Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Pope Continues to Degrade Papacy via Association with Counterfeit Israel

The Pope's moral authority is plummeting to the level of counterfeit Israel's:

Pope Benedict XVI Assures ADL He Will Continue to Raise His Voice Against Anti-Semitism

New York, NY, November 3, 2010 … In an audience at the Vatican, Pope Benedict XVI today assured top leaders of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) that he would continue to raise his voice against anti-Semitism and attempts to isolate the state of Israel ...

Mr. Foxman ... asked the pontiff to use the Church's moral authority to help prevent Israel from being made a pariah by its enemies. "Please do not permit the world to isolate Israel," Mr. Foxman said, to which Pope Benedict replied, "I will be there" ...

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/5896_96.htm

"Israel" is a pariah due to its actions. Papal P.R. can't cover that up.

also see:

Survey: Israel worst brand name in the world

"Israel" Hopes Papal Visit Will Help Polish International Image In Wake of Gaza Massacre

Palestinian Christians urge Pope to call off May visit to Israel

Will Benedict's "Pilgrimage" Boost "Israel's" Image or Destroy His Own?

On 6 December, IFAD will release the Rural Poverty Report 2011: Meet the lead author, Edward Heinemann

On Monday 6, December during an international conference on food security at Chatham House in London, IFAD will launch the Rural Poverty Report 2011: New realities, new challenges: new opportunities for tomorrow’s generation.
The Rural Poverty Report 2011 is a comprehensive resource for policymakers and practitioners, especially those in developing countries.  The report provides latest estimates on poverty rates in rural areas of developing countries, as well as poverty trends in different regions. It has new information on how many people move in and out of poverty over time, as well as first-hand accounts from poor rural people on the challenges they face in their everyday lives.

RPR 2011 photo essay
The report looks at who poor rural people are, what they do and how their livelihoods are changing.  It explores the challenges that make it so difficult for rural people to overcome poverty, and identifies the opportunities and pathways that could lead towards greater prosperity for them and their communities.  And it highlights key global challenges such as the need to double agriculture output and increase food production by 70 per cent to feed 9 billion people in 2050.

It also highlights the policies and actions that governments and development practitioners can take to support the efforts of rural people themselves, both today and in the years to come.

Writing the report: the back story
Many colleagues were involved at different stages of the report’s preparation. You can find out more about these great people in the report’s acknowledgements, and there are many more who worked behind the scenes. At the end of the day, it ended up being an “all-hands-on-deck” exercise.

Having said that, the report would not have seen the light of the day if were not for Edward Heinemann and Bettina Prato.

Some 10 months ago, Ed, was asked to lead this process and finalize the report. For months, he worked around the clock and hardly left his office. I remember sometime in the summer, not having seen Ed around for weeks, I went up to his office to check on him. I knocked on his door and put in my head and I found an unshaven Ed typing furiously. I said: “Hi Ed, have not seen you around for some time, just came up to see how you were doing”.

Ed smiled and said he was fine. Closing the door, I thought to myself, “I guess he is so busy that he did not have time to shave” and I almost asked him, “Ed, why have not you shaved?”, but thought it was better not to do so.

There are many things Ed has learnt thanks to the Rural Poverty Report process and undoubtedly many experiences and conversations that will stay with him for ever. There is one other thing that, for the time being, seems to have stayed with him – and that is his unshaven look, which has now transformed to a well-groomed beard.

With six days to go to the big day, yesterday I asked Ed to share his state of mind about the launch. Here is what he had to say.

Edward Heinemann – the Rural Poverty Report lead author’s state of mind
“Back in July, when I gave in what I thought was the final draft of the Rural Poverty Report, my idea was that I would be able to wash my hands of it, do something else for a few months, and then re-engage once we had the launch presentations lined up. I got that completely wrong. From September on I spent days, weeks, months looking over galley proofs – a term I didn’t even know three months ago – til the words ran into each other; I rewrote briefs, prepared Q&As, drafted summaries of summaries and reviewed key messages. I looked over the text 273 times, and each time I did I found things that could have been said better, that should have been said differently, or that simply shouldn’t have been said at all. There were corrections and there were corrections to corrections. It was miserable. 
In my worst nightmares, someone somewhere dreams up a question that leaves me gasping for air like a suffocating goldfish.
Now, with a week to go to the launch, I’m looking forward to it, of course. I tell myself it will be fun. I do know that it will be worthwhile, because I am confident that the report will help us and our partners make a real difference in the lives of the poor rural people.”  


