September 2014
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

Month September 2014

when you lose a position at the ‘High table,’ people desert you!

letter sacking
If Mr. Mbabazi’s and his supporters did not see this coming, then they are political idiots. And btw, Mr. Mbabazi was the author of his own demise and demise it is. His political future is DEAD AS DODO. For that he must blame the three women closest to him, his wife, sister in law and daughter Nina. They continued to engage in the equivalent of a positive feedback in science rather than preferring negative feedback.

For starters their actions simply escalated the conflict with YKM. Then came the idiotic youth wingers for Mbabazi who were obviously cheered on by MR Mbabazi or the three women. In the end, YKM had absolutely no choice but to sack him and confine him o Uganda’s political dustbin.

Now Mr. Mbabazi must face the system he thinks he knows or controlled. To his credit or political suaveness YKM bid his time and let Mr. Mbabazi mess up his life and mess up he did. He dared YKM to sack him and YKM has done so.

And ladies and gentlemen, forget the nonsense that Mr. Patrick Amana Mbabazi has his own network. Bure. Zero. Nada. YKM must have circled them and is now going to pounce on them kabisa. Expect some in your neighbourhood seeking asylum. Hahaha.

here is a kigganda saying “bwomegga toluma”/when you wrestle someone to the ground you do not again bite them. But YKM will bite Mr. Mbabazi and his supporters. You watch.

IGP Kale Kayihura is one of the winners. He actually played major role in enticing Mr. Mbabazi to play the game YKM set him for. And Mr. Mbabazi and especially his mdomo wife did not disappoint. Mr tear gas will tear gas them even more. Ndiyo.

YKM is a character. He waited on the day the world would be talking about Scotland to sack Mr. Mbabazi. That guarantees one thing, his infamy will linger in the minds of many Ugandans.

Sure some in Uganda are saddened, but many are indifferent. It is not a big deal.Actually we are more focused -relieved somewhat, do not ask why-on Scotland voting NO than YKM sacking his hapless and if you believe vindictive former PM.

And now the real scary stuff. Like nyayo, YKM could, I say could go for the jugular and cut Mr. Mbabazi not just politically but economically. He could end up in Luzira for his role in Temangalo.

YKM has all the cards and how Mr. Mbabazi’s three women and the idiotic youth wingers. Now Nina can hang on to that membership register. It ain’t of no value to YKM or NRM anymore. No more blackmailing YKM or NRM. Nina must pay the shylock or face the consequences. For Nina it is a triple blow. The shylock could not pounced because the father was PM. No more. Dunia.

Folks, how Mr. Mbabazi could make so many blunders is baffling given claims that he has his own network. Sejusa must be laughing silly in London. For him it is double victory perhaps. And Mr. Mbabazi cannot say Mr Sejusa never warned them, he did.

YKM knows that Mr. Mbabazi has no political constituency in Uganda. For instance, like YKM they both belong to the Anglican Church and so like the Scots voters that constituency is for the status quo. Similarly, both come from Western Uganda, yes, we are talking about ethnicity so there is no match there. YKM is still their man.

YKM wanted to send a message to all those NRM pretenders going around claiming that they too could be president. Not when YKM is the owner of NRM. Expect to see those labelled Mbabazi’s supporters do what many of Njonjo’s supporters did when he was called the traitor, deny him. Many politicians in Uganda are on the edge this weekend. And that is how YKM wanted it.You are going to learn how power works: when you lose a position at the ‘High table,’ people desert you!



Folks,Is it Friday massacre in Ugandan politics?. YKM relieves Mr. Mbabazi in the big one and then embattled Lord Mayor replaces his deputy! So how does the Mayor work with KCCA?

Dr Rugunda is a mild mannered fellow whose temperament will serve him well. He is also a very likeable person going by his ‘ndugu’ affection. Furthermore he has not shown a naked ambition to become president of Uganda. Mr. Mbabazi let it get into his head that somehow his perceived closeness with Israel would allow another Col Bar Lev to hand him power. Well there is no such Col Bar Lev in UPDF today and in case YKM is in very good contacts with Israel.

It is funny but Dr Rugunda and VP Sekandi have a lot in common. They are humble, mild mannered and patient. These are huge qualities in African politics. Not surprisingly many including in the media ridicule them, but that is a huge mistake.

