and get away with it.
That is why he informed the world that he (Gen. Sejusa) will lead the masses in a civil disobedience if and when Museveni rigs or attempts to rig the elections.
Now that Museveni has reacted naively by arresting Gen. Sejusa the ball is now in the People of Uganda's court. Gen. Sejusa's intentions is to protect the people's votes. To protect the people's right to democratically chose the president of their choice. If Museveni sees this as a crime, then it is now the duty and responsibility of every Ugandan to FREE Gen. David Sejusa from wherever Museveni is keeping him.
At this moment, Free Uganda would like to advise the government of Uganda to release Gen. David Sejusa immediately and refrain from any future harassment of him.
Free Uganda also appeals to the people of Uganda to stay calm and concentrate on their preparations of voting for change. However, the people of Uganda must not forget to prepare themselves for the liberation of Gen. David Sejusa.
If Museveni thinks that by detaining Gen. Sejusa will stop the masses from coming out on the streets to demonstrate against vote rigging then he must think again as the people who he is witnessing flocking willingly in their droves to attend Dr Besigye's campaign rallies will in turn come out on the streets of every district to demand for justice. They will demand their victory. They will demand the release of Gen. Sejusa and will not back down until he his freed.
The struggle for the political liberation of our country continues unabated with or without our chairman Gen. David Sejusa. Major Twaha M Mukiibi. External Coordinator Free Uganda.


Dr, Kizza Besigye and Amama Mbabazi need to know that this is a fight for the whole country.

You remained silent on Christopher #Aine for weeks. 

Many young people were murdered and dumped on the beaches of Lake Victoria and you said nothing at all.

You continue to campaign daily for an already rigged election oblivious to the suffering of Ugandans.

This is the challenge now.

At every one of your rallies, call out dictator #Museveni to free Gen. Sejusa.  Daily.  All our voices will be heard and he will be freed.

You have an incredible opportunity here to show solidarity as opposition and to sandwich the dictator into retirement and handing over power.

Far too many Ugandans are losing faith in you.  You seem to be in this game for relevance or pure power but not for real change for Ugandans.

Martha Leah Nangalama
Moncton, Canada


By Dr. Vincent Magombe

The patriotic youth of Uganda are talking. They are circulating leaflets and Internet images calling for the release of General David Sejusa.

The message from Free Uganda to the youth is - PREPARE, PREPARE AND PREPARE.

Get ready for the decisive battles ahead.

It is not going to be easy. Ugandans will have to pass through the Gates of Hell to cross over to the Promised Land.

So, to all patriotic youth of Uganda - you will occupy a special place in the struggle to free the Motherland.

You are over 70% of Ugandan's population, and there is no way Museveni, even with the support of all Muhoozi's Special Forces troops, can win the coming battle.

See the arrest of General Sejusa as the long awaited call for the patriotic youths of Uganda to get involved in the nobel cause to rescue the Motherland from the claws of terror, daily suffering, poverty, unemployment, and humiliation by the #Museveni regime.

As wisdom goes, the way forward is TO ORGANSE, NOT TO AGONISE.

So get to the nearest youth group campaigning for the Freedom of Uganda - just look around you, check the internet, ask your friends and you will find a home to join and be useful to your Motherland.

In the mean time watch out for more updates on the situation on the ground.

We also await Major Twahathe statement addressed to our the youths who are members of the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces (UPDF).

Ugandans should not see the UPDF as an enemy in what is going on.

Museveni is doing his best to drag the national army into his evil survival games. As General Sejusa has numerously stated, the young men and women of the UPDF know who is the real enemy of Uganda. It is not those who are trying to change the country for the better.

It is Museveni, and the time is coming for him to be STOPPED.


By Dr. Vincent Magombe

The World is now on the Ugandan case, as shown by the coverage of General Sejusa's arrest, but it is Ugandans who will liberate Sejusa and our Motherland Uganda, and not the world outside.