Visit the Rural Poverty Report 2011 website. Make sure you meet the women and men from rural areas whose thoughts and perspectives were influential in the preparation of the Rural Poverty Report 2011.Read testimonies |  Watch the video testimonials

Find out more about the report and join the virtual chats: Follow #rpr2011

  • On 6 December from 9:30 to 11:30 GMT, IFAD’s social reporting team will report live from the Chatham House launch event. Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and on this blog. Follow #rpr2011
  • On 9 and 10 December from 9:00 to 10:00 GMT and 14:00 to 15:00 GMT, Ed and Bettina will host a virtual chat on Facebook and Twitter. Please send your questions and comments.  Follow rpr2011
  • On 17 December from 9:00 to 11:00 GMT, IFAD’s social reporting team will report live from the Rome launch event. Follow us on TwitterFacebook and on this blog.  Follow #rpr2011
Looking forward to seeing you on line.




The Powerful Results of the Global Gathering of Women Pastoralists

By IFAD Reporters: Mattia, Antonella, Silvia, Judith, Soma and Luisa

The Global Gathering has come to an end. Over five intense days, there was rich discussion and experience sharing, as well as some important decisions, not to mention unexpected difficulties but the enthusiasm never wavered…

In what was supposed to be the dry season, but a series of unseasonal downpours (climate change in action?!) enlivened the programme and in the true spirit of pastoral adaptability to unpredictable environments, the organizers managed to move 200 people from Mera Village to a safer place in a matter of hours and with good mood.


Despite all this, and intense sessions during the days, the Gathering participants still could not resist animating the misty night with songs and dances making even more unique this event.

On the first two days, the participants organized themselves into working groups to discuss thematic areas relevant to them, including natural resource management, conflict management, climate change, women’s health, communication and media, traditional governance, education and human rights, and - last but not least - advocacy and the role of men in the empowerment of pastoral women. They identified common challenges and their vision for the future.

It was particularly interesting to hear the ‘men’s group’ discussing the challenges faced by women. “They work more than us”. they admitted, and “women empowerment has to start in the families”, so they outlined limitations faced within their own societies, from owning property to participating in decision-making processes. The relative lack of free time of women was also recognized a possible constraint in their productive potential. In other words, if women had more time they could engage in income generating activities such as handicraft production and marketing. Early marriage and inability to own land were identified as two further barriers to women’s empowerment – although one group member felt that communal rather than individual land ownership was more empowering for women. Lastly, the group acknowledged that domestic violence took place and actions are needed to face this bad phenomenon. This group agreed that first steps should be taken at household level, and that they themselves would try to share the workload more equally. They hoped that it would also give women the time and energy to start to take part in decision-making processes outside the home. They would give their wives greater voice in deciding on domestic issues including on financial issues, and their girls an education - and try to sensitize men and women about the issue of domestic violence.

Despite the many challenges faced by women, they are immensely resourceful in finding ways to meet the household’s basic needs, often ahead of their own. This important role played by pastoral women is only marginally recognized. Increasing awareness of women’s concerns and valuing their unique inputs is a step towards strengthening their role in pastoral communities, and reducing their vulnerability to external shocks.

Another working group looked at how to add value to their products and improve access to markets as a crucial step towards a sustainable economic empowerment of pastoral women. In Mongolia, they identified lack of quality control to ensure consistency of production, lack of storage capacity of raw materials, insufficient and out-of-date technical equipment and lack of access to international markets as key constraints. Added to this there are practical difficulties associated with nomadic tribes, with whom it is much harder to communicate. This group identified the possibility of setting up a well-publicized central support unit, to which pastoral women and their communities would have access. The functions of such a unit would include quality control, storage of raw materials to ensure year-round capacity to respond to orders, training, common packaging and technical equipment, and sustainability could be ensured by asking a small contribution from users.