And let us be clear. Mr. Mbabazi is not a Mwai Kibaki whose temperament is more in tune with Dr Rugunda and VP Sekandi. When nyayo replaced Mr. Kibaki as VP he retreated to Afya House to serve as Health Minister. But he had one advantage: he had behind him a sizeable consistency and of course members of the dominant class and in the army and security services looking out for his interests. So he bid his time and the rest is history.

He went on to save Kenya from nyayo’s neglect and set it on the path for economic take off. Now can Mr. Mbabazi do that? No. Why not? Because YKM has completely kicked him out of cabinet. Furthermore Mr. Kibaki did not have the equivalent of Mrs. Mbabazi, Mrs. Hope Mwesige and Mrs. Nina Mbabazi Rukikaire creating problems for him everywhere.

Moreover Mr. Kibaki attracted some sympathy something Mr. Mbabazi is not likely to receive. Actually one of the people waiting to feast on him is a former Mitchelite the ‘rat’ by virtue of his membership in the NRM historical club.

It must be a tough and obviously painful day for Mr. Mbabazi and his political family. Did he make a mistake to hang onto both PM and SG? Now that he is no longer PM, the writing is on the wall for SG. His fate reminds me of the saying “the rat that grows old gets to feast on the cat”. Apparently as the cat he feasted on the likes of Hon Gilbert Balisseka Bukenya and many others. Now there are many ‘rats’ waiting to feast on him too. Power is sweat but also tricky.

I hope Mr Mbabazi talks the Njonjo way not what some UAHs suggested,i.e.. sending sister in law abroad to start a fight. What fight? To remove YKM. Hahaha.

YKM could take away their passports. So YKM’s treatment or punishment will largely depend on how the Mbabazi camp reacts. They overreact and YKM squeezes them even more. Bank loans could be recalled, murder charges-recall the young man shot in his Kololo home-could be initiated, Temangalo could be resurrected etc.

The Lord Mayor’s actions may be mere symbolism. But YKM’s bold move is pregnant with huge political consequences. Sejusa was damn right. Hello Professor Eric Kashambuzi!




You’ll find it interesting to know that, Mbabazi is extremely thoughtful, calculative and organised. I do not need to remind you that you know Mr. Mbabazi knows that Museveni relies on the military to maintain authority and therefore grip on power.

1 / The question that calls to mind is however, after what happened to Tinye and others in the same league, why is Mbabazi hell bent on challenging president Museveni’s authority? What has he detected?

2 / Does he have assurances from within the military that his back is covered in case things get out of control? In Uganda, cynicism dictates that, an insider can not challenge our presidency without involving the military. President Museveni did not raise the bar to that level. He left it where he found it for good reasons. Uganda’s political affairs will always be decided with the full involvement of the military.

3/ Obviously, Mr Mbabazi knows his former boss’s weaknesses, is he therefore testing the waters, but will coil back into his shell if he realises that his life is in danger? After what happened to Dr. Besigye, we know president Museveni will go all the way if necessary, once his authority is threatened.

I guess what I’m trying to say here is that, Mr Mbabazi has not been weakened, to the contrary, he’s position has been strengthened, how? He now has all the time in the world to mobilise and eat into the NRM party structures. Secondly, he can now openly declare his presidential ambitions in time for 2016, to galvanise the youth and Ugandans in general.

That said, I also do believe that Mr Mbabazi should contact Dr. Besigye as soon as time allows it, to get some advice on how to survive the brutal and repressive NRM regime. There is a lot of tramped up charges, some real but on hold, awaiting Mr Mbabazi. Temangalo and CHOGAM cases, and some cooked on the Rwakitura farm, are likely to bounce back.

And oh! to spice up things a little, he might also rape his maid or something else!!! Anything!!



I will not take time to respond to what happened this morning in the reshuffle sabalwanyi has made. And there three factors am writing about in this document.

The constitutional betrayal

When there was the constitutional amendment to remove the term limits Amaama Mbazi thinking that he was mighty, supported the removal of term limits together with his in law Hope Mwesigye in all this they thought they were clearing the way such …that people like Dr. Besigye don’t enter state house. In my own prediction they thought it was easy for them to easily enter state house since the old man would easily go but alas it was a miscalculation. May be if Hope Mwesigye who was then a state minister for parliamentary affairs would had not championed and offered to be the one to bribe Mps to vote for the amendment then maybe it would have been different today. So I can ably say that on this overstay and their lack of the space to fight to go to state house if there were term limits may be he would compete in the election and become president but he killed his own path thinking that he was killing the way for the others. Since am a mukiga like him [Amaama] then I will give him our proverb Nyakwehena akanya a hatema meaning that some mon defecated where he was supposed to slash.

