Semei Kakungulu, NOT a traitor, but a nationalist or/de numbers of Banyoro killed was by Col Colville.

Standard

Executive summary: People who live in the failures of the past will always move backwards.
Accusing Gen. Kakungulu of murdering Ugandans is surely historically incorrect as well as it is morally so. When some one is defeated in battle, the terms of settlement are set by the victor, not by the anguished. Property, territory etc are lost. The accusation that Buganda gained under colonialism and that gen. Kakungulu was a traitor are therefore sign of intellectual dishonesty on the part of the authors, for the following few reasons:
 
1/7). Kakungulu ‘pacified’ the tribes in the East and North-East as part of his job-description. He planted trees, built roads and district centres, forced people not to move naked [the so called ba-Kedi, etc] to stop spirit worship, etc. KAKUNGULU WAS NOT THE colonial POLICY MAKER. He was not at Berlin1884.
2/7). To say he betrayed Ugandans is lack of historical ‘contexity’ (if one can use such word). It is anachronistic. FIRST OF ALL THERE WAS NO SOVREGNN STATE CALLED UGANDA . There was no such citizenship. He was not an employee of the Ugandan state. So, how can he be accused of betraying Ugandans when no Ugandan citizens existed then? Uganda has existed with citizenship only from 1962.
3/7). Even if Kakungulu were a war-lord and killed people [did he?]in the territorial space now called Uganda , he still should not be called a traitor becasue he broke no “non-aggression pact” between him and the peoples he defeated. And, even if he had dis-obeyed his bosses, another commander would have done the same job
4/7). The same goes with blaming Buganda for ‘cooperating’ with the Brits to subjugate Bunyoro: There was no ‘non-aggression treaty/cooperation/ military alliance’ between the two Kingdoms, which had been at war for 300-400 years in advance of the British. SO, HOW DOES BETRAYAL COME INHERE?
5/7).  Speaking in terms of military strategy and diplomacy, one can say Buganda was very astitute indeed to ally with a strong force [the super-power of the day] to ‘teach’ the old enemy a lesson. Ford Mirima should instead blame the Bunyoro Kitara government of the time for failure, if not on the military front, certainly on the Diplomatic one. War is politics by other means and therefore it is a high time the Mirimas and the other apologists of failure should revisit history and apportion blame where it should be: Bunyoro’s failure in diplomacy AT THE TIME.
Speaking of betrayal how come that after King Kamurasi’s death, a very tragic succession civil war broke out, where many thousands lost their lives? Shall we therefore blame Prince Kasagamatoday [if not prince Kabalega in fact], for killing the Banyoro, in equal measure as the British did? Is the death of a Munyoro from a Munyoro spear ‘sweeter’ than the death of a Munyoro fighter from a Muganda warrior?
6/7) Examples: When the Germans marched on the USSR in June 1941; they shipped back everything, including people and even bridges and works of art. BUT, when you loose a war, there is what is called ‘war booty’ or war trophies. Ask the Germans: When the Soviets took Berlin in May ’45, the carried away anything of value, including research centres and scientists [the Americans did the same in their sector]. Even territory was not spared [ Germany was dismembered and parts of her restored to Poland . Part of the former centre of German imperial Glory , PRUSSIA , is now an integral part of the Russian federation  called Kaliningrad ]. Germany is not claiming it back in 2008!!
 
7/7). CONCLUSION: It is VERY WRONG FOR UGANDAN REVISIONISTS TO HANKER FOR THE LOSSES THEY SUFFERRED BACK IN HISTORY. It was even a mistake for the British to lay seeds for the referendum of 1964, which Obote fulfilled, in violation of the Agreement between the KY and UPC reached in advance of the Lancaster Conference, in 1961. Worse still, is the recent wave of ‘district and chiefdom creation”, in areas recognised under the Constitution of Uganda to belong to other known entities. Mirima and the other hangers-on [under the cover of the NRMO] should not exploit the ignorance of their people to hide their kingdom’s failure on the diplomatic front in the years past. This is not to say anything abut Kabalega’s ‘foolhardy’ in engaging a much superior enemy {instead of negotiating like the Ghanaian Chiefs, the Buganda Kings, etc, as a politico-military tactic, to save their kingdoms’ integrity] against whom he has no chance [he may have been a good filed-commander but he certainly was no politician. A hare cannot engage a lion without consequences]. The results were a foregone conclusion. We may praise him for bravery and darling, for sentimental and mobelisational reasons. but, at intellectual levels, the gloves have to be removed; otherwise many will continue to mislead their people, with the negative consequences for all of us.
 
