As things go, I do not know much about what Museveni said in his State
of the Nation address, but a series of otherwise-random events led me to
find out that "#SONUG15" contained a part where Museveni said:
Museveni: I spend many hours awake while you sleep. Handling the
Namugongo event successfully proved a point #SONUG15
I am quoting a tweet, so there may be a few words missing. But indeed, I
would like to use this excuse to express my support for the guy. Being
President is not easy. He does it well, as God enables him.
He brags there about preventing a terrorist attack by Muslims fanatics.
Of course, nobody can stop such attacks; only God. But God has done it
by the hand of the man whom He chose to lead the country.
Although his Republic falls far short--that is, it is not the Christian
Free State--it does this security properly for the most part, while also
preserving that freedom and laissez-faire that is Uganda's rich
heritage. The Americans, with everything between their PATRIOT act and
whatever they will respond to Edward Snowden with, have found that their
freedom was not preserved in the "war on terror", which they have
already lost (double-entendre intended).
Furthemore, Museveni realises that he can measure his potency, strength,
and control by how firm his hand is around the terrorist Muslim's necks.
Indeed, that is true. He bragged about how he has a special intelligence
focus on them. He should, of course, go ahead and purge this land
entirely of the high places of the heretics, and turn Uganda from the
sin of secularism. Then nobody would shake his hold on power, ever;
because even we, who challenge it by the Christian Free State, would not
be relevant then, and I would have to retreat to his service under God.
But now that he is hesitating to clearly stamp out the foundational sin
of this nation …
However, as for the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, which he made
Israel sin, from these Jehu did not depart, even the golden calves
that were at Bethel and that were at Dan.
But Jehu was not careful to walk in the law of the LORD, the God of
Israel, with all his heart; he did not depart from the sins of
Jeroboam, which he made Israel sin.
You know that Uganda is still recorded in the Organisation of Islamic
Countries. How can she ever defeat the Mozzies when she still consorts
with them? Do not be unequally-yoked with heathens. What intercourse hath
light with darkness?
And I know that Uganda will not have a secure economic future until at
least that is corrected, because, Uganda had a policy of entertaining
this membership, even after Idi Amin was overthrown, because the Muslim
countries did from time to time hand out a token to member countries.
Yet the foundational sin of them all precedes Idi Amin. At the time of
Independence, Uganda was not a Presidential Republic in the sense one
sees today. The first president and vice president were both monarchs.
When the monarchies were abolished, it was by the help of a Muslim army
commander, who later went on to become president himself. But before all
that, Uganda was under the British, who still have a sacralist system.
The Independent Uganda was also sacralist, by virtue of being monarchic,
since the only monarchic system that survived the 1890s (also signalled
by name-change the previous formely-pagan monarch had undergone: to
"Daniel") was sacralist, Christian, and Protestant, modelled loosely
after the British sacralist monarchy, both implicitly and explicitly.
In fact, there were civil wars around the religion of the monarch(y),
precisely because Uganda was from the beginning a sacralist nation,
growing out of sacralist tribes.
With the Republic proper came the secularism, which not only allowed Idi
Amin, but also relied on him to actually come into existence and
strengthen. So, like the Westerners, we first cut off the roots saying
we were only interested in the branches. First we had a secular
Protestant head of state, and then we ended up with a Muslim head of
state. Those are our darkest days; those are the times our nation turned
against itself and against the World. Uganda was taking part in
terrorising Jews and Christians. We ended up fighting a brief war
against Israel. (And though UG lost that battle, dramatically because it
was not the hand of man against them, yet this fierce nation took out
Yonatan Netanyahu: for though she had a mad Mozzie for president, and her
hand was committing sin, yet before her Saul, even Jonathan, would fall
as one whose shield was not annointed, that it may be fulfilled what was
spoken by the prophet "A nation of fierce speech, feared far and wide,"
cutting down heroes even in its defeat, sustained of God even when not
deserving. I think Yoni was a sufficient to cover the requirement on our
side; so even for that incident, there may never be bad blood between
Uganda and Israel.)