Kigezi sub region.

Mr. Museveni should stop his appointments with kigezi sub region basing them on divide and rule because by replacing Amaama with Rugunda is a clear indication that he is using the people of kigezi for selfish reasons. However we are known to be resolute, deciessive and very intelligent people, such a people cannot be dragged into this, it’s better the people of kigezi not to join Rugunda in celebrations but rather continue the pressuring Mr. Museveni to get out of state house because these positions are being given to my region to use it!

The future

The future is for the resolute because Museveni can never go because of an election but because rather people are able to chess him as a people because Mr. Museveni is good at violence and rigging of election. Its better that Mbabazi even ceases to think of an election to oust Museveni because he can’t and if he thinks so let him officially declare his presidential bid. Lastly my prediction to many political players whom I have talked to has come true I have always told them that museveni was still studying on how to work without Mbabazi and if he one day learnt how to work without him then he would drop him and indeed it has happened.

Katurebe Joushwa

Mr. Mbabazi’s political future is DEAD AS DODO

Mr. Mbabazi’s political future is DEAD AS DODO. He is political history. Ugandans missed something else. It was Mr. Ofwono Opondo who confirmed his dismissal.

Funny some want to make him an Ali baba yet he is not. And let us be clear, there is nothing Mr Mbabazi is going to do politically. Yes he is still SG but that will soon end through a special delegates conference packed with YKM loyalists. Forget the Nina held register it is garbage. She can keep it as her souvenir.

Now suppose I am wrong and Mr Mbabazi resurrects politically, where is his political base? Furthermore suppose he goes mano mano with YKM which regions can he carry? I dare say that Mr Mbabazi is actually not electable period. Forget the lies going on. He struggled to win his seat and people give him a chance to win Uganda. Not chance in a million.

What I see is some folks edging him on towards political suicide. I dare add that he cannot even say or do what Hon Bukenya did, which is defy NRM and somehow still stay relevant. the moment he left Luzira on trumped up charges, Hon Bukenya was a free man to speak his mind.

Folks get of the fence and tell the truth.If he were to successfully resist he would certainly be the first to do in several African countries. If history is an indication as noted on previous posts on UAH, his chances are very thin. And guess what, even those who were shouting before that they will die with Mr. Mbabazi are now more interested in protecting their fufu and believe me will deny him.

QN: are you saying party SG cannot be relieved of his or her duties through other means? What if YKM calls NRM’s highest organ to suspend him? I think there short cuts to relieve him of his duties as SG, pending a delegates conference. And were are talking about Uganda where the president gets what he wants.

Well, let us not waste time arguing for as they say we cannot be arguing whether the slaughtered cow was pregnant or not. The result would be clear soon.

So we get things clear. If you believe just one part of his CV, there are others too, but let us take the claim that he served in state research bureau during Amin’s time that would be quite something. So when did he leave the SRB? Was he still in SRB when for example, the Archbishop and the two ministers were killed etc? What did he know about that etc.And mark you he married a reverend’s daughter.

But if Ugandans detest YKM for overstaying, look at the people who helped him suppress Ugandans. Look at the portfolios Mr Mbabazi had held under YKM and other previous regimes. It even turns out that he was not only in SRB but was also apparently the director of legal affairs in UNLA as per the CV posted on UAH. So someone who goes back to SRB should be preferred and welcomed to replace YKM? Is that the change Ugandans are yearning for? What is it I am missing? Actually if it turns out that he was in SRB and director of legal affairs in UNLA then something is really wrong with Ugandans.

For me I am indifferent . I don’t give a hoot about Mr. Mbabazi. Erase that I was until the SRB bombshell came along. So what changes are Ugandans looking for? They even consider a SRB monster as a potential presidential candidate? Holly cow!

Yes it is time for YKM to go, but it does not and should not mean that it is the likes of Mbabazi to replace him. As the saying goes “enkkolo ssi mmere”/anything does not count as food.