Christopher Muwanga,
Nakasero,
Kampala.
16.12.2008.

About ekitibwakyabuganda

Ba Ssebo ne ba Nyabo, Twebaza Abaganda bonna abulumulirwa Obuganda . Era twebaza ne mikwano gya Buganda gyonna wonna wegiri munsi yonna. Omukutu guno gwatandikibwawo nga e’kigendererwa kwe kuyigiriza abantu ebintu ebikwatagana no’Buganda era nokuwanyisiganya ebilowozo nebanaffe abatali Baganda. Abaganda ne mikwano gya Buganda mukozese omukisa guno muwereze ebirowozo byamwe no’bubaka bwona obunaagasa Abaganda na’baana Buganda berizala mu maaso eyo. Obumu ku bubaka obuwerezebwa ku mukutu guno bugyibwa mukuwanyisiganya ebirowozo okubera kumukutu gwa Ugandan’s at Heart (UAH) Forum ogwatandikibwawo Mwami Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba. Era twebaza muzukulu wa Kintu ne Nnambi ono olw’omulimu gwakoledde bana Uganda bonna abali e’bunayira mungeri yo kubagatta mu byempuliziganya no’kutumbula okukolaganira awamu.

12 responses »

  1. Muwanga Doctrine: ‘People who live in the failures of the past will always move backwards’.

    Counter-doctrine: ‘PEOPLE WHO BUNDLE AWAY THE PAST BLUNDER THROUGH THE PRESENT AND SQUANDER THE FUTURE’

    Mr Muwanga correctly points out the need to avoid REVISIONISM. But he then proceeds to employ revisionism to debunk alleged revisionism…that made feel that it is important to make the following 10 plus 2 observations:

    1/12 In order to brush off Mr Miirima’s assertions, Mr Muwanga takes out of the context Germany’s territorial ‘losses’ after the two great wars in order to make Bunyoro’s claims to lost territories sound absurd. The fact is that, Germany was not losing territory, but rather, she was handing back stolen territory that she had acquired during the three Polish Partitions of the 18th century, in 1772, 1793 and 1795 when Poland’s neighbours (Russia, Hapsburg Austria and Prussia, ‘The Alliance of the Black Eagles’) dismembered the so called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the Prussian example that Mr Muwanga provides as a basis of dismissing Mr Miirima’s claims, Bunyoro is comparable to Poland and not to Germany. So Mr Muwanga’s is a false analogy. Restitution in favour of Poland can not be bereavement on part of Germany (loss of Konigsberg – or Kaliningrad – notwithstanding).

    2/12 When we put the Prussian case in its proper historical perspective, Germany at the end of the great wars was in a similar position to Buganda now. Mr Muwanga is of course silent on who ‘gained’ what Germany ‘lost’. The fact is that, Poland did not gain. It was being reconstituted, after being cannibalised by the “Alliance of Black Eagles”…..very much akin to the Anglo-ganda alliance. Bunyoro is in a similar position to Poland.. Remember that, Poland was briefly resurrected in 1807 when Napoleon set up what he called the Duchy of Warsaw which itself was undone after Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo.