Then the attention was focused on action planning and at the end resulted in the ‘Mera Declaration of the Global Gathering of Women Pastoralits”, a milestone call to action by pastoral women and men. Drafted over intense hours of debate by geographical representatives mandated by their groups to represent them, the historic declaration called for greater recognition of pastoralism as a sustainable and valuable way of life and for specific policy support.

This experience has come to an end, but there is a lot that we will keep with us: from the smile of the organizer, Lalji and the energy of his people that never waned even in difficult circumstances, to the work of all the volunteers and above all to the pastoral women who with their warmth and commitment made this event really unique!


Mera Declaration of the Global Gathering of Women Pastoralists


We, the women pastoralists gathered in Mera, India, from November 21-26, 2010, representing 32 countries, have met to strengthen alliances and forward practical solutions to issues that affect us.

We are part of a world-wide community of pastoralist peoples that is 300 million strong. We pledge that we will continue to live in a way that is environmentally sustainable and protects biodiversity and common resources for generations to come. We will continue to network and share our best practices and lessons learned to build capacity amongst ourselves and the global community.

We experience firsthand the leading edge of climate change and its associated problems, and we have much to share with the world about adaptation, mitigation and living sustainably on planet earth. Recently, pastoralists have been increasingly vocal at the international level but, as women, our voices have yet to be fully heard. We have unique and equally valuable contributions to make to our own communities and the global community.

We experience firsthand the leading edge of climate change and its associated problems, and we have much to share with the world about adaptation, mitigation and living sustainably on planet earth. Recently, pastoralists have been increasingly vocal at the international level but, as women, our voices have yet to be fully heard. We have unique and equally valuable contributions to make to our own communities and the global community.

We will work with men to build strong and equitable pastoralist societies and we will contribute to greater social equality within our families, our communities, our countries and around the world.

We present this declaration as a guiding political document to inform and support the development of pastoralist policies.

We call on governments, governing agencies of the United Nations, other relevant international and regional organizations, research institutes and our own customary leaders to support us and to:

1.RECOGNISE the essential role of pastoralists in global environmental sustainability, including the conservation of biodiversity, mitigation of climate change and combating desertification.

2.ENSURE the equal rights of pastoralist women and recognize their key role in society. This includes the recognition of the work of women pastoralists as a valid profession and as a fundamental component of pastoralism.

3.RECOGNISE pastoralist mobility as a fundamental right.

4.ENSURE and defend pastoral access to resources, including our traditional grazing lands.

5.PROTECT the rights of pastoralists and provide security in nomadic areas including the enforcement of laws that guarantee the safety of women.

6.RECOGNISE pastoralists who identify as indigenous and respect the UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights.

7.MONITOR the development and implementation of policies affecting and protecting pastoralists.

8.SUPPORT the development of an international organization in charge of considering complaints about violations of pastoralist rights. This organization needs the ability to hold countries accountable and should include pastoralist women as members.

9.ADAPT existing legislation to take into account the specificities of pastoralist ways of life and differentiate nomadic and transhumant pastoralism from intensive livestock production.

10.PROMOTE regional policies and treaties that take into account trans-border pastoralism and respect traditional grazing territories and migratory patterns. These are to be negotiated in consultation with pastoralist women.

11.DEVELOP specific policies that promote the sustainability and welfare of pastoral ways of life and the ecosystems we rely on for survival. The policy-making process must include meaningful participation, and consultation, with pastoralist women.

12.DEVELOP legislation that restricts development that harms or threatens pastoralist livelihoods.

13.ALLOW year-round access to grazing lands, including some lands that are currently within wild life preserves and conservation areas. These grazing spaces are to be established in consultation with pastoralist women.

14.PROMOTE and recognize Indigenous Community Conservation Areas (ICCAs).

15.ENSURE proportionate representation of pastoralist women in all levels of governance.

16.RESPECT the right of pastoralist women to education, both formal and informal, and including secondary education. Provide support to shift perceptions around the full educational needs of girls.

17.DEVELOP accessible and appropriate programmes for pastoralist children to access education. Special emphasis is to be given to pastoralist girl children. These are to be developed in consultation with pastoralist women.

18.DEVELOP mobile facilities that respect pastoralist realities and are in line with the needs of pastoralist women.