Dr Rugunda has survived because he has no naked ambition to be president. In other words he knows his place.

Ugandans do not care anymore about performance. Consider the OPM which was and still is one of the most corrupt. Yet many mourn the demise of Mr Mbabazi, the PM who presided over most of that corruption.

And BTW why does Uganda need a PM on top of an executive president? What is it that would not done if the office of the PM was abolished?

Knowing Ugandans, I will not be surprised a bit if the Ugandan opposition, yap, came out in support of Mr Mbabazi. Phew!



Please read this legal opinion I gave you on 24th July. I was worried then you had had allowed emotion to get the better of your normally good judgement. I told you, in all likelihood, this woman Nsenga would have a very hard task, convincing the court of her innocence. I told you very few people would believe her talke that she run down her husband in front of a previously locked gate, after it had stopped, because of a mechanical failure in the car. The defence also weakened their case by calling the Deputy Director of the CID as a witness. This totally destroyed his credibility. He could only be taken seriously if he had resigned his post and told the the court he was giving evidence in protest. In fact the prosecution made a huge error in not applying to the court to treat his evidence as that of a “Hostile Witness”. Such evidence is normally treated with great caution because the courts assume the witness has an axe to grind or a motive to lie or embellish the truth. In any event, I think the judge ignored his evidence and treated it just as that of a hostile witness.

Mrs Nsenga can still appeal on legal technicalities, in regard to her mental state at the time she run down the husband. But in the absence of satidfactory techinical or scientific evidence that a car that has stopped can, through mechanical failure, gather such speed and strenght within such a small confined area as a garage as to knock down and crush a human being is a very hard sell for any innocent bystander to swallow. I think the judge drew an inference that the gates were actually open when Mrs Nsenga returned home and she drove at her husband at speed crushing him underneath the car. She compounded the initial injury by reversing over his prostrate body.

Mrs Njenga needs a much better lawyer to handle her appeal. I think the original defence lawyers were incompetent because they should have set their stall on a defence of manslaughter and led evidnce alluding to her mental state arising out of the breakdown in her marriage which might have amounted to diminished reponsibility in law. If I was her lawyer, that is the line I would have taken. please read the example I gave you, of you shooting down Fardson Karanga in public with an UZI sub-machine gun. It is going to be a very hard sell for you to convince a court that it was an accident, evn if in fact you have a licence to carry the gun.

Thank You

George Okello

This is a very normal process in the interaction between the Police CID and the DPP’s office. Files move backwards and forwards, but it is the DPP who makes the final decision on whether to prsecute and what charges to prefer. This is because it is the DPP who ultimately has to prove the case in court.

Secondly, in a majority of borderline cases eg, murder and manslaughter, attempted murder and serious bodily harm, robbery and burglary, rape and indecent assault etc, the DPP will prefer to charge the accused with the graver offence because the actus reus of all these offences are always the same- the duty of the prosecuting attorney then is to prove mens rea or intent.

In a case like this one you are commenting on, I think you have got your understanding of the law totally mixed up. It would be a very negligent DPP who charged this woman with manslaughter and not murder. In a case like this one, it is highly imprable that a car that has stopped infront of a gate, then suddenly picks up speed and crushes a person inside the gate. This is not something that ordinarily happens. Iin fact nobody would believe such a tale. Which means, there is going to be a very heavy burden on the accused to dispel the near certain presumption that she intended to kill or cause grievious bodily harm to the deceased. I once prsocuted two muder cases in the High Court sitting in Lira, which were very sensational.

1st, an itinerant worker was employed by a petrol station to cutt off a brach of a tree that had overgrown and was encroaching on the roof. The man climbed up the tree and with his saw, started cutting off this huge tree branch. By coincidence, a motorist who was filling up passed under the tree and it is at that precise moment that the brach snapped and hit him on the head like a bullet. He died instantly. The man was arrested and charged with murder.

2nd: a 14 year old girl, in a school fight, picked up s huge stone and used great force to hit a similar aged boy on the head, killing him instantly. The boy had been beating up.

Now in both these cases, the DPP instructed me to prefer a charge of murder, which on trial was reduced to manslaughter on grounds of lack of intent/self-defence in the case of the girl (2 years youth custody- and eventually customary compensation according to Lango customs- I think the girl was released from prison after only 3 months). In the the case of the man, the murder charge was dismissed, instead he was convicted of reckless negligence or something like that ( I can’t remember the Uganda Penal Code.

