Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

🤔 BOBI WINE is blabbering to a straightforward question whether he supports or opposes the repressive anti-homosexuality law in uganda which he claims targets him! bobi wine describes the law as a “political weapon,” asserting that any statement he makes could be used against him. however, to me, this...

206,411 просмотров • 2 лет назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 11

Фото профиля justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸
justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸2 лет назад

full interview #icymi ⬇️

Фото профиля justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸
justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸2 лет назад

let me leave this here for my trolls!

Фото профиля justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸
justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸2 лет назад

almost the same with the bbc interview

Фото профиля LM Dada
LM Dada2 лет назад

@HEBobiwine He is consistent with this response but I understand yo frustration coz u want him to speak like a gay rights activist which he is not

Фото профиля justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸
justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸2 лет назад

@HEBobiwine repeating the same line over and over is not my argument. re-read what i said, please.

Фото профиля Hon.Nsubuga Acksam 🇺🇬🇹🇿 🇰🇪 🇷🇼
Hon.Nsubuga Acksam 🇺🇬🇹🇿 🇰🇪 🇷🇼2 лет назад

@HEBobiwine There is no time for such! And don’t divert our struggle to oust the dictator to a mere homo conversation. Homosexuality is not even amongst the top 10 issues pressing the wanaichi here at home. So don’t drag us to your knees

Фото профиля justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸
justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸2 лет назад

@HEBobiwine what law school did you go to? i want to black list it!

Фото профиля aloysius maximus
aloysius maximus2 лет назад

@HEBobiwine Strategic ambiguity is also a tactic. He is definitely damned if he supports (most Ugandans support the law) & kind of damned if he doesn't (many foreign powers are against the law). He's therefore better off towing the fragile middle ground.

Фото профиля justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸
justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸2 лет назад

@HEBobiwine so you think ugandans are dense not to understand the vague answers bobi wine gave? should that ambiguity be brought to your other freedoms? let’s not play games when it comes to the question of any right/s.

Фото профиля Mpagi Julius
Mpagi Julius2 лет назад

@HEBobiwine I think you are confusing him for a gay rights activist.

Фото профиля justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸
justice hunter 🇺🇬🇺🇸2 лет назад

@HEBobiwine comprehension!!!!!

Похожие видео

Whether you support him or not, President Trump’s systematic retaliation against law firms like Susman Godfrey for representing clients or causes he opposes is more than an attack on those firms — it’s an attack on the rule of law itself. Lawyers make easy targets. But as John Adams knew when he defended the British soldiers on trial for the Boston Massacre, securing our rights and freedoms depends on their efforts to uphold the rule of law and defend the unpopular. If you’re being prosecuted, suing the government for violating your rights, or challenging an unconstitutional law, you need a lawyer. And you shouldn’t have to worry about whether the government will retaliate against the attorneys who take your case. Worryingly, there doesn’t seem to be an end in sight to these executive actions that threaten to chill First Amendment-protected advocacy, undermine the right to counsel, and erode due process. President Trump announced that five more executive orders targeting law firms and their clients are forthcoming, even after courts blocked three earlier orders for likely violating the Constitution. The use of executive power to punish opponents is neither new nor confined to a single party, but we should always be alarmed by such unconstitutional overreach. Today’s tactics can just as easily be turned against the views or causes you support tomorrow. For nearly 250 years, America has been a nation of laws, not men. Our heritage of freedom and due process demands that legal processes remain accessible to those with grievances. Access to counsel is a critical part of that liberty.

