- Status
A
Ani_Ibi
Guest
White and terminally uncool is irrelevant. These are the leaders which we have elected. We are the people who are witnessing the death of Africa. We are the people (who supposedly) care about our African brothers and sisters.
The cynical media is (as usual) killing the messenger. Instead of doing the intelligent thing which is to use the this world-wide event to raise consciousness about the oppressive dictatorships in Africa which are sucking the lifeblood out of its people, the media is jockeying for position to see who can publish the most destructive, inhumane trash it possibly can. What’s new?
So, question to yall: after Live8, what’s next? The plan, Stan? Don’t just tear down a position; offer a counter position. Men perish who lack vision.
O
OriginalJS
Guest
For whatever reasons, Africans have made some very poor choices in electing their governments. Robert Mugabe may be an anomaly, but none of the other African leaders seem to want to lift a finger to stop him. I did hear that Botswana has erected fences to keep Zimbabweans from slipping into the country, but even Mbeki and Mandela won’t bring strong pressure to bear on Mugabe.
Debt relief may help some, but as long as vicious and corrupt governments are elected by the majorities, the disparities won’t disappear and that is too bad. I fear that any aid money sent will, as in the past, line the pockets of present day Mugabes and Idi Amins.
Debt relief may help some, but as long as vicious and corrupt governments are elected by the majorities, the disparities won’t disappear and that is too bad. I fear that any aid money sent will, as in the past, line the pockets of present day Mugabes and Idi Amins.
C
caroljm36
Guest
Ani Ibi:
That’s their position. Oh, and we must grovel, and empathize, and apologize. Because it’s all our fault. Evil white men exploited people of color…blah blah blah blah BLAH.
They have a position–send more cash. Whatever we sent before, no matter how many billions over the decades, send more because we’re not doing enough. We’re never doing enough.
That’s their position. Oh, and we must grovel, and empathize, and apologize. Because it’s all our fault. Evil white men exploited people of color…blah blah blah blah BLAH.
R
Richardols
Guest
According to Freedom House, the only wholly free and democratic countries in Africa are South Africa, Mali, Senegal, Botswana, and Mauritius.
R
rlg94086
Guest
Ani Ibi:
Seriously, the G8 leaders need to put political pressure on the leaders of the African nations to reform. Money isn’t the answer; it’s only part of the answer. Throwing money at a failed, corrupt system won’t help. You have to fix the system and then fund it.
Perhaps the UN could do something other than pass out condoms.
Regime change? http://forum.catholic.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
Seriously, the G8 leaders need to put political pressure on the leaders of the African nations to reform. Money isn’t the answer; it’s only part of the answer. Throwing money at a failed, corrupt system won’t help. You have to fix the system and then fund it.
Perhaps the UN could do something other than pass out condoms.
A
Ani_Ibi
Guest
What’s your position? Or better still, what’s your solution? What outcome do you want? Why? How do you propose acquiring that outcome?
R
rlg94086
Guest
Ani Ibi:
I gave mine. What’s yours?
A
Ani_Ibi
Guest
Fair question. I was actually challenging another poster. My position is taking form as part of an overall Life proposal.
R
rlg94086
Guest
Ani Ibi:
Too many people to marry
A
Ani_Ibi
Guest
What are the stats, rlg? How many singles do we have in the Church?Too many people to marry
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
Ani Ibi:
"…CATHOLIC Archbishop of Lagos, Anthony Cardinal Olubunmi Okogie has described the debt relief granted Nigeria by the Paris Club of creditors as unnecessary, adding that proceeds arising from the relief will enrich those at the helm of affairs in the country.
He took this position in an interview with Daily Champion weekend during his Canonical visit to Saints Peter and Paul Catholic Church, Isolo, Lagos, just as he warned Nigerian leaders to curtail their greed “otherwise, they will be heading towards destruction.”