The point I am making is that the best prosecuting tactic is to charge the accused with the graver of the offences that may have been committed and it would be up to the court to make a finding on the facts.

You seem to be reading some form of malfeasance or malpractice in what is in fact a very common procedure or process between the DPP and the Police. Unless you can provide any proof that untoward influence was being used, I do not see anything wrong so far in the trial of this woman.

If you shot someone with a gun in broad daylight and killed him, it would be a very stupid DPP who would charge you with manslaughter rather than murder. Even if the issue of self-defence, mistaken identity etc are raised, I think these are defences that it would be up to the court to deliberate in a trial for murder. This is why I can not understand you when you insist that this woman should be charged with manslaughter rather than muder. Running down people infront of locked gates is surely not a common occurrence in Uganda or anywhere else in the world. In fact I think this woman is going to be put to task to exonerate herslf because her tale is very difficult to swallow to an impartial observer.

George Okello

PS: I last practised criminal law 20 years ago

Museveni’s $50K bribe to US Diasporans while Ugandans at home are grassing

Museveni, has increased his sponsership to UNAA from the current annual package of $20.000 to $100.000 annually. Additonally Brian Kwesiga wasted no time by taking advantage of the Ugandan rulers presence by requestimg him to grace UNAA’s 27th annual convention which will take place in New Orleans, LA next year. Museveni last attentiended UNAA in Seattle, WA in 1994. Museveni also promised to renergize the current diaspora desk which has been under MOFA. Effective immdediatly the diaspora desk will be linked to the presidents office.

Imagine literally spoon feeding a twenty six year old “child”. That is what Museveni is doing to UNAA, spoon feeding the organization yet UNAA by now should actually be in a position to sponsor home based projects instead of depending sponsorship from Uganda to run U.S based UNAA projects, including partying and pocketing some change from the Ugandan Tax payers funding to a corrupt and fraudulent organization.

When i attempted to raise a point as to why UNAA should not get more funding from Uganda, the mic was cut off while some notable Dallas based NRM diehards were doing what was evidently expected of them. They booed me to the pleasure of their boss Museveni.

Joseph Kamugisha

We should void the UNAA constitution because it is illegal under State law

We should void the UNAA constitution because it is illegal under State law. Since the constitution is voidable, we should disband the bodies that were created under the new constitution i,e the Council, the Board of Trustees and the Election Commission.
UNAA is a Massachusetts corporation and like any other Massachusetts corporation, UNAA has to abide by State law (especially Chapter 156B and 180). Under Massachusetts law, UNAA’s current by-law (i.e the 2010 constitution) is illegal.

State law provides that a by-law shall not be repealed or amended, or an additional by-law adopted, unless notice of such proposed action shall have been given at a previous meeting; and such repeal, amendment or adoption shall not take effect until it has been approved by the state secretary as conformable to law.

UNAA violated this provision because UNAA members did not the get legal notice period. The constitution was given to the members at the annual meeting in 2010 and the members were required to vote on it during the same meeting. Under the law, members should have voted on the new constitution at the next meeting in 2011.

In addition, UNAA violated the above section when the constitution became effective without the approval of the secretary of state as required by law. The secretary of state has never approved the new constitution.

State law also provides that changes to the articles (Constitution) have to be approved by vote of two-thirds of its members entitled to vote. In 2010, UNAA’s constitution was approved by about 100 members out of over 1,200 members. i.e in 2010, anyone that paid for the convention was a member. Since the 100 members did not amount to two-thirds of UNAA’s members entitled to vote, the vote was void.

Most importantly, State law also provides that no by-law inconsistent with law shall be made by a corporation. UNAA’s constitution has several provisions that are inconsistent with the law. e.g state law requires that members should approve candidates for Board positions. However, UNAA’s constitution provides that it is the council that approves the Board.
In addition, state law requires that members should have the right to nominate candidates for the Board. However, UNAA’s constitution does not allow members to nominate anyone for Board positions. This power is vested exclusively in the Executive. This is a clear violation of the law.
Another example is expulsion of members. State law requires that members can only be expelled after a vote by members. However, UNAA’s constitution violates this law because it provides UNAA’s Council can vote to expel a member.