When Museveni came, he righted many wrongs. Essentially, Uganda cried
out for deliverance, and it was given it. But his mistakes are in
thinking that secularism is what saved Uganda, rather than condemned it.
Uganda was a failed State, it had been a battle ground for religious
opportunists. This had gone on for 100 years but it had to stop.
That's his opinion on the sacralists who came before him. You would
think that secularists are not themselves religious opportunists, who
rely first of all on the inherent hedonist mandate contained democracy,
and who then have to act out the due intolerance to those who do not
tolerate their standard (or, rather, lack of one).
Unfortunately for him, he, like the rest of the World leaders, condemns
himself by not distinguishing firmly and strictly between religion as
revealed by God, and religion as revealed by liars. I mean, that quote
above comes just after this one:
Some Moslem intellectuals either out of ignorance or opportunism, do
mislead a lot of people. And this is not helping but destroying
Right, so Mozzies are destroying nations and Christians should be
gagged? Isn't the destruction the Mozzies are causing a good wake-up
call for nations to innoculate and insulate against creeping Islamism by
enforcing the old religion?
It can't possibly be that these people are comparing a state submissive
to the Son of God, whose official cult is the old Trinitarian faith,
whose people are quickened by the Spirit, and which applies to itself
the standard of the Word of God--and, yes, admitting (confessing) when
(not if) it sins and fails to live up to it--to a state whose highest
moral standard is Qathem Mahound, the heretical rapist paedophile who
renamed himself Muhammad. Nobody can force a religion on a nation; but
nobody can separate a state and its religion, even if they have to leave
it only secularist hedonism as a choice (and a bad choice at that).
I will not spend time on the infinite other reasons why, since a state
is going to have a religion, it should be Christian. My argument here is
simpler: secularism is an illegitimate usurper, and the Republic
currently in sin. This is how the history has fashioned it to be for
Nevertheless, God hasn't totally forgotten Uganda, and has given her a
secular President who has strengthened his grip on the throats of his
Muslim enemies, and outwitted them on all important show-downs. The
importance of achieving this, against Muslim terrorists, of all foes,
cannot be over-estimated, and certainly may not be under-estimated. It
is God who has strengthened His anointed's arm, just like He
strengthened Jehu's. He even has ADF cornered.
But the secularism remains a sin. Museveni once said:
The most atrocious, criminal, cowardly and monstrous attacks by
Al-Shabaab against soft and innocent targets such as shoppers in a
Shopping Mall, young students in a University or football fans
watching the World Cup matches at the Rugby Club in Kampala may look
very frightening to those that are not used to war or that are not
well informed. However, those attacks, in fact, prove three things.
They prove that Al-Shabaab is sectarian which is obvious because it
only targets Non- Moslems. Secondly, it proves that Al-Shabaab is
bankrupt both morally and ideologically. Why attack non-combatants?
Why not attack soldiers if you want to fight? Why attack only
Non-Moslems? Thirdly, however, it also proves that Al-Shabaab is
Now, would that he had gone on to say that the Al Shabaab gangs are
morally-bankrupt because of their faithful Islam! But he did not. The
high places of Jeroboam son of Nebat! How can we, as a nation, be
ashamed of confessing the holy supremacy of not only what is clearly
superior, but which we believe--if in fact we believe--to have come by
the Son of God Himself? What is not morally-bankrupt, and how do we
know? How can a state, any state, know what is moral and what is not,
unless it cite is official religion? Which one is it that Museveni is
Moreover, the sins Al Shabaab commits, targetting non-Muslim civilians
(even as it avoids soldiers), are sanctioned and demonstrated by the
accursed heretic Muhammad. How and why shall we be required to tolerate
murderous intolerance? We didn't declare war; the heretic did. So "let
the sword go throughout all the land," since that is what they have
This is also not a problem of "civilisation". The Muslim Arabs have been
literate for centuries longer than we have been, and they still follow
the paedophile's murderous examples as the highest of morality. It's not
the lack of TV or Internet, all of which the Muslim states have much of,
and only broadcast be-headings, torture-executions, and heresies, be it
Iran, Saudia, or (some/the other) Islamic State.