Reacting to the $18 billion or 60 per cent debt relief granted Nigeria by the Paris Club, Cardinal Okogie said "the government is not sincere with the populace because the clauses embedded in the debt relief were not disclosed.
“Paris Club can not give 60 per cent debt relief just like that. There must be certain conditions tied to it,” the Bishop added.
According to him, bribery and corruption have eaten deep into the nation’s fabric, pointing out that the only way the debt relief was got would be through lobby…"
allafrica.com/stories/200507050645.html
Well this Archbishop is speaking out apparently:
"…CATHOLIC Archbishop of Lagos, Anthony Cardinal Olubunmi Okogie has described the debt relief granted Nigeria by the Paris Club of creditors as unnecessary, adding that proceeds arising from the relief will enrich those at the helm of affairs in the country.
He took this position in an interview with Daily Champion weekend during his Canonical visit to Saints Peter and Paul Catholic Church, Isolo, Lagos, just as he warned Nigerian leaders to curtail their greed “otherwise, they will be heading towards destruction.”
Reacting to the $18 billion or 60 per cent debt relief granted Nigeria by the Paris Club, Cardinal Okogie said "the government is not sincere with the populace because the clauses embedded in the debt relief were not disclosed.
“Paris Club can not give 60 per cent debt relief just like that. There must be certain conditions tied to it,” the Bishop added.
According to him, bribery and corruption have eaten deep into the nation’s fabric, pointing out that the only way the debt relief was got would be through lobby…"
allafrica.com/stories/200507050645.html
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
And another:
G8 leaders meeting in Scotland should make action by African states against Zimbabwe’s government a precondition for more debt relief and aid, a leading Zimbabwean bishop said on Wednesday.
President Robert Mugabe’s government, already estranged from the West over its seizure of white-owned commercial farms for blacks, attracted more condemnation for its demolition of shanty towns which rights groups say has left 300,000 people homeless.
“The international community has done little to prevent Mugabe’s excesses and it is time to act,” said a report co-authored by Zimbabwean Roman Catholic Archbishop of Bulawayo Pius Ncube, a fierce critic of Mugabe’s government.
alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L06107683.htm
G8 leaders meeting in Scotland should make action by African states against Zimbabwe’s government a precondition for more debt relief and aid, a leading Zimbabwean bishop said on Wednesday.
President Robert Mugabe’s government, already estranged from the West over its seizure of white-owned commercial farms for blacks, attracted more condemnation for its demolition of shanty towns which rights groups say has left 300,000 people homeless.
“The international community has done little to prevent Mugabe’s excesses and it is time to act,” said a report co-authored by Zimbabwean Roman Catholic Archbishop of Bulawayo Pius Ncube, a fierce critic of Mugabe’s government.
alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L06107683.htm
T
trth_skr
Guest
Lucifer’s rock concert is not the answer.
The answer is prayer and the turning of hearts and minds back to Christ the King.
Benedict the XVI should be encouraged to perform the consecration of Russia. Though I believe JPII tried, I sadly do not believe he suceeded in doing it.
Man and man’s way is not going to be the answer. Man and his governments and nations need to bring our Lord back into His rightful place.
Mark
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
The answer is prayer and the turning of hearts and minds back to Christ the King.
Benedict the XVI should be encouraged to perform the consecration of Russia. Though I believe JPII tried, I sadly do not believe he suceeded in doing it.
Man and man’s way is not going to be the answer. Man and his governments and nations need to bring our Lord back into His rightful place.
Mark
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Which is basically what I’ve been saying. Debt relief only benefits the brutal oppressive governments – and more aid means more money for guns, ammunition, and hired thugs to oppress the people even more.
Yes, regime change IS the answer. But it must be done by Africans – not by Europeans or Americans. And it will not be done without bloodshed.
W
wabrams
Guest
vern humphrey:
Why not Europe or America?
A
Ani_Ibi
Guest
vern humphrey:
2005-07-05
Pouring official aid into Africa not the answer
Rory Leishman, London Free Press
Bob Geldof deserves credit for not only promoting public awareness of the grinding poverty that afflicts most of Sub-Saharan Africa, but also pointing out that relatively wealthy people – like most of Canadians – can afford to do more to help the desperately poor peoples of Africa.
Prime Minister Paul Martin vowed last week that his government will do its part, declaring “We’re going to double the amount of aid that we’re going to give to Africa by the year 2008.”
But that statement was somewhat misleading. Finance Minister Ralph Goodale explained in his February budget that the Martin government plans to increase Canadian aid to Africa to about $2 billion in 2008-9, up from $1 billion two years ago in 2003-4.
Is an extra $1 billion in aid to Africa over five years enough? Geldof doesn’t think so. He insists that Canada, the United States and all other industrialized countries should contribute no less than 0.7 per cent of their gross domestic product (GDP) to foreign aid – a target proposed by former prime minister Lester Pearson in 1969.
Canada currently spends about 0.23 per cent of GDP on foreign aid. To meet the Pearson target of 0.7 per cent, the Martin government would have to come up with $6 billion in additional spending on foreign aid over one year.
Is that reasonable? Could a tripling – or quadrupling – of foreign aid eliminate the appalling levels of starvation, sickness and death that plague so many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa? That’s doubtful.
Take the case of Nigeria. According to the World Bank, that North African country has a per capita income of less than $275 a year; an average life expectancy at birth of just 45 years; and a child malnutrition rate of close to 30 per cent. Yet Nigeria is one of the wealthiest oil producers in the world. Last year, it took in $38 billion in oil revenue.
Nonetheless, Nigeria also receives about $314 million a year in foreign aid, including $28 million from Canada. There is no reason to believe that several billion dollars of additional aid would suffice to lift this strife-torn and corruption-ridden country out of poverty.
Ethiopia, the largest recipient of Canadian foreign aid in Africa, is even worse off than Nigeria. Despite having received hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign aid in recent years, it has run up a foreign debt of $1.6 billion.
Six years ago, the government of Canada announced plans to forgive more than $1.16 billion in bad debts owed to Canada by 16 heavily indebted poor countries, including Ethiopia.
Thousands of people in Zimbabwe are starving, while Robert Mugabe builds himself a new presidential palace.
Most of this money was lent at low rates for development projects. Can there be any more graphic illustration of the failure of foreign aid than the inability of recipient countries to pay back these low-interest development loans?
Fifty years ago, Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan were all as impoverished as Nigeria. Yet today, the peoples of those three Asian countries enjoy life expectancies and living standards comparable to those in Canada and Western Europe.
Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan have virtually no natural resources. How is it, then, that they have prospered, while most of the comparatively resource-rich countries of Africa have become progressively more impoverished?
The quality of government is a prime determinant of economic growth. Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan have been blessed with governments that maintain law and order, respect property rights and encourage trade and investment. The great majority of African countries suffer from economically crippling government mismanagement.
Zimbabwe is a case in point: Not so long ago, this country exported food.
Today, due to the corrupt and incompetent rule of the country’s socialist dictator, Robert Mugabe, thousands of people in Zimbabwe are starving, while Mugabe builds himself a new presidential palace.
The sad truth is that much of the billions of dollars in foreign aid that Canada has expended on Africa has been wasted.
Instead of clamouring for more of the same, Canadians would do better to increase their voluntary donations to private charities such as the Canadian Foodgrains Bank or Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders), that have proven records of efficiency in the delivery of life-saving help and development assistance to the poorest and neediest.
canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/London/Rory_Leishman/2005/07/05/1117380.html
2005-07-05
Pouring official aid into Africa not the answer
Rory Leishman, London Free Press
Bob Geldof deserves credit for not only promoting public awareness of the grinding poverty that afflicts most of Sub-Saharan Africa, but also pointing out that relatively wealthy people – like most of Canadians – can afford to do more to help the desperately poor peoples of Africa.
Prime Minister Paul Martin vowed last week that his government will do its part, declaring “We’re going to double the amount of aid that we’re going to give to Africa by the year 2008.”
But that statement was somewhat misleading. Finance Minister Ralph Goodale explained in his February budget that the Martin government plans to increase Canadian aid to Africa to about $2 billion in 2008-9, up from $1 billion two years ago in 2003-4.
Is an extra $1 billion in aid to Africa over five years enough? Geldof doesn’t think so. He insists that Canada, the United States and all other industrialized countries should contribute no less than 0.7 per cent of their gross domestic product (GDP) to foreign aid – a target proposed by former prime minister Lester Pearson in 1969.
Canada currently spends about 0.23 per cent of GDP on foreign aid. To meet the Pearson target of 0.7 per cent, the Martin government would have to come up with $6 billion in additional spending on foreign aid over one year.
Is that reasonable? Could a tripling – or quadrupling – of foreign aid eliminate the appalling levels of starvation, sickness and death that plague so many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa? That’s doubtful.
Take the case of Nigeria. According to the World Bank, that North African country has a per capita income of less than $275 a year; an average life expectancy at birth of just 45 years; and a child malnutrition rate of close to 30 per cent. Yet Nigeria is one of the wealthiest oil producers in the world. Last year, it took in $38 billion in oil revenue.
Nonetheless, Nigeria also receives about $314 million a year in foreign aid, including $28 million from Canada. There is no reason to believe that several billion dollars of additional aid would suffice to lift this strife-torn and corruption-ridden country out of poverty.
Ethiopia, the largest recipient of Canadian foreign aid in Africa, is even worse off than Nigeria. Despite having received hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign aid in recent years, it has run up a foreign debt of $1.6 billion.
Six years ago, the government of Canada announced plans to forgive more than $1.16 billion in bad debts owed to Canada by 16 heavily indebted poor countries, including Ethiopia.
Thousands of people in Zimbabwe are starving, while Robert Mugabe builds himself a new presidential palace.
Most of this money was lent at low rates for development projects. Can there be any more graphic illustration of the failure of foreign aid than the inability of recipient countries to pay back these low-interest development loans?
Fifty years ago, Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan were all as impoverished as Nigeria. Yet today, the peoples of those three Asian countries enjoy life expectancies and living standards comparable to those in Canada and Western Europe.
Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan have virtually no natural resources. How is it, then, that they have prospered, while most of the comparatively resource-rich countries of Africa have become progressively more impoverished?
The quality of government is a prime determinant of economic growth. Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan have been blessed with governments that maintain law and order, respect property rights and encourage trade and investment. The great majority of African countries suffer from economically crippling government mismanagement.
Zimbabwe is a case in point: Not so long ago, this country exported food.
Today, due to the corrupt and incompetent rule of the country’s socialist dictator, Robert Mugabe, thousands of people in Zimbabwe are starving, while Mugabe builds himself a new presidential palace.
The sad truth is that much of the billions of dollars in foreign aid that Canada has expended on Africa has been wasted.
Instead of clamouring for more of the same, Canadians would do better to increase their voluntary donations to private charities such as the Canadian Foodgrains Bank or Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders), that have proven records of efficiency in the delivery of life-saving help and development assistance to the poorest and neediest.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
First of all, you can’t impose democracy on any one – by definition, they have to do it themselves.
Secondly, as outsiders we’d be resented.
Third, how may of your friends and neighbors are you willing to sacrifice in this quest?
W
wabrams
Guest
vern humphrey:
Second, when did the US start caring about that?
Third, absolutely none.
First, we’re doing it in Iraq, why not Africa too?
Second, when did the US start caring about that?
Third, absolutely none.
R
rlg94086
Guest
No softballs please… (Vern, I hope you don’t mind my responding)
First…because Iraq was part of the war on terror and in our national security interest. While it would be good for Africans, it is not for our protection.
Second, we’ve always cared about that.
Third, at least we agree here.
God Bless,
Robert
- Status