    3/12 There was another Polish partition in 1939, the 4th Partition in which Germany and Russia once again shared out Polish territories (as part of implementation of the infamous Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact). All these were reversed at the end of WWI and WWII. If Germany tried to claim back those territories as Mr Muwanga argues, it would be like a thief trying to ‘resteal’ what he had pilfered in the past. Ermland, Gdansk, Kuyavia and Netze ‘lost’ by Germany were Polish territories…call it war booty if you want. Mubende, Buyaga, Bugerere, Bugangaizi, Bululi are Bunyoro territories yet to be ‘lost’ by Buganda.

    4/12 Whereas the treaty of Versailles restored Poland all its territories, and gave it a semblance of independence reversing a process that had started 170+ years before, the 1961 independence conference rejected Bunyoro’s claims for a 65 year old injustice to be addressed fully. To quote Mr Muwanga, ‘…So, Bunyoro is going to claim the ‘Abalega’ territory from the DR Congo government , because it was under Bunyoro 130 years ago and because Kabalega was born there?’:

    5/12 Of course here we have a classical case of the logical fallacy of reductio ad absurdum: twisting an opponents argument, however weak, to make it sound silly. Mr Muwanga, People do not lay claim to countries or territories just because they were born there! That is appealing to ridicule or substituting mockery with evidence Mr Muwanga. In that case, the Fujimoris of Peru will soon seek to annex Japan, Mr Muwanga would worry. Mao Nobert, born in Mbarara will annex Nkore to the domains of the Rwot, afterall, someone is temporising on restoring Obugabe! Mr Miirima was not looking at things that way, I think.

    6/12 But lets us pretend that Mr Muwanga’s reductio ad absurdum ammunition can still fire. We have already seen Poland reclaiming territories lost for over a period of 175 years, although Mr Muwanga elects in his critique of Mr Miirima to de-historicise and obfuscate that fact. In any case, and just for the sake argument, how do the 175 years of Poland’s deprivation compare with Mr Muwanga’s 130 years in relation to Bulega? But what Mr Muwanga has selectively forgotten also is that, Bunyoro’s claims are not as dated as he has tried to portray them. Uganda’s (if you may allow me to use the category) oldest political organisation is the Mubende-Bunyoro Committee’ formed in 1921 by Banyoro to reclaim the territory excised by the British and given to Buganda. This was about 25 years after the event. They petitioned in 1943, 1945, 1949, 1954 etc. The problem was not as old as 130 years. So, even Mr Muwanga’s attempt to deploy ‘appeal to ridicule’ ends up being very much a case of a lame duck laying a putrid egg! Just for reference, I have attached for Mr Muwanga and forumists a copy of the memorandum by Uganda’s oldest political organisation regarding Bunyoro’s appeals to recover her territories.

    7/12 Kakungulu’s treachery that Mr Miirima keeps referring to is in the moral, and not in the legal sense of flouting a non-aggression pact. It is the question of an African siding with European invaders and being used as a tool to subjugate his fellow Africans. A traitor is not necessarily a violator of a legal arrangement as Mr Muwanga would want to make us think. Mr Muwanga’s constant references to non-aggression pacts/treaties/alliances is a bit disingenuous. He would want to make us believe that every mutual obligation between individuals and groups has to be codified into a legal document/framework. That is an attempt to whitewash intrigue, subterfuge, underhandedness and opportunism. Mr Muwanga is simply elevating skullduggery to the level of a science by trying to stress that, if there is no pact, anything goes!

    8/12 The fact is that, opportunism is a cancer that soon consumes its most ardent exponents. Just look at Mengo between September 1888 and February 1892. When the the so-called readers (converts to the cause of religious fundamentalism), the Baganda subjects of Kabaka Mwanga, turned against him and deposed him, was it because they lacked a non-aggression pact with their King? When a month later, the readers split up into Christians and Moslems and turned on each other bloodily, was that skullduggery or lack of a treaty? When in 1892, the Christians turned against each other leading to the murders of Catholics and vandalism of Lubaga, that was fine – according to Mr Muwanga – because those brothers had no ‘non-aggression treaty/cooperation/ military alliance’. Is that a principled way of looking at our past errors or simple glorification of myopia?

    9/12 Mr Muwanga makes a strong point when he states of Kakungulu that, ‘…even if he had disobeyed his bosses, another commander would have done the same job’. However, this serves only to highlight the ferocity of British imperialism. We cannot use that argument as a weapon for attributing moral uprightness to Kakungulu. According to Mr Miirima, Kakungulu was a simple quisling who was willing to implement the unjust orders of his ‘boss’. The trouble with quislings is that, they share the same fate as loo paper. Once they are used, they are flushed. When they insist on floating around, their ‘bosses’ flush them again and force them down the toilet with a plunger and brush. That fate befell Kakungulu, just as it did to Selim Bey. Quislings, scullions, reatiners and lackeys are never allies. Hyenas lark around lions not because they are allies. We know why they do do so.

    10/12 ‘Kabalega was ‘fool hardy’ to resist the mighty’: 1893 was not the first time he had engaged the mighty. On 14.5.1872 Samuel Baker declared that he had annexed Bunyoro to Egypt. Kabalega routed him and his contingent of Egyptian troops causing them to retreat ignominiously. To use Mr Muwanga’s words but in a different sense, ‘it was a foregone conclusion’. What was lacking then was a local quisling to stab Kabalega in the back. Kakungulu had not yet been discovered. Yet the same Kabalega refrained from attacking Col Gordon’s garrisons six years later. This does not give the impression of a truculent, tactless, politically naïve ‘suicide spearer’ etc., the picture being paited by Mr Muwanga.
    11/12 And by the way, British colonial manoeuvres never received full endorsement from everyone. Just as an example, upon the implementation by Berkley of Colonel Colville’s earlier undertaking to excise all Bunyoro territory south River Kafu and give it to Buganda for sharing out amongst catholic and Protestant chiefs, two British officers who were civil servants in Bunyoro at the time were so outraged by the injustice that they even resigned their posts and went back home. These were William Pulteney and Forster. They were taking a moral stand, compared to local quislings like Kakungulu. May be Mr Muwanga will advise us that Kakungulu had signed a ‘non-disobedience pact’!

    12/12 Moreover, or rather, finally, needling Mirima over his references to ‘Ugandans’ at a time when Uganda was not yet a sovereign entity smacks of a tad of pedantry. It is true that there was no de jure ‘Uganda’. However, there is a lot more to ‘being’ than merely existing in the juridical sense. The reality of the times that Mr Miirima refers to was that, there was a de facto ‘Uganda’, however nascent. That entitles Mr Mirima (or even Mr Muwanga if he chooses), to employ the category ‘Ugandans’ retrospectively.

    Over to you

    L/Cpl (rtd) Otto Patrick
    PALABEK

  2. Countrymen and Women,

    In my post on subject yesterday 18th dec. 2008, I touched on one aspect where, in connection with the positives of Gen. Kakungulu’s actions in the “East”, the issue of Numeracy came in. I said some thing like:
    “The ‘Samia’ counted/numerated in base 5”. They now use base “10” too but it is not certain to me whether it was due to Kakungulu’s efforts, or due to general education efforts or simply due to natural linguistic evolution. See further down for an insight into SAMYA Numeracy. This is an issue best left to the ethnographers or to anthropologists/students of the Samia, for that matter. There is no intendend implication that the Samia have inferior numeration range. Thers is reportedly a ‘group’ in Asia that counts only up to ‘two’.
    In presenting examples from Luganda Numeracy, I mentioned/ wrote that “akatabalika” – a trillion, is ten figures or nine ‘zeros’ or, “1000 X 1 kakade”. This is a “kawumbi” instead. The more accurate thing is that the Muganda of old had no name for a figure beyond 11 zeros [twelve figures]. I did not mention either, the designation of a 5-zero figure [6 figures] surely called “akasiriivu” but commonly known as ‘emitwalo kkumi’. For details, see lower in this message.
    Way forward: Any living language must evolve: shed old words and absorb new ones. Luganda and Lusamya are not different. As for the former though, I am sure the trillion [akatabalika today] will soon have a standard word, since we can now count figures with more than 12 zeros. (Dr. Kiyiingi of the Institute of languages at MUK already has a proposal in the manuscripts, I am sure).
    On Kakungulu’s role in all this, I still add that his push for education, directly, indirectly, by force or otherwise benefited the ‘tribes’ of the East, other than dis-advantaging them.

    LUGANDA NUMERACY or NUMERATION

    NumberNumberScientificLuganda

    (numeration)(in figures)notationnumeration

    ten 10 1.E+01kkumi

    a hundred 100 1.E+02ki-kkumi

    a thousand 1,000 1.E+03lu-kkumi

    ten thousand 10,000 1.E+04omutwalo

    a hundred thousand 100,000 1.E+05akasiriivu

    a million 1,000,000 1.E+06akakade
    a billion 1,000,000,000 1.E+09akawumbi

    a trillion 1,000,000,000,000 1.E+12akatabalika

    SAMIA NUMERATION

    numberSamya numerationfigureremarks

    onendala1

    twochibiri2

    threechidatu3

    fourchine4

    fivechitanu5

    sixchitanu na ndala6″five and one” proves the base “5”, is used.

    sevenchitanu na chibili7″five and two”

    eightchitanu na chidatu8″five and three”

    ninecitanu na chine9″five and four”

    tene-kumi10″ten’ instead of say ‘2 fives’ or equivalent.

    elevene-kumi na ndala11″ten and one” shows base “10” came into use too.

    twelvee-kumi na chibili12

    twentykabili20

    thirtykadatu30
    fourtykane40

    fiftykatanu50

    sixtykasa-saba60

    seventy(makumi) katanu nende kabili70Borrowing from Swahili begins. “Saabini” may do here.

    eightykataanu nende kadatu80tamanini may do

    ninetykatanu nende kane90tisa-ine may do

    a hundredemyanda-na100

    two hundredemya chibili200

    three hundredemya chidatu300

    a thousandelifu1,000 swahili borowing.

    Christopher Muwanga,
    Nakasero,
    Kampala.

  3. Mr Muwanga:

    Most surviving members of Semei Kakungulu including his daughters and grand children now mostly stay in Kabusu/Lubaga.

    One of his surviving sons Mzeei Israel Mugyenyi, the father of Dr Shannon Kitayimba Kakukungulu lives somewhere near there (Najjanaakumbi). The other surviving son lives in Busajjabwankuba not very far from the Islamic University at Nkoma/Mbale. But the heirs to Semei Kakungulu come from another lineage. The surviving sons and their offspring are out of it.

    WBK

  4. Mr Muwanga:
    > >
    > > The young people better read you because you are actually teaching them some
    > > history. Take the example you cite below:
    > >
    > > 3/5. Tribes of the East: Did you know why the Bagisu loved Obote so much?
    > > Open Secret: Obote ‘gave’ Maruku County Headquarters to the Bagisu, at the
    > > expense of the ‘Bakedi’, who set up post in Tororo. the rest is History. But
    > > why this example here? – to prove that these people were fighting physically
    > > in the pre-Kakungulu era and by proxy in the post Kakungulu era. It is 2008
    > > and people and lives are being lost in a boundary [swamp] dispute between
    > > the Bagisu and the Bagweri on one hand and between the Banyore and Bagisu on
    > > the other. Where do you live Sir Henry, to ‘seek evidence’ that Kakungulu
    > > pacified the East? How the Lango and Acholi come in, I do not know BUT,
    > > Kakungulu was mainly active up to Kaberamaido and I have not heard the Kumam
    > > complaining. I want to challenge Henry Ford instead to tell/prove to me that
    > > the Ateso have never fought the Karamajong, the Bagisu-the Ateso, the
    > > Bagweri-the Banyore, the Dhopadhola-the ‘Tororo’ Ateso, etc. Leave the
    > > sentimental and wishful world man”
    > >
    > >
    > > You should tell UAH members why Obote gave Maluku Headquarters to Bugisu.
    > > You are also onto something when you hint that the ongoing clashes between
    > > the Bagweri from Kamonkoli/Doko with Bamasaba from the slums of
    > > Mbale/Namatala over Doko Wetlands is rooted in that action. The new Uganda
    > > Clays factory at Kamonkoli in present day Budaka district could intensify
    > > the fights. Apparently the fights are about yams!
    > >
    > >
    > > Finally tell the young people who were poor at history what it is the
    > > Referendum over the lost counties achieved. Why it is that 44 plus years
    > > since that referendum things have gotten worse and not better for the
    > > indigenous Banyoro? Also tell UH members the role played by Mr Mirima’s
    > > father in the lost counties. Mr Mirima is adamant to say because his father
    > > was in the thick of things blackmailing Mmengo for a Sazzachief. That is why
    > > Mr Mirima hardly acknowledges his more accomplished father. He wants his
    > > father to be forgotten. That is his way of teaching history.
    > >
    > > WBK

  5. WBK,
    > Then why did the “Bakedi” love Obote so much? Surely it couldnt have
    > been for the same reason?
    > What kind of history is this we are teaching our kids?
    > Think again brother think again. Obote must have been loved for some
    > other reason than this!
    > gook

  6. Gook:

    I meant to say that it was quid pro quo in favour of the Bamasaba for voting ‘right’. You see this quid pro quo business did not start with the current ‘coalition’. You vote wrong you get punished, you vote ‘right’ you get rewarded.

    That said, the clashes in the region are a recent phenomenon. The Jopadhola -I hope that is the right way-and Banyole lived in peace. They have intermarried and had no problems. The same goes for Bagwere and Bamasaba (in reality Namatala is muchanganiko and is sometimes called mu-Kiteso for obvious reasons). The last I checked both voted ‘right’ so what is the problem?

    For the benefit of UAH members, there are no people called Bakedi in Uganda today or then.

    WBK

  7. Owekitiinisa Rehema;
    Its good Buganda has come out to openly embrace Semei Kakungulu and all the atrocities he committed against Africa.
    But a few things should be put right. Kakungulu was never of royal blood. Indeed, Kabaka Ronald Mutebi last week asked members of the royal family to weed out pretenders, and Kakungul must be weeded out as quickly as possible.

    Its a pity that credible people like Emmanuel Sendaula should be asked to head the task force to repair a house of murderer who cannot find a place on Uganda’s list of heroes.

    I will not repeat what I have been saying on forum about Kakungulu’s claim of royal blood, he is the son of a mukopi Ssemuwemba who migrated to Kooki and eventually got executed there. Kakungulu escaped and returned to Buganda.

    Because of his shrwedness Kakungulu found himself in the top echolons of Bugangada kingdom leadership culminating in his being prefered to Apolo Kagwa to command Buganda forces in the Anglo-Ganda Alliance.

    So, he was never of royal blood and because ot the atrocities he committed against Africa he cannot be awarde hero status.

    Henry Ford Mirima

  8. Mr. Mirima,

    “atrocities he committed against Africa” ? Is Africa here supposed to equate Kabalega and his warriors ? I wish you could just stop throwing labels around. As we have learned, Kabalega had been busy not only invading and colonizing neighbouring ethnic groups, but he was keeping them as slaves as well, before he was sent packing.

    Why don’t you call his acts ‘atrocities’ ? Were all these bad things which Kabalega did, not against Africans (Africa in your language) ? Should it matter whether Kakungulu was of royal blood or not ? The fact is, he was instrumental in removing this regional bully. Would it have been more acceptable to you if Kakungulu had allied with another African leader instead of the Brits to dislodge him ? For dislodged, he had to be.

    S. Bwekiributa.

  9. Ask what the Abarusura used to do to the Basongora. Those who resisted the colonialist, at least in earlier times, did so for their own interests -not collective African interests. Except in later time when some Africans supported liberation movements in some other African countries, I am not aware of any African leaders (kings, chiefs) who sent military assistance to those in the coast areas (or elsewhere) to resist or beat back the invading colonialists.
    Incidentally, even with the benefit of the history of colonialism and its effect o Africa, some of the very people castigating the earlier leaders are the very people collaborating with the neocolonialists to exploit Africa.
    Ask Mw.Mirima to tell us what about the deals with Tallow/Heritage whomever concerning oil in his native Bunyoro region. I doubt he has the details. I wonder why
    Jean Paul Mivumba

  10. Ms Rehema:

    The thread has taken on a different tack. Yes some of Semei Kakungulu’s children are still alive. Mzeei Ibrahim Ndawula is well and alive at Busajjabwankuba about 4 miles from Mbale town on Mbale-Soroti road. The other surviving son is Mzeei Engineer Isreal Mugenyi the father of Dr Shannon Kitayimbwa Kakungulu somewhere near Kampla. Her daughters may also be still alive in Kabusu/Lubaga. There is also his eldest grandson Mzei Sezzi-older than his surviving uncles perhaps-somewhere in Mpigi. Bukedde profiled him sometime back.

    You also mentioned Mr Galiwango. His family is from Doko which has now become a battle ground over wetlands. The family was quite active in Mbale town. His brothers were for example involved in running Gangama Football Club, the only club outside of Kampala/Jinja corridor to ever win the Uganda Cup, now renamed Kakungulu cup-not Semei Kakungulu. Gangama also happens to have one of the largest Catholic missionaries in Mbale.

    I have laboured to show that contrary to what some commentators would like UAH members to believe there was no animosity towards Kakungulu’s folks in Mbale. It is fair to say that most of the Baganda families there went with Semei Kakungulu. You mentioned Ms Nantongo who won elections. Her family used to live in Kachumbala in Kumi district. There was no animosity towards her family from the Itesot until the rebellion broke out in Teso.

    Nakaloke sub county where Semei Kakungulu is buried is the only sub county-has since been subdivided into two, the other part halved off to form Namanyonyi sub county-in Mbale district or the entire Bugisu for that matter where the majority are not Bamasaba. Yes there some, but there are more Bagwere, Baganda, Basoga and pockets of Banyole and Itesot. Still they get along and in leap years like this one, all groups partake in the famed Kadodi, which must now be at its peak since the year is coming to an end.

    The language issue is a non issue. When you venture to the famous drinking places in Nkoma or Namatala, people are happy to enjoy their malwa/ajono and all that in peace. In terms of religion, it is closer to 50:50 muslim and Christians but no problems at all.

    I labour to refute the myth that the people of Mbale do not want to hear the name Kakungulu. That is Chibuku nonsense from those not willing to accept that “obusajja bukirana”. I hope it is proper to say so in a public forum like this.

    FYI, descendants of Mbale Baganda-Semei Kakungulu’s people whom supposedly Baganda elite shun-are represented fully at Mmengo. Kibaluuma.

    As they say, the picture is worthy more. That picture in Bukedde put to rest the samwa samwa from a few UAH commentators.

    WBK

  11. Mr. Muwanga

    Friends, I have read this rather late. Colonialism was a tragedy for the African people, born out of our weaknesses – ignorance, poverty, tribalism and disunity. The real enemy of the African people were the British, a global power extending their empire through trickery (treaties) and outright war. It is unfortunate we Africans fought the wars for the British, killing their own people. The ‘enmity’ and competition between Buganda and Bunyoro was one of ‘dwarfs’ effectively exploited and manipulated by the shrewd British in line with their divide and rule policy. At the end of the colonial wars of conquest, the true leaders, who stood for African independence and integrity Mwanga (of Buganda) and Kabalega (of Bunyoro) were captured together in war and exiled by the British, helped by Nubians and Kakungulu’s mercenaries. Puppet kings were enthroned to fool the Africans, but in reality independence and African dignity were lost. There was nothing heroic about being a mercenary of the British who were spreading their empire. Kankungulu was used and betrayed by the British dumped must have realized later. We are told that he died a disillusioned man.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s