I suggest that UNAA members request the Executives to disband the Council, Board of Trustees and the Elections Commission, since all those bodies were created pursuant to provisions of the illegal constitution.
If the Executive refuses to act, state law provides that 10% of the members can request the Executive to call a special meeting (via email?) and let the members vote on these proposals.

In case none of the officers is able and willing to call a special meeting, state law provides that 10% of the members can petition the supreme judicial or superior court to authorize ordinary members to call the special meeting.

Posted by: Joseph Musoke
For a faster response please contact me at 415.789.6427



The main questions in this case are whether this Uwera Nsenga had a motive festered by an on going history of marital conflict, Did she use the vehicle as a means to cause grievous body harm with intent to murder. Did the opportunity to carry out her sordid act present itself on that awful night?

We learn that this was a soured relationship, with verbal threats from Mrs Nsenga to inflict fatal bodily harm to Mr Nsenga. The acceleration of the vehicle in question, indicates that it was an intentional and deliberate action. The action of repeated driving over an unmoving body just seals it for the prosecution.

For those asking how she could have known whether the husband would be the one opening the gate. The answer is simple. The fact that Mr Nsenga habitually opened the gate for the wife, creates the opportunity for the latter to carry-out her plan. We have to flinch with knowledge that this could have been a wrong target, a totally innocent party.

But we have to remember that people intent on crime execution, don’t think rationally and normally. The victim of this criminal act could have been an employee or any other member of the family, and not necessarily the husband. This was a 50/50 gamble that netted the target. Any other outcome of her actions would have been mere collateral damage.

The judge reached his conclusion using scientific knowledge.



I am off to Manchester to attend the Labour Party national Annnual Delegates Conference , the last one before the next General Election. I and many others who were expelled or resigned from the Labour Party when Tony Blair became leader and set on a course of destroying a great party with his so-called New Labour project, are likely to be re-admitted to the party. Tony Blair expelled us because he accused us of being “ultra-leftists”, but in truth we are the people who are the true soul and custodian of the party, and are the only ones who can rescue it from the doldrums. The Labour Party was set up as a socialist party for the working class, Tony Blair tried to change it into a right-wing party competing with the Conservative Party for the same middle ground of politics. His misrule has made it possible for the Conservatives to bounce back into power after they had been driven into perdition by the ruinous, cruel and totally divisive years of misrule and neglect by neo-conservatists grouped around Margaret Thatcher. The Labour Party today faces new challenges, I think the party conference is going to be concerned with what has happened in Scotland and the impact that it will have on the party’s continuing relevance as a party of power. Scotland has always been a bastion of support for the Labour Party, at the moment the party has the most MPs in the Westminster Parliament and can not win national power UK=wide without the support of Scotland because the Conservatives have a natural majority support in England, in the large swathes of rural areas, with Labour mainly confined to the large cities of London, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle etc where poverty and urban decay fosters disenchantment with the modern state and a rejection of right-wing neo-liberal policies pursued by both Tony Blair and David Cameron.

I am going to be taking my daughter along, but the good news is that I have been given a slot of 15 minutes to speak at a fringe meeting organised by Socialist Labour; they have agreed to hear and debate my report (this will not be part of the official delegates deliberations as it is a fringe meeting)


I am very glad to have this opportunity to once again address an internationalist audience, even if if it is only for 15 minutes because tommorrow, I am going to use the occassion to draw world-wide attention to the suffering Museveni is inflicting on Ugandans on a daily basis and the rottenness and corruption of his murderous feral regime. Labour Party Conferences always reserve a slot for international and democcratic struggles in other parts of the world, and in the past I have tried many times to put the issue of Museveni’s murderous rule and tyranny on the agenda of the main conference, but I have always failed to do this because Museveni’s government was in the good books of Tony Blair and any resolution that seemed to be condemning Museveni or drawing attention to the torrent of blood that was flowing out of Uganda was seen as a resolution sponsored by the “ultra-left”.

Please note that all delegates to the Labour Party Conference sponsor themselves, so it is not like in Uganda where NRA delegates have to be “facilitated” by the government to attending their so-called “conferences” or “retreats” at Kyankwanzi.

Thank You,

George Okello,
Hemel Hempstead,

%d bloggers like this: