Don't confused Hawaii and Kenya-Kenya was a British colony, still part of the British dwindling empire, found in East Africa. New York State is different from Hawaii State,and Kikuyu not Luo are the one mostly associated with Mau Mau, Mr.Trump dig that!!
Trump, who has been putting pressure on Obama lately to make public his long-form birth certificate from Hawaii, decided to set a good example and release his own on Monday. Only problem was, the document that Trump provided to the conservative Website Newsmax wasn't his actual birth certificate, but rather a "hospital certificate of birth." Supporting documents Trump provided shows he ordered the copy of the birth certificate on April 27th, 1999.The birth certificate shows it was issued the next day on 4-28-99. If Trump had already obtained this official document, then why did he offer up his Hospital Birth Certificate first? According to the State Department website, it is not enough to prove citizenship on its own He provided this document. It is from the Jamaica Hospital in Queens, New York and signed by the attending physician and the hospital administrator. However, the document is not enough to prove citizenship or get a passport"
So on Tuesday he obtained and,released some new documents.
The first is baby Donald's Certificate of Birth Registration for New York City and it bears a wealth of information. It shows he was born to Fred C Trump and Mary McLeod on June 14, 1946. It is signed by the same doctor from Jamaica Hospital. It lists Fred as a builder and Mary as a housewife who was born in Scotland. It shows Fred was seven years older than Mary when young Donald was born. It shows that Donald had 3 siblings waiting at home for him at the house Fred and Mary owned on Wareham Road in Queens. And talk about a drive-thru delivery, Mary was sent home just 10 hours after Donald was born. The second document appears to be Trump's official "Certification of Birth" from The City of New York's Vital Records department. It bears his date of birth, his place of birth (Queens), his parents' full names, the registrar's signature and the official seal for The New York City Department of Health.
According to the passport requirements page on the State Department website, Trump's "Certification of Birth" appears to fulfill all of the requirements needed to obtain a passport from the United States. Because no one including Fox who was unable to view and touch the original in person, one can not tell if the official seal is raised. The State Department website states: "Primary evidence of birth in the United States. A person born in the United States generally must submit a birth certificate. The birth certificate must show the full name of the applicant, the applicant's place and date of birth, the full name of the parent(s), and must be signed by the official custodian of birth records, bear the seal of the issuing office, and show a filing date within one year of the date of birth."
According to the State Department website, it is not enough to prove citizenship on its own: "Secondary evidence of birth in the United States. If the applicant cannot submit a birth certificate that meets the requirement of paragraph (a) of this section, he or she must submit secondary evidence sufficient to establish to the satisfaction of the Department that he or she was born in the United States. Secondary evidence includes but is not limited to hospital birth certificates, baptismal certificates, medical and school records, certificates of circumcision, other documentary evidence created shortly after birth but generally not more than 5 years after birth, and/or affidavits of persons having personal knowledge of the facts of the birth." According to the State Department, city, county and state-issued birth certificates all qualify as primary evidence in the pursuit of a passport.
Trump continues to insist the "Certificate of Live Birth" President Obama released in 2008 is not the same thing as his own "birth certificate". In a statement released, Trump says: "A ‘birth certificate' and a ‘certificate of live birth' are in no way the same thing, even though in some cases they use some of the same words. One officially confirms and records a newborn child's identity and details of his or her birth, while the other only confirms that someone reported the birth of a child. Also, a ‘certificate of live birth' is very easy to get because the standards are much lower, while a ‘birth certificate' is only gotten through a long and detailed process wherein identity must be proved beyond any doubt. If you had only a certificate of live birth, you would not be able to get a proper passport from the Post Office or a driver's license from the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Therefore, there is very significant difference between a ‘certificate of live birth' and a "birth certificate" and one should never be confused with the other." Hawaii's Department of Health has said the certificate of live birth is the standard form it issues to obtain a driver's license and passport, and that President Obama's is valid. When Fox asked the State Department if a "Certificate of Live Birth" from Hawaii, like President Obama's, is enough to qualify for a passport, a State Department official offered only this statement: "A certified birth certificate is generally considered primary evidence of U.S. citizenship.
Additional guidance on submitting evidence of U.S. citizenship is available on travel.state.gov/passport. We cannot comment on President Obama's birth certificate or passport records." So-called "birthers" question President Obama's certificate of live birth because it appears to be missing a registrar's signature and an embossed seal. Those who have seen it say both are on the back side. However, like the official seal on Trump's certificate, those not privy to the original can't see the signature or feel the stamp on Obama's either. If one thing is clear, proving you are a naturally-born citizen of the United States isn't so easy.
Here's the full text: Good evening. Tonight, I'd like to update the American people on the international effort that we have led in Libya - what we have done, what we plan to do, and why this matters to us.
I want to begin by paying tribute to our men and women in uniform who, once again, have acted with courage, professionalism and patriotism. They have moved with incredible speed and strength. Because of them and our dedicated diplomats, a coalition has been forged and countless lives have been saved. Meanwhile, as we speak, our troops are supporting our ally Japan, leaving Iraq to its people, stopping the Taliban's momentum in Afghanistan, and going after al Qaeda around the globe.
As Commander-in-Chief, I am grateful to our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and their families, as are all Americans. For generations, the United States of America has played a unique role as an anchor of global security and advocate for human freedom. Mindful of the risks and costs of military action, we are naturally reluctant to use force to solve the world's many challenges. But when our interests and values are at stake, we have a responsibility to act. That is what happened in Libya over the course of these last six weeks.
Libya sits directly between Tunisia and Egypt - two nations that inspired the world when their people rose up to take control of their own destiny. For more than four decades, the Libyan people have been ruled by a tyrant - Moammar Gaddafi. He has denied his people freedom, exploited their wealth, murdered opponents at home and abroad, and terrorized innocent people around the world - including Americans who were killed by Libyan agents. Last month, Gaddafi's grip of fear appeared to give way to the promise of freedom. In cities and towns across the country, Libyans took to the streets to claim their basic human rights. As one Libyan said, "For the first time we finally have hope that our nightmare of 40 years will soon be over." Faced with this opposition, Gaddafi began attacking his people. As President, my immediate concern was the safety of our citizens, so we evacuated our Embassy and all Americans who sought our assistance.
We then took a series of swift steps in a matter of days to answer Gaddafi's aggression. We froze more than $33 billion of the Gaddafi regime's assets. Joining with other nations at the United Nations Security Council, we broadened our sanctions, imposed an arms embargo, and enabled Gaddafi and those around him to be held accountable for their crimes. I made it clear that Gaddafi had lost the confidence of his people and the legitimacy to lead, and I said that he needed to step down from power. In the face of the world's condemnation, Gaddafi chose to escalate his attacks, launching a military campaign against the Libyan people. Innocent people were targeted for killing. Hospitals and ambulances were attacked. Journalists were arrested, sexually assaulted, and killed. Supplies of food and fuel were choked off. The water for hundreds of thousands of people in Misratah was shut off. Cities and towns were shelled, mosques destroyed, and apartment buildings reduced to rubble. Military jets and helicopter gunships were unleashed upon people who had no means to defend themselves against assault from the air. Confronted by this brutal repression and a looming humanitarian crisis, I ordered warships into the Mediterranean. European allies declared their willingness to commit resources to stop the killing.
The Libyan opposition, and the Arab League, appealed to the world to save lives in Libya. At my direction, America led an effort with our allies at the United Nations Security Council to pass an historic Resolution that authorized a No Fly Zone to stop the regime's attacks from the air, and further authorized all necessary measures to protect the Libyan people. Ten days ago, having tried to end the violence without using force, the international community offered Gaddafi a final chance to stop his campaign of killing, or face the consequences. Rather than stand down, his forces continued their advance, bearing down on the city of Benghazi, home to nearly 700,000 men, women and children who sought their freedom from fear. At this point, the United States and the world faced a choice. Gaddafi declared that he would show "no mercy" to his own people. He compared them to rats, and threatened to go door to door to inflict punishment. In the past, we had seen him hang civilians in the streets, and kill over a thousand people in a single day.
Now, we saw regime forces on the outskirts of the city. We knew that if we waited one more day, Benghazi - a city nearly the size of Charlotte - could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world. It was not in our national interest to let that happen. I refused to let that happen. And so nine days ago, after consulting the bipartisan leadership of Congress, I authorized military action to stop the killing and enforce UN Security Council Resolution 1973. We struck regime forces approaching Benghazi to save that city and the people within it. We hit Gaddafi's troops in neighboring Ajdabiya, allowing the opposition to drive them out. We hit his air defenses, which paved the way for a No Fly Zone. We targeted tanks and military assets that had been choking off towns and cities and we cut off much of their source of supply. And tonight, I can report that we have stopped Gaddafi's deadly advance.
In this effort, the United States has not acted alone. Instead, we have been joined by a strong and growing coalition. This includes our closest allies - nations like the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Italy, Spain, Greece, and Turkey - all of whom have fought by our side for decades. And it includes Arab partners like Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, who have chosen to meet their responsibility to defend the Libyan people.
To summarize, then: in just one month, the United States has worked with our international partners to mobilize a broad coalition, secure an international mandate to protect civilians, stop an advancing army, prevent a massacre, and establish a No Fly Zone with our allies and partners. To lend some perspective on how rapidly this military and diplomatic response came together, when people were being brutalized in Bosnia in the 1990s, it took the international community more than a year to intervene with air power to protect civilians.
Moreover, we have accomplished these objectives consistent with the pledge that I made to the American people at the outset of our military operations. I said that America's role would be limited; that we would not put ground troops into Libya; that we would focus our unique capabilities on the front end of the operation, and that we would transfer responsibility to our allies and partners. Tonight, we are fulfilling that pledge.
Our most effective alliance, NATO, has taken command of the enforcement of the arms embargo and No Fly Zone. Last night, NATO decided to take on the additional responsibility of protecting Libyan civilians. This transfer from the United States to NATO will take place on Wednesday. Going forward, the lead in enforcing the No Fly Zone and protecting civilians on the ground will transition to our allies and partners, and I am fully confident that our coalition will keep the pressure on Gaddafi's remaining forces. In that effort, the United States will play a supporting role - including intelligence, logistical support, search and rescue assistance, and capabilities to jam regime communications. Because of this transition to a broader, NATO-based coalition, the risk and cost of this operation - to our military, and to American taxpayers - will be reduced significantly. So for those who doubted our capacity to carry out this operation, I want to be clear: the United States of America has done what we said we would do.
That is not to say that our work is complete. In addition to our NATO responsibilities, we will work with the international community to provide assistance to the people of Libya, who need food for the hungry and medical care for the wounded. We will safeguard the more than $33 billion that was frozen from the Gaddafi regime so that it is available to rebuild Libya. After all, this money does not belong to Gaddafi or to us - it belongs to the Libyan people, and we will make sure they receive it. Tomorrow, Secretary Clinton will go to London, where she will meet with the Libyan opposition and consult with more than thirty nations. These discussions will focus on what kind of political effort is necessary to pressure Gaddafi, while also supporting a transition to the future that the Libyan people deserve. Because while our military mission is narrowly focused on saving lives, we continue to pursue the broader goal of a Libya that belongs not to a dictator, but to its people.
Despite the success of our efforts over the past week, I know that some Americans continue to have questions about our efforts in Libya. Gaddafi has not yet stepped down from power, and until he does, Libya will remain dangerous. Moreover, even after Gaddafi does leave power, forty years of tyranny has left Libya fractured and without strong civil institutions. The transition to a legitimate government that is responsive to the Libyan people will be a difficult task. And while the United States will do our part to help, it will be a task for the international community, and - more importantly - a task for the Libyan people themselves. In fact, much of the debate in Washington has put forward a false choice when it comes to Libya. On the one hand, some question why America should intervene at all - even in limited ways - in this distant land. They argue that there are many places in the world where innocent civilians face brutal violence at the hands of their government, and America should not be expected to police the world, particularly when we have so many pressing concerns here at home.
It is true that America cannot use our military wherever repression occurs. And given the costs and risks of intervention, we must always measure our interests against the need for action. But that cannot be an argument for never acting on behalf of what's right. In this particular country - Libya; at this particular moment, we were faced with the prospect of violence on a horrific scale. We had a unique ability to stop that violence: an international mandate for action, a broad coalition prepared to join us, the support of Arab countries, and a plea for help from the Libyan people themselves. We also had the ability to stop Gaddafi's forces in their tracks without putting American troops on the ground.
To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and - more profoundly - our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as President, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.
