{UAH}: [MUSISI] MMENGO SHOULD STOP THE 9,000 SQ …
{UAH}: [MUSISI] MMENGO SHOULD STOP THE 9,000 SQ MILES IDIOCY | |
|From: |Patrick Otto |
|To: |ugandans-at-heart@ |
|Date: |[pic]Wed, Nov 25, 2009 7:02 am |
Mr Musisi,
Yes indeed, I refer to the opium of the dispossessed. It is good that you put that opium in figures: 9,000 sq miles, that you always claim was stolen by government. So, about 8,000 sq miles given to 1,000 notables with the massive displacement of many bataka was no theft!
So, to more-or-less sing "sirikawo baby" to the Bakopi Bazukulu who had to unearth the bones of their dear ones to give way to the new lords, Mmengo pushes a pacifier into the mouths of the expropriated. The pacifier, the dummy is the Akenda: the government has it!
Facts:
1. The 9,000 sq miles alloted to government for public use was on the assumption that Buganda had land to the tune of 19,600 sq miles. Buganda was surveyed and found to be 16,138 sq miles (9.689 in Mmengo; 3,781 in Masaka and 2,668 in Mubende). The 1900 agreement stated that, any shortfall upon survey of Buganda would be deducted from the public 9,000 sq miles. Therefore, right from go, that land was actually 5,538 Sq miles. Any talk of 9,000 sq miles is, to use your word, idiotic.
2. As you know, 667 sq miles of the 5,538 sq miles (NOT 9,000) was in Buyaga and Bugangaizi. The 1964 referendum returned that land to Bunyoro control. It is, to use your word, idiotic for any body to hope that land was stolen by government from Buganda. Completely idiotic. Do we want to reverse the results of the referendum? Anyhow, what was left then was 4,871 sq miles.
3. Of the 4,871 sq miles, 644 sq miles went into the Buruli, Masaka, Singo ranching Scheme leaving 4,227 Square miles.
4. That land remains under the control of the public political authority which, up to 1962 was the colonial government, hence the reference to Crown Land. In 1962, the public political authority in Buganda was the federal state of Buganda, so it controlled that land. In 1966 Uganda ceased to be semi-federal so all public land was reverted to central authorities. How does a change in constitution amount to theft of 9,000 sq miles of land, which in fact did not even exist in the first place? If you want Buganda to control the land, why don't you secede and become an independnet state or launch a campaign for reinstating your federal status?
Anyhow, isn't it idiotic to insistently refer to 9,000 sq miles when what existed in the first place was 5,538 sq miles? Isn't it even more idiotic to refer to the same 9,000 when what is actually at stake is 4,227 sq miles?
Lance Corporal (Rtd) Otto Patrick
"THE SAME HEAT THAT MELTS THE BUTTER HARDENS THE EGG"
[pic]
From: Musisi Bosco
To: ugandans-at-heart@
Sent: Wed, 25 November, 2009 11:05:41
Subject: {UAH}: Re: [MUSISI] SSABATAKA? WHICH BATAKA?..JAMES MITI? DAUDI BASUDDE? YUDA MUSOKE KASA? SAULO LUGWIISA?......
Mw. Otto,
You write: "You see, that is why I refer to the opium of the dispossessed."
Who is dispossessed? And if anyone is dispossessed on account of the theft of the 9,000, isn't therefore truistic for Mengo as a duty to try to retrieve this land? You see, Buganda is highly centralized even in the present difficult circumstances, not anarchic, that it recognises its central authority. If that suprises you, which it appears to be, then blame the culture and long years of politico-adminstrative maturity and order.
You write further: "In light of the Basudde/Kasa letter which you have already seen, isn't any reference to "Ssabataka" in modern times clearly preposterous?"
I hope I am not telling you news that throughout Buganda history, there have been dissenters, renegades and freedom to take individual or collective position with regard to contentious issues. It would appear that the Basudde letter is penned by a group of Bataka who were so inclined, nothing more than that, in my view. In any case, we can't really dwell on a 1921 letter by a group of Bataka and continue to accord it undue importance in 2009. The demands of 2009 are clear and know. Yours is a red herring. Positions change and shift - just a couple of years ago, positions shifted from Regional Tier to Federo, and may even shift further to secession. Does that again surprise you?
Now to the Entebbe oligarchy. You write: "But you are now painting the picture of an Entebbe oligarchy."
Yes I am and its is a realistic picture, do you suggest otherwise?
MB
Auckland
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.