Comments on: No Date Set for Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill

By: Maazi NCO

Maazi NCO — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:23 +0000

Too bad!!! Davey-Boy Cameron's threat has not just been rebuffed by Uganda, it has also been rebuffed by other African nations (e.g. Ghana and Malawi). You are ---of course--- welcome to perform a positive pro-gay spin on these stories, labouring painfully to explain to us that a transparent blackmail from the UK government is actually nothing of the sort, but some kind of "redeployment of resources" (Whatever that means !!!!) Bottom line---- most Africans do not take the threats of the cash-strapped Baby-Faced UK Prime Minister seriously. "Baby-Face" ended up embarrassing himself and his cabinet officials. Every single person I have spoken to over here is curious to know why Davey-Boy Cameron "likes" ANAL SEX.

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:23 +0000

The policy has been in place for some time, as many of us know. Perhaps it might have been better to continue to have ‘quiet chats’ with the African leaders concerned, and not ‘go public’. To be absolutely honest, that is actually my view.
That said, you have always made clear your determination to see the Bill pass, regardless of whether or not cash currently given to politicians is directed elsewhere. So, in a sense, nothing has changed. Bahati continues says what he has always said.
I think we all expected some ‘noise’ from certain quarters over this.
I see, ‘Maazi NCO MP’, that you still get very EXCITED by a certain activity. May I remind you that Bahati wants to slaughter lesbians as well, and they don’t do the activity in question? Many heterosexual men do – especially, I am told, in Africa.

By: Maazi NCO

Maazi NCO — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:23 +0000

see, ‘Maazi NCO MP’, that you still get very EXCITED by a certain activity.

I am not excited by anything. The MPs of Uganda have already made their stance known to the world so there is nothing to be excited about.

May I remind you that Bahati wants to slaughter lesbians as well, and they don’t do the activity in question?

There is no slaughter programme in Uganda. Gayism whether committed by males or females is an abominable sex crime already punishable under existing laws which are in the process of being revamped by Parliament (regardless of the rantings of the Baby-Faced Prime Minister of the UK who should really be concentrating on fixing British Economy rather than looking for colonial misadventures)

Many heterosexual men do – especially, I am told, in Africa.

You were told wrong. Most Africans are sensible enough to refrain from descending so low to engage in abhorrent actions that degrade human dignity. Anal sex is almost the exclusive preserve of gay sex practitioners and that aberrant behaviour in Uganda (and other parts of Africa) is regarded as inhuman, insane, immoral, unAfrican and deviant.

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:23 +0000

Warren
Might it be worth doing a piece on the UK Government’s policy? One of your nice forensic analyses?
Here’s the article that ‘Maazi NCO’ cited earlier today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15511081
Here’s the statement (in relation to Ghana) from the responsible UK Government department:-
“Following a story printed in the British press last weekend, a number of media outlets in Ghana have suggested that the UK is cutting or threatening to cut aid to Ghana and other African countries with poor records on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGB&T) rights.
“We wish to state that the original reporting in the UK media contained a number of factual errors, including that UK aid to Ghana had been cut. This is not the case.
“In 2010, total UK aid to Ghana was £85 million, £36 million of which was provided as general budget support (that is, unearmarked financial aid going directly to the government budget). A further £23 million was provided in budget support specifically to the health and education sectors. Total UK aid to Ghana is planned to rise to £100 million by 2015.
“The UK government provides aid directly to partner governments when we are satisfied that they share our commitments to: reduce poverty; respect human rights and other international obligations; improve public financial management; promote good governance and transparency, and fight corruption. We regularly review the performance of governments in these areas and take action when we have concerns. As part of our commitment to uphold human rights and international obligations, we are committed to combating violence and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGB&T) people in all circumstances.
“In the case of Ghana, following statements in the press attributed to the Western Regional Minister, DFID Minister Stephen O’Brien did raise the UK’s concerns with government counterparts during his visit to Ghana in July.
“In Malawi, the UK decided to suspend general budget support in July 2011, after the Government of Malawi repeatedly failed to address UK concerns over a broad range of economic management and governance issues. These issues included concerns about human rights, including minority rights. Again, the UK has not cut its aid budget to Malawi, but continues to support programmes in Malawi that protect poor people and deliver basic services like health and education.“

By: Maazi NCO

Maazi NCO — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:23 +0000

And the Government of Tanzania responds to Prime Minister Dave-Boy Cameron's donor blackmail threats...

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:23 +0000

Recognizing reality (especially when it doesn’t meet his ‘political needs’) was never really ‘Maazi NCO MP’s’ strongest point.

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:21 +0000

Oh wonderful! How truly appropriate! (I’ll explain when my comment above completes its time in … the moderation queue.)

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:21 +0000

Interesting comment from a report on the CHoGM Conference in Perth:-
“(Ugandan presidential adviser John) Nagenda accused Mr Cameron of showing an “ex-colonial mentality” and of treating Ugandans “like children”. “Uganda is, if you remember, a sovereign state and we are tired of being given these lectures by people,” he told the BBC’s Newshour programme. “If they must take their money, so be it.”…Mr Nagenda said he doubted that the Ugandan parliament would ever approve a bill which proposed the death penalty for some homosexual acts. “I believe it will die a natural death. But this kind of ex-colonial mentality of saying: ‘You do this or I withdraw my aid’ will definitely make people extremely uncomfortable with being treated like children,” Mr Nagenda said.”
Well I do understand Nagenda’s chagrin. But I think he is making some assumptions here – assumptions that need to be challenged.
Firstly, there is not ‘threat’ to cut resources to help Ugandans. There is policy to ‘rebalance’ how aid is deployed in order best to promote human rights. The Government of the United Kingdom has every right -even, it could be argued, a duty – to develop and pursue such a policy.
Secondly, noone is treating Ugandans like ‘children’. The Ugandan Government is simply being informed of the policy on how aid is to be deployed, so that it can make properly informed choices about its own policies.
Thirdly, the notion that “[the Bill] will die a natural death” is not looking that realistic just now. The May ‘attempted trickery’ episode (when attempts were made to trick people into thinking that the ‘slaughter provisions’ in the Bill had been dropped) rightly made western governments furious – we were treated as if we were stupid. We are not. There is still much ‘bad blood’ as a result of what happened then.
I can see why Nagenda felt that he had to say what he said, but surely any country must understand that good relations always come with ‘strings attached’. Our ‘strings’ are that we are not prepared to tolerate the execution and imprisonment of people simply because they are gay, just as we do not execute or imprison people simply because they have more than one consenting sexual partner.
If we were saying to Uganda: “you must introduce ‘gay marriage’ or we’ll cut aid”, then I would completely understand their annoyance. But we are not saying that. We are saying this: “if you start killing (and continue/begin imprisoning) people simply because they are gay, or because they speak up for the fundamental human rights of their gay compatriots, we will find different ways of distributing aid intended to help ordinary Ugandans – ways that do not provide direct cash support to the state machinery that administers the aforementioned killing/imprisoning.” Given previous statements he has made, Nagenda should have no problem at all with that!

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:21 +0000

And, of course, the line of the UG Catholic Church hierarchy has all along been much the same as those above: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2010/jan/10011101
(The UG Catholic statement is somewhat confused, as it cites Penal Code 145 as a reason for not needing the Bill, having suggested that the bishops oppose even imprisonment for gays. On a wider level, the Church has come within an inch of supporting general decriminalization: the ‘current formula’ being its stated opposition to what it terms “discriminatory penal legislation” against gays: http://www.calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=a9849daa-dd60-4028-adc0-2dfa024cb3a9)

By: Richard Willmer

Richard Willmer — Wed, 30 May 2018 19:48:21 +0000

Indeed I am, and you are correct in what you say.
Officially, the UK Parliament is ‘sovereign’, but everybody understands that, perhaps unlike in the USA, there is in practice strong link between the fate of the Government and that of MPs.