Moreover, America has an important strategic interest in preventing Gaddafi from overrunning those who oppose him. A massacre would have driven thousands of additional refugees across Libya's borders, putting enormous strains on the peaceful - yet fragile - transitions in Egypt and Tunisia. The democratic impulses that are dawning across the region would be eclipsed by the darkest form of dictatorship, as repressive leaders concluded that violence is the best strategy to cling to power. The writ of the UN Security Council would have been shown to be little more than empty words, crippling its future credibility to uphold global peace and security. So while I will never minimize the costs involved in military action, I am convinced that a failure to act in Libya would have carried a far greater price for America.
Now, just as there are those who have argued against intervention in Libya, there are others who have suggested that we broaden our military mission beyond the task of protecting the Libyan people, and do whatever it takes to bring down Gaddafi and usher in a new government. Of course, there is no question that Libya - and the world - will be better off with Gaddafi out of power. I, along with many other world leaders, have embraced that goal, and will actively pursue it through non-military means. But broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.
The task that I assigned our forces - to protect the Libyan people from immediate danger, and to establish a No Fly Zone - carries with it a UN mandate and international support. It is also what the Libyan opposition asked us to do. If we tried to overthrow Gaddafi by force, our coalition would splinter. We would likely have to put U.S. troops on the ground, or risk killing many civilians from the air. The dangers faced by our men and women in uniform would be far greater. So would the costs, and our share of the responsibility for what comes next. To be blunt, we went down that road in Iraq. Thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of our troops and the determination of our diplomats, we are hopeful about Iraq's future. But regime change there took eight years, thousands of American and Iraqi lives, and nearly a trillion dollars. That is not something we can afford to repeat in Libya.
As the bulk of our military effort ratchets down, what we can do - and will do - is support the aspirations of the Libyan people. We have intervened to stop a massacre, and we will work with our allies and partners as they're in the lead to maintain the safety of civilians. We will deny the regime arms, cut off its supply of cash, assist the opposition, and work with other nations to hasten the day when Gaddafi leaves power. It may not happen overnight, as a badly weakened Gaddafi tries desperately to hang on to power. But it should be clear to those around Gadaffi, and to every Libyan, that history is not on his side. With the time and space that we have provided for the Libyan people, they will be able to determine their own destiny, and that is how it should be. Let me close by addressing what this action says about the use of America's military power, and America's broader leadership in the world, under my presidency.
As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than keeping this country safe. And no decision weighs on me more than when to deploy our men and women in uniform. I have made it clear that I will never hesitate to use our military swiftly, decisively, and unilaterally when necessary to defend our people, our homeland, our allies, and our core interests. That is why we are going after al Qaeda wherever they seek a foothold. That is why we continue to fight in Afghanistan, even as we have ended our combat mission in Iraq and removed more than 100,000 troops from that country.
There will be times, though, when our safety is not directly threatened, but our interests and values are. Sometimes, the course of history poses challenges that threaten our common humanity and common security - responding to natural disasters, for example; or preventing genocide and keeping the peace; ensuring regional security, and maintaining the flow of commerce. These may not be America's problems alone, but they are important to us, and they are problems worth solving. And in these circumstances, we know that the United States, as the world's most powerful nation, will often be called upon to help. In such cases, we should not be afraid to act - but the burden of action should not be America's alone. As we have in Libya, our task is instead to mobilize the international community for collective action. Because contrary to the claims of some, American leadership is not simply a matter of going it alone and bearing all of the burden ourselves. Real leadership creates the conditions and coalitions for others to step up as well; to work with allies and partners so that they bear their share of the burden and pay their share of the costs; and to see that the principles of justice and human dignity are upheld by all.
That's the kind of leadership we have shown in Libya. Of course, even when we act as part of a coalition, the risks of any military action will be high. Those risks were realized when one of our planes malfunctioned over Libya. Yet when one of our airmen parachuted to the ground, in a country whose leader has so often demonized the United States - in a region that has such a difficult history with our country - this American did not find enemies. Instead, he was met by people who embraced him. One young Libyan who came to his aid said, "We are your friends. We are so grateful to these men who are protecting the skies." This voice is just one of many in a region where a new generation is refusing to be denied their rights and opportunities any longer. Yes, this change will make the world more complicated for a time. Progress will be uneven, and change will come differently in different countries.
There are places, like Egypt, where this change will inspire us and raise our hopes. And there will be places, like Iran, where change is fiercely suppressed. The dark forces of civil conflict and sectarian war will have to be averted, and difficult political and economic concerns addressed. The United States will not be able to dictate the pace and scope of this change. Only the people of the region can do that. But we can make a difference. I believe that this movement of change cannot be turned back, and that we must stand alongside those who believe in the same core principles that have guided us through many storms: our opposition to violence directed against one's own citizens; our support for a set of universal rights, including the freedom for people to express themselves and choose their leaders; our support for governments that are ultimately responsive to the aspirations of the people. Born, as we are, out of a revolution by those who longed to be free, we welcome the fact that history is on the move in the Middle East and North Africa, and that young people are leading the way. Because wherever people long to be free, they will find a friend in the United States. Ultimately, it is that faith - those ideals - that are the true measure of American leadership. My fellow Americans, I know that at a time of upheaval overseas - when the news is filled with conflict and change - it can be tempting to turn away from the world. And as I have said before, our strength abroad is anchored in our strength at home.
That must always be our North Star - the ability of our people to reach their potential, to make wise choices with our resources, to enlarge the prosperity that serves as a wellspring of our power, and to live the values that we hold so dear. But let us also remember that for generations, we have done the hard work of protecting our own people, as well as millions around the globe. We have done so because we know that our own future is safer and brighter if more of mankind can live with the bright light of freedom and dignity. Tonight, let us give thanks for the Americans who are serving through these trying times, and the coalition that is carrying our effort forward; and let us look to the future with confidence and hope not only for our own country, but for all those yearning for freedom around the world. Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America. ----------------------------------------------- USE OF MULTINATIONAL FORCES-eg CANADIAN,NATO - BRITISH AND OTHERS
Donald Trump Join the long line of birthers who believe that Hawaii is not part of United state!! And that Preident is not a US citizen.
Almost since the day Barack Obama announced his run for president around 2008, a group of people who are known as birther developed around the idea that President Obama is in fact wasn't born in the United States, but was a "Kenyan." Boehner and McConnell were all quiet and scared to confront the birthers!! The "birthers." continued to push the ridiculous idea that President Obama wasn't born in the US, and is in fact not qualified to be president. Even though the evidence of his birth in Hawaii is overwhelming:
• His certification of live birth from the state of Hawaii has been available on the Internet since 2008 • Both of Honolulu's major news papers published accounts of his birth at the time • Hawaiian officials have personally verified that his birth certificate is on file and valid.
The idea was so preposterous that it seemed destined to remain confined to the lunatic fringe. After all, there was more than enough proof that Obama was born in Hawaii -- including official state documentation, and birth announcements in both of
Honolulu's newspapers at the time.
Today most of the Republican base and among those who voted Republican in 2010, 64% said it was not clear Obama was born in the US (source: PDF) • Among those who watch Fox News on a daily basis, 63% said it was not clear (source: PDF) • At least a dozen members of the House GOP caucus reportedly believe this as well In short, in order to believe that President Obama was not born in America, you have to believe that all these documents are frauds, that all these officials are lying, and that somehow somebody invented a time machine to go back and place these birth announcements. And now Donald Trump has joined them, and is positioning himself as "King of the birthers" See it for yourself in the video below:
When Muammar Gaddafi came to power in 1969, I was a Third Year university student at Dar-es-Salaam. We welcomed him because he was in the tradition of Col. Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt, a nationalist and pan-Arabist.Soon, however, Uganda and the rest of the Black Africa started to experience problems with Col. Gaddafi:
1. Idi Amin came to power with the support of Britain and Israel because they thought he was uneducated and easy to manipulate. Amin, however, turned against his sponsors when they refused to sell him guns to fight Tanzania. Unfortunately, Gaddafi, without getting enough information about Uganda, jumped in to support Idi Amin. This was because Amin was a ‘Moslem’ and Uganda was a ‘Moslem country’ where Moslems were being ‘oppressed’ by Christians. Amin killed a lot of people extra-judicially and Gaddafi was identified with these mistakes. In 1972 and 1979, Gaddafi sent Libyan troops to defend Idi Amin when we attacked him. I remember a Libyan Tupolev 22 bomber trying to bomb us in Mbarara in 1979. The bomb ended up in Nyarubanga because the pilots were so scared that they could not come close to bomb properly. We had already shot-down many Amin MIGs using surface-to-air missiles. The Tanzanian brothers and sisters were doing much of this fighting. Many Libyan militias were captured and repatriated to Libya by Tanzania. This was a big mistake by Gaddafi and a direct aggression against the people of Uganda and East Africa.
2. The second big mistake by Gaddafi was his position vis-à-vis the African Union (AU) Continental Government “now”. Since 1999, he has been pushing this position. Black people are always polite. They, normally, do not want to offend other people. This is called: obufura in Runyankore, mwolo in Luo – handling, especially strangers, with care and respect. It seems some of the non-African cultures do not have ‘obufura’. You can witness a person talking to a mature person as if he/she is talking to a kindergarten child. “You should do this; you should do that; etc.” We tried to politely point out to Col. Gaddafi that this was difficult in the short and medium term. We should, instead, aim at the Economic Community of Africa and, where possible, also aim at Regional Federations. Col. Gaddafi would not relent. He would not respect the rules of the AU. Something that has been covered by previous meetings would be resurrected by Gaddafi. He would ‘overrule’ a decision taken by all other African heads of state. Some of us were forced to come out and oppose his wrong position and, working with others, we repeatedly defeated his illogical position.
3. The third mistake has been the tendency by Col. Gaddafi to interfere in the internal affairs of many African countries, using the little money Libya has compared to those countries. One blatant example was his involvement with cultural leaders of Black Africa – kings, chiefs, etc. Since the political leaders of Africa had refused to back his project of an African Government, Gaddafi, incredibly, thought that he could by-pass them and work with these kings to implement his wishes. I warned Gaddafi in Addis Ababa that action would be taken against any Ugandan king that involved himself in politics because it was against our Constitution. I moved a motion in Addis Ababa to expunge from the records of the AU all references to kings (cultural leaders) who had made speeches in our forum because they had been invited there illegally by Col. Gaddafi. Brighter side
4. The fourth big mistake was by most of the Arab leaders, including Gaddafi to some extent. This was in connection with the long suffering people of Southern Sudan. Many of the Arab leaders either supported or ignored the suffering of the Black people in that country. This unfairness always created tension and friction between us and the Arabs, including Gaddafi to some extent. However, I must salute Col Gaddafi and President Hosni Mubarak for travelling to Khartoum, just before the referendum in Sudan, and advised the Sudanese President to respect the results of that exercise.
5. Sometimes Gaddafi and other Middle Eastern radicals do not distance themselves sufficiently from terrorism even when they are fighting for a just cause. Terrorism is the use of indiscriminate violence – not distinguishing between military and non-military targets. The Middle East radicals, quite different from the revolutionaries of Black Africa, seem to say that any means is acceptable as long as you are fighting the enemy. That is why they hijack planes, use assassinations, plant bombs in bars, etc. Why bomb bars? People who go to bars are normally merry-makers, not politically minded people. We were together with the Arabs in the anti-colonial struggle. The Black African liberation movements, however, developed differently from the Arab ones. Where we used arms, we fought soldiers or sabotaged infrastructure but never targeted non-combatants. These indiscriminate methods tend to isolate the struggles of the Middle East and the Arab world. It would be good if the radicals in these areas could streamline their work methods in this area of using violence indiscriminately.
Citizen of Gulu, Northern Uganda and the world at large are experiencing grief following the death of two of their most prolific personalities on Thursday. Gulu born former Uganda Cranes and current Express FC Coach David Otti died in the early hours of Thursday afternoon at case Medical Center in Kampala, following a sustained battle with diabetes. David Otti, was one of the most decorated persons in Ugandan football he was 71. Otti is best remembered as one of the most successful coaches in Ugandan football and led giants Express, SC Villa and KCC FC to multiple titles in a career that dates back to the 1960s when he played for Bitumastic FC and the Uganda Cranes.
Otti has coached Express, SC Villa and Kampala City Council whom he led to several top trophies. He also served as Uganda Cranes coach when the national teams qualified for the Africa Cup of Nation in Cairo (1974) and Ethiopia (1976). He briefly had short coaching spells in Somalia and Rwanda.