It is time for all patriotic forces to ready themselves and the people for the coming efforts to free the country.

By arresting General David Sejusa, Museveni has made the biggest mistake since he came to power in 1986, and, for sure he (Museveni) will pay dearly.

Free Uganda is in the process of reviiewing the timeline for the Freedom Struggle, to factor in the urgency of the current developments.

Soon enough a special statement to be issued by Major Twaha Mukiibi the Free Uganda Special Coordinator, will be made, directly addressing the men and women of Uganda People's Defence Forces.

Museveni must not be allowed to drag the UPDF down with him.

Museveni is doing all he can to force the national army to do his dirty stuff, and Free Uganda is aware of what is happening - Many senior military officers are warning Mr Museveni to leave the army out of his election campaigns.

The arrest of General Sejusa will not be in vain - this is the trigger that the country has been waiting for.

More updates from Free Uganda Special Operations Department and Free Uganda Press Department will be forth-coming.

In the mean time, Free Uganda advises Ugandans not to panic, but to calmly prepare to confront this vagrant abuse of the constitution of Uganda by Mr Yoweri Museveni.

Stay rest assured that the bulk of the men and women of the Uganda People's Defence Forces are not part of this Museveni madness, and when the moment of truth arrives, they will, no doubt, rally on the side of the People.

Watch out for further updates on the detereorating situation in the country.

For God and our Motherland Uganda.


By Dr. Vincent Magombe

The arrest of Ugandan General David Sejusa IS ONE STEP CLOSER TO THE COUNTRY'S LIBERATION.

The Ugandan nation is firmly advancing on the road to Liberation, and the arrest of General David Sejusa can only serve to quicken that process.

The clock has started ticking towards END TIME foe Museveni leadership of Uganda, and the Freedom Fire is surrounding Museveni from all sides.

Arresting General Sejusa, the Chairman of Free Uganda Liberation Platform has awakened us all to the urgency of freeing or People from bondage sooner rather than later.

As at now all options are being considered, and all Freedom Struggle activists across Uganda are in a state of RED ALERT.

What Museveni is triggering by arresting General Sejusa is a revolutionary storm that will hit him unexpectedly and relentlessly until all Ugandans, and not just General David Sejusa are rescued from Bondage.

The Hour of Liberation is not far away.


By Dr. Vincent Magombe

Free Uganda Chairman, General David Sejusa arrested and is now detained in Makindye Military Prison in Kampala.
Free Uganda wishes to announce to Ugandans and the world at large that Dictator Museveni's military police and other security agencies, including Muhoozi's Special Forces Command, have arrested General David Sejusa and taken him to Makindye military prison in Kampala.
Free Uganda is closely monitoring the situation and calls on Ugandans, and all Freedom Forces in the country, to await further announcements about these dangerous developments in Uganda
Free Uganda will not be intimidated by your foolish games.
We know hat the People of Uganda are on the side of the Freedom Struggle, and not with you
The people's Freedom Struggle is entering a decisive and final phase and all Freedom Fighters ,including our Chairman General David Sejusa are more than prepared to pass through the Gates of Hell to reach the Promised Land.
So go ahead, Mr Museveni, and light the spark that the People of Uganda, including our Patriotic Sons and Daughters of the Uganda People's Defence Forces and other security formations in the country have been waiting for.
Mr Museveni, do not under-estimate the Power of the Ugandan Masses to confront you in your evil ways.
How along can the People be kept in captivity?
How long can you - you one sile man - continue to bully and subjugate over 37 million Ugandan to captivity.
Free Uganda will keep you all update of the developing situation in Uganda.
In the meantime all the patriotic forces in the country are advised to stay on standby in readiness for and action as may be required,
If Mr Museveni wants trouble, what a better way to get it.
Museveni must know that General David Sejusa is not alone in this - and the People will do all it takes to free the General and ultimately free our Motherland Uganda from the curse of Musevenism.
The Struggle continues.