FIRE

156,425 просмотров • 1 год назад

Bobi Wine was recently selected to address the Geneva Summit for Human Rights and Democracy, marking his second appearance at the prestigious international forum. He first spoke at the summit in 2023 following Uganda’s 2021 general elections. This time, however, the circumstances surrounding his address are markedly different. After the 2026 elections, Bobi Wine fled his home and has remained in hiding amid threats from Muhoozi Kainerugaba, Uganda’s Chief of Defence Forces. As a result, he is expected to deliver his address remotely via video rather than appearing in person. In his 2023 maiden speech at the summit, Bobi Wine described what he characterized as widespread violence and repression during the 2020 election campaigns. He explained the numerous times Ugandans were killed by state authorities, under President Yoweri Museveni, who is responsible for grave human rights violations. His message was direct and focused: he urged the international community to reconsider its relationship with Museveni’s government, calling for an end to financial support and diplomatic cooperation. He further appealed for targeted sanctions against Museveni and his associates, advocating for their international isolation. Despite ongoing concerns raised by human rights organizations and opposition figures, Western governments have continued to engage with Museveni’s administration. This raises an important question: what will Bobi Wine’s upcoming address emphasize under these new and more precarious circumstances? Below is my commentary on his maiden address, during which he introduced himself and his cause to the global stage. YouTube - EU in Uganda United Nations

Mordecai Muriisa ™️

26,590 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

This is abhorrent behaviour. Netanyahu is a wanted war criminal, indicted by the International Criminal Court. He should be immediately arrested by any country that purports to support international law. The fact that any politician, or party in Australia or elsewhere would indicate they would not follow through on their obligations under international law is extremely disturbing. It places every Australian at risk as it undermines the very system of rules that underpins our rights including basics like consular protection abroad, human rights protections, aside from basic sovereignty and territorial integrity without which the world is lawless. Australia is obligated under the treaties we have signed to support the independence and rulings of the international justice system which includes the duty to prevent genocide where sufficient evidence exists to invoke that duty, and to end apartheid where legally established by the ICJ. This requires sanctions and all measures to bring it to an end. Our duties are very clear. They do not change according to the case, the State, the individual or any other factor. Netanyahu is a wanted war criminal. And Australia should deliver him to The Hague. As we would any other. Being committed to the arrest of Putin, Duterte or Netanyahu is not a reflection of Australia’s regard or otherwise for our local communities, and should never be characterised as such for political gain, but of our unwavering commitment to justice under the international law established with our direct and proud involvement, and on which our future relies.

Craig F̶o̶s̶t̶e̶r̶

188,688 просмотров • 1 год назад

Francesca Albanese on Fire: A Lesson to Canada 🇨🇦 on International Law and Palestinian 🇵🇸 Rights "The priority is to stop the genocide. If the government here, the parliamentarians here want to call it a 'Ceasefire,' call it the way they want, but this is the priority. The rest is secondary. Which doesn't mean that the recognition of the State of Palestine is not important. My question is, if this country has entertained discussions on the two-state solution, how come it does not recognize the state of Palestine yet? What is there to be debated? The recognition of Palestine 🇵🇸 shouldn't take time; it should be automatic and be an act of coherence. Otherwise, if you don't recognize it, it means that you shouldn't be talking about it at all. Why are you even a voice in the debate? It's about coherence. I know what I'm saying is blunt, but we need to be blunt because the impunity that has been granted to Israel for decades has led to this, which is a disaster both for the Palestinians and the Israelis. Again, diplomatic talks have been turned into a place to justify the unimaginable, the illegal... Is Canada spending any of its political capital to make sure that the genocide ends as soon as possible, the ceasefire, whatever, but then there is already a deadline set for the end of occupation? The ICJ has passed an advisory opinion which declares the occupation unlawful and to be dismantled unconditionally and totally as rapidly as possible, and that 'as rapid as possible' has been defined by the General Assembly; it must happen by September next year. What is Canada doing to ensure that the Occupation is dismantled? And then, more than these, there is Apartheid. I know that in this country, you feel uncomfortable with the word 'Apartheid,' but you have to tell me why? Because I, together with Israeli human rights organizations, Palestinian human rights organizations, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Harvard University, and thousands of Israelis, talking about Apartheid, give you the evidence of it, and here, like in other parts of North America, I hear, 'Hmm... we cannot say that word.' It's your problem... International law is so clear that it doesn't allow you to find excuses. So, however, end the genocide, end the Occupation, end the Apartheid; this is what it means to apply international law and help build peace for Palestinians, Israelis, and anyone who calls that land home." — Francesca Albanese at a Press Conference in Canada. Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur oPt

The Compass Report 🧭

32,171 просмотров • 1 год назад