Otti was also a former general secretary of the National Council of Sports and at the time of his death coached Express FC. The Minister of Sports, Charles Bakabulindi expressed sadness at Otti’s death today and said Uganda’s has lost one of its veteran coaches and most noticeable soccer personalities. Many people say though he was very knowledgeable about sports in the country, he was humble and respectful with his life. David Otti and Peter Okee (RIP) are the men most would like to emulate. The duo not only led the Cranes to regional glory in the seventies, but also followed up with appearances on the continental stage. Otti, who had featured as a midfielder in the continental finals in the sixties, was the man in charge before that golden performance when Okee led Uganda to the 1978 final. Uganda has since won eight CECAFA titles though a slot in the continent’s top tournament remains elusive.
Those were the days of Peter Okee, Pady Okech, Ddibya, Ouma, Massajage and many more whose mantle the gang of Omondi, Tom Lwanga, Nsereko, Mubiru Tank.
He extended his skill across the region to work at Kenyan side Gor Mahia (1981-83), Somalia’s Mogadishu Municipal Council (1987-1990) and Rwanda’s outfit APR (1995-96) plus serving as National Council of Sports (NCS) general secretary.
It’s at Express where Otti is revered most having brought the club their first league title in almost two decades back in 1993. He also won three Uganda Cup titles while there. The former Ugandan international was also in charge of the Ugandan teams that qualified for the Africa Cup of Nations in Cairo (1974) and Ethiopia (1976). The philosophical Otti, who also deputised coach Bobby Williamson in the last futile Nations Cup campaign, was never lost on hope.
The former Ugandan international footbal coach, was also in charge of the Ugandan teams that qualified for the Africa Cup of Nations in Cairo (1974) and Ethiopia (1976). The philosophical Otti, who also deputised coach Bobby Williamson in the last futile Nations Cup campaign, was never lost on hope. “We can remember yesterday but for tomorrow, we only hope,” he explained his feelings after the amputation last year. Indeed, hope is his legend continues.
Paying tributes ------------------- Many credit Otti for having discovered Philip Omondi and Magid Musisi, arguably the best two players this country has ever known.
Tom Lwanga, team manager Simba FC: Otti was a different coach. He had love and care for his players. He is one person who never blamed anyone when he commits a mistake. Football has lost a philosopher and may his soul rest in peace.
Matia Lule, head coach KCC FC: David has been like a parent. He taught me very many things in football. I looked at him beyond being a father to a grandfather. I thank God for his life. He made me what l am today.
Jimmy Ssemugabi, Fifa instructor: He has been like a brother. We met in 1962 and we were very tight. We used to play in the same positions, in defence and midfield. I thank God that l got a chance to train him in Coffee SC in the 70’s until he left. Nothing l can say except thank God for his life. Muhamood Kateregga, Team manager Express FC: I referred to him as the godfather of football and teacher. He built me and coached me when l was in the youth side - U20. At Express, he wasn’t after money but teaching football which is not the case today.
Hassan Mutasa, Otti’s best friend: I knew much about him but what l can say is that; l met Otti when he had just come out from school in Gulu. We used to share the same house and play football together. Football in Uganda has lost a true coach and an administrator.
Sam Ssimbwa, head coach Express FC: He was a mentor and used to guide me on different issues off and on the pitch. The country has lost a lot. He was an open-minded man. As someone who worked with him, Otti was old but had the idea of football. I will miss him and may his soul rest in peace.
David Obua, Cranes player: I am so gutted, so gutted! I don’t know what to say! It hurts. It is just like when my dad passed away. I shed so many tears.
Uganda will remember Otti in the lining up alongside the likes of, Peter Okee, Polly Ouma, Hassan Mutaasa, Alex Oundo, John Kaddu, Samuel Kawadwa plus the fantastic goal-keeping pair of George Bukenya and Patrick Nathan!!Last but not least David Otti was the real pride of the North when it come to the football!! God has decided that it is time to leave without bidding goodbye!! ACHOLI AND THE WORLD AT LARGE WILL MISS YOU!!
Resident Commissioner for Gulu District, in Northern Uganda, Col. Walter Ochora, died at International Hospital Kampala on Thursday, as a result of a lung condition and respiratory problems, explained Dr. Ian Clarke.
According to the President General of Democratic Party (DP) Norbert Mao, “Col. Walter Ochora was among the few people in the National Resistance Movement with a heart for peace, development and unity whose administrative skills would be greatly missed.” Mao also lamented that Ochora has died at the time ..."when the country wanted him most... he was undoubtedly one of the country’s heavyweights."concluded Mao.
COL. Walter Ochora Odoch was born on February 3, 1957. He went to St. Joseph Layibi College where he studied from senior and completed six in 1972.
After secondary education he joined Munduli national army leadership school in Tanzania in 1981, from where he graduated as a second lieutenant.
He served in the UNLA from 1982 to 1985 under Col. Eric Odwar as a senior commander. Ochora announced the fall of the Milton Obote II government in 1985 after the troops loyal to Tito Okello and Bazilio Okello captured the city. He served under Tito Okello Lutwa’s government as senior commander from 1985-1986.
Ochora was one of the senior army officers who commanded a rebel UPDA brigade together with Odong Latek in 1986. A year later in 1987 he was a key figure in Acholi peace talks which resulted in the signing of the peace agreement between NRA and the UPDA.
Ochora was later absorbed into the NRA and was appointed a brigade commander. He was involved in the operations to pacify northern Uganda, Teso, Mbarara and Kasese in western Uganda.
In 1996 he was elected Gulu district chairman until 2006 when he was defeated by DP’s Norbert Mao. He was then appointed Gulu RDC, until 2010 to seek re-election as Gulu LC5 chairman but was defeated by FDC’s Martin Ojara Mapenduzi.
Ochora is among Acholi leaders (religious and cultural) who played a cardinal role in the process of restoring peace in the region.
He was part of the team that met LRA leader Joseph Kony in the jungles of Garamba in the DR Congo in pursuance of peace. He retired from the army four years ago after serving for 25 years. Recently he graduated with a degree in development studies at Gulu University.
Two weeks ago after his defeat in the Gulu district race, Ochora said he would retire from politics. He convened a press conference at his home and said he had wanted to serve the people of Gulu this time for the last term, but failed.
“I will not continue with politics now. I had wanted to serve for one more last term and retire from politics, but I failed. I want to concentrate on studying for my masters degree and commercial farming among other private projects. I will only accept presidential appointments within the country,” he said.
Ochora’s favourite lifetime story was of the 1985 events when he served as president for three days after the overthrow of Obote II. He said the top commanders left him stranded with power. He was writing a book about this.
own on Monday. Only problem was, the document that Trump provided to the conservative Website Newsmax wasn't his actual birth certificate, but rather a "hospital certificate of birth." Supporting documents Trump provided shows he ordered the copy of the birth certificate on April 27th, 1999.The birth certificate shows it was issued the next day o
n 4-28-99. If Trump had already obtained this official document, then why did he offer up his Hospital Birth Certificate first? According to the State Department website, it is not enough to prove citizenship on its own He provided this document. It is from the Jamaica Hospital in Queens, New York and signed by the attending physician and the hospital administrator. However, the document is not enough to prove citizenship or get a passport" 
own on Monday. Only problem was, the document that Trump provided to the conservative Website Newsmax wasn't his actual birth certificate, but rather a "hospital certificate of birth." Supporting documents Trump provided shows he ordered the copy of the birth certificate on April 27th, 1999.The birth certificate shows it was issued the next day o
n 4-28-99. If Trump had already obtained this official document, then why did he offer up his Hospital Birth Certificate first? According to the State Department website, it is not enough to prove citizenship on its own He provided this document. It is from the Jamaica Hospital in Queens, New York and signed by the attending physician and the hospital administrator. However, the document is not enough to prove citizenship or get a passport" 
Therefore, there is very significant difference between a ‘certificate of live birth' and a "birth certificate" a
nd one should never be confused with the other." Hawaii's Department of Health has said the certificate of live birth is the standard form it issues to obtain a driver's license and passport, and that President Obama's is valid. When Fox asked the State Department if a "Certificate of Live Birth" from Hawaii, like President Obama's, is enough to qualify for a passport, a State Department official offered only this statement: "A certified birth certificate is generally considered primary evidence of U.S. citizenship. 