19.DEVELOP and implement programmes that support women’s health in pastoralist communities. Information and training on health, particularly reproductive health, should be given priority.

20.CREATE and support programmes that promote the economic development and diversify economic opportunities for pastoralist women, including micro-credit financing. These programmes must be developed in consultation with pastoralist women.

21.SUPPORT pastoral women through capacity building, including direct access to markets and training to improve the quality and marketability of their work and managerial skills.

22.SUPPORT training programmes focused on leadership and communication to enable pastoralist women to effectively participate in negotiations in all issues affecting their ways of life.

23.SUPPORT and fund research into new technologies that further improve the efficiency and environmental sustainability of pastoralist ways of life. These technologies should be attuned to the needs and realities of pastoralism and should take advantage of renewable and easily accessible natural resources.

We women pastoralists want our children, and our children’s children, to have the tools and opportunities they need to adapt to the realities and changing conditions of the modern world while retaining their traditional cultural legacies and lifestyles.

This is our right and it is by remaining pastoralists that we can be of greatest service to the entire human community.

Monday, November 29, 2010

Developments in the Williamson appeal matter during the past week

From: Prof. Arthur R. Butz, PhD.

Date: November 27, 2010

Subject: Developments in Germany in the Williamson appeal matter during the past week concerning his “holocaust minimization” broadcast on Swedish TV and filmed in Germany

32 minutes after lawyer Nahrath, a member of the rightist NPD, informed Judge Eisvogel that he had been added to Bishop Richard Williamson's legal team, Nahrath received a phone call from Der Spiegel. It is speculated that Der Spiegel's source of news on the new development had to be its friend lawyer [Maximilian] Krah, an associate of the lawyer Lossman who resigned when Nahrath was added to the legal team.*

In order to placate the priestly Catholic fraternity of the SSPX, Williamson said he will drop his lawyer Nahrath, and his appeal, and asked that the SSPX pay his fine. SSPX Superior Fellay agreed, but the next day Fellay publicly denounced Bishop Williamson and repeated his order to Williamson to drop Nahrath or be ejected from the SSPX.
Then Williamson told Fellay that he would continue his appeal but drop Nahrath, reasoning that "A willow will bend whereas an oak will snap and break." Through all of this Williamson never actually spoke to Fellay. Williamson retained a new lawyer on Nov. 26, politically neutral and with a good professional reputation, but thus far not publicly identified.

http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2010/11/developments-in-williamson-appeal.html

*Williamson's defense lawyer, Matthias Lossmann, told German Press Agency dpa that they had "amicably ended" their cooperation, indicating that this was in part due to Williamson's decision to hire another lawyer. He said the name would soon be made public.

"You will then see why I no longer feel called for," he added.

http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/news/holocaust-denying-bishop-s-lawyer-pulls-out-of-case-ahead-of-trial-1.325231

Testimonios Directos - Yeisully Tapias Arcila


Los Testimonios Directos dan a sus lectores la posibilidad de acercarse a la gente y a las organizaciones que se benefician de los proyectos y programas finaciados por el Fondo Internacional de Dessarrollo Agrícola (FIDA).

En este Testimonio, Yeisully Tapias Arcila (izquierda)
, participante del Primer Encuentro de Juventudes y Microempresa Rural en Colombia, nos comparte sus experiencias en Colombia.

Hola, Señores y Señoritas del FIDA,
Quiero saludarlos con un caluroso abrazo, espero que se encuentren muy bien.

Primero quiero agradecerles por fomentar espacios de construcción Juvenil, como lo fue el evento en Cartagena; quiero decirles que estos espacios no solo permiten que los jóvenes intercambien experiencias, que construyan para un mundo mejor, que fortalezcan su visión empresarial y que maximicen sus capacidades de emprenderismo; si no que también aporta elementos fundamentales para un ser humano: La oportunidad de expresar sus ideas, de sentirse útil y necesario para una sociedad en Desarrollo, para cumplir sueños tan simples como conocer el mar, algunos conocer de sus antepasados y como fue su verdadero origen...en este caso afro descendientes; además de sentirse motivado con saber que no solo hay jóvenes de un Municipio, ni de un Departamento, ni de un país que están trabajando para la construcción de escenarios de Paz; si no que nos acompañan es este caso jóvenes de quince países, y el acompañamiento de entidades que creen en nosotros los jóvenes como lo es: El FIDA, Oportunidades Rurales, ACUA, entre otros. Pero que seguro hay más jóvenes del mundo que aportan un granito de arena para lograr cumplir UN SUEÑO JOVEN.

Por lo anterior, agradezco nuevamente el habernos permitido participar en este espacio y hacer parte de sus vidas.

Cordialmente;
Yeisully Tapias Arcila
Colombia, la Dorada, Caldas
Asociación Jóvenes Emprendedores

Sunday, November 28, 2010

SSPX Bishop Fellay's Lawyer/Business Partner is Fundraiser for Racial Supremacist State


Bp. Fellay's Lawyer/business partner Maximilian Krah among patrons at September 27, 2010 American Friends of Tel Aviv University Fund Raiser

This bit of information comes from an investigative work anonymously posted in a few places on the internet (and immediately censored from at least one of them). I copy the entire work below with the following caveats: I don't see that the author has proven his charge that Mr. Krah is of Judaic ancestry, as likely as it seems. It would be quite "traditional," after all for such a champion of 15th-century aristocrat Catholicism; such a temporally ambitious man as Bp. Bernard Fellay to have a "Court 'Jew'." Regardless of what his actual ethnic identity may be, it's clear Maximilian Krah fulfills that role for Bp. Fellay. Mr. Krah's documented Zionist fundraising is highly problematic for anyone that claims to oppose racial supremacy.

Maximilian Krah and Menzingen: A Cause for Serious Concern?


The Timeline -

January 2009
A Corporate Attorney by the name of Maximilian Krah became publicly linked with the affairs of the Society of Saint Pius X.

January 20, 2009
Fr. Franz Schmidberger, Superior of SSPX in Germany, issued a press release in which it was stated: “We have not seen the interview given by Bishop Williamson to Swedish television. As soon as we see it we will submit it to scrutiny and obtain the advice of attorneys.”

But, in fact, the attorney to whom Menzingen would turn had already been put into place.

It was none other than Maximilian Krah of the Dresden Corporate Law company, Fetsch Rechtsanwälte: the partners being Cornelius J. Fetsch, Maximilian Krah and Daniel Adler.

Link: Fetsch Rechtsanwälte
http://www.dasoertliche.de/?id=10700323337...&arkey=14612000

January 19, 2009
One day before Fr. Schmidberger’s press release, Maximilian Krah was appointed as delegate to the Board, and manager, of the company Dello Sarto AG. The Chairman of the company is Bishop Bernard Fellay and the Board Members are First Assistant, Fr. Niklaus Pfluger, and the SSPX Bursar General, Fr. Emeric Baudot.

The purpose of the company is stated as being (Google translation):
“Advice on asset management issues and the care and management of assets of domestic and foreign individuals, corporations, foundations and other bodies, in particular of natural or legal persons which the Catholic moral, religious and moral teaching in its traditional sense of obligation and see, and the execution of projects for the mentioned persons, as well as advising on the implementation of these projects; whole purpose of description according to statutes.”

In other words, Dello Sarto AG appears to be an investment company that speculates, one has to assume, with SSPX funds in financial and other markets in the search for profits for various SSPX projects. But is it possible to get involved in today’s financial markets without being exposed to the risk and/or practice of usury?

The company was commercially registered on January 13, 2009 and issued 100 shares at 1,000 Swiss francs, giving it an initial capital of 100,000 Swiss francs.

As far as the checkbook is concerned, Maximilian Krah and Bishop Fellay alone are enabled individually to issue a payment of funds, while Frs. Pfluger and Baudot are required to obtain a co-signature to do so. Krah is not a cleric, but exercises greater financial powers than the First Assistant or Bursar. Curious.

Link: Dello Sarto AG
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl...D813%26prmd%3Db

Maximilian Krah is a Board Member of other associations that control SSPX funds.

In the September 2010 edition of a publication issued by EMBA-Global we read that the “EMBA-Global programme is designed for experienced managers, professionals and executives who seek to develop the skills, knowledge and networks to operate as successful Global leaders, anywhere in the world,” and that it “brings together an elite international network of business professionals.”

Link: EMBA-Global
http://www.emba-global.com/EMBA-Global_Cla...tember_2010.pdf

Maximilian Krah is pictured on page 6 of the September 2010 publication along with the following, accompanying text:
“Maximilian Krah. German. Lawyer. Jaidhofer Privatstiftung, Vienna, Austria. Lawyer with substantial international experience. Currently a Board Member of an Austrian foundation. Responsible for wealth and asset management of the settlement capital, and for the project development of non-profit projects all over the world, which are sponsored by using the achieved funds.”

The full name of the company mentioned above is Jaidhofer Privatstiftung St. Josef and Marcellus. Jaidof is the seat of the SSPX District headquarters in Austria.

The fact that the SSPX appears to be involved in international financial markets will worry many of their faithful who would, rightly, believe that such activity is both risky on the material plane, and questionable on the moral level. There may, of course, be those who are less concerned, feeling that it is acceptable practice in the modern world, and aimed at “a final good.” Are the latter right?

Krah first made his appearance in the international sphere, as far as rank-and-file traditionalists are concerned, in the wake of what has been dubbed by the mainstream media as “the Williamson Affair.” His comments on the bishop were less than flattering, exuded a liberal view of the world, and poured oil on the fire of controversy that raged across the world, and against both the bishop and the SSPX, for months on end. It has been plain for a long time now that the “interview” and the “ensuing controversy” were a set-up, but it was, and still is, a matter of conjecture as to which person(s) and/or agencies engineered the set-up. Perhaps subsequent information in this email will throw more light on this troubling question?

What is beyond conjecture, however, is that Bishop Fellay’s attitude towards Bishop Williamson changed dramatically. Even those who will hear nothing against Bishop Fellay have noticed this change. The change has been public and persistent, and has been both insulting and humiliating for Bishop Williamson. It has also been largely carried out in the mainstream media, and, in Germany, the notoriously anti-Catholic communist magazine, Der Spiegel, has found a favored place, much to the astonishment of traditionalists everywhere. It has been there that we heard the shocking references to Bishop Williamson as “an unexploded hand grenade,” “a dangerous lump of uranium,” etc, as well as the insulting insinuations that he is disturbed or suffering from Parkinson’s Disease. The question, let it be remembered, is not whether one agrees or disagrees with Williamson, whether one likes or dislikes either Bishop Williamson or Bishop Fellay, but whether or not a man has a right to express a personal opinion on a matter of secular history. The ambush of Williamson by the Swedish interviewer, Ali Fegan, said by some Swedes to be a Turkish Jew, left Williamson on the spot: to get up and walk out in silence, thereby providing the media with the hook “that his refusal to speak is proof of his revisionist beliefs” or simply to lie. Williamson made his choice. Whether we agree or not is neither here nor there.

In the past, nearly two decades earlier in Canada, Williamson made “controversial comments” on the same subject at what was understood to be a private meeting of Catholics. A journalist, however, found out and made a story out of it. The relevance of this episode is that the attitude of Archbishop Lefebvre contrasts remarkably with that of Bishop Fellay. The first just ignored the “controversy,” treating a secular and anti-Catholic media with total disdain, and the matter quickly became a dead issue. The latter played to the media gallery, broke corporate unity with his brother in the episcopacy (specifically warned against by Archbishop Lefebvre during the 1988 consecrations), and turned what should have been a molehill into a mountain.

ENTER KRAH

Krah is instructed to find an attorney to defend Williamson. He opts for Matthias Lossmann as defense attorney, a strange choice. It is strange, because Lossmann is a member of the extremist Die Grünen party (The Greens), an organization that is well-known in Germany as a water melon: green on the outside, red on the inside. A party that is pro-feminist, pro-homosexual, pro-abortion and harbors Daniel Cohn-Bendit, a member of the European Parliament in its ranks. Besides his frontline involvement in the 1968 Red turbulence in the universities in France, he is a known advocate of pedophilia, as his autobiography demonstrates. What was Krah thinking of, then, in choosing such an attorney to represent a Catholic bishop? Was Lossmann really the only attorney in Germany prepared to take this case?

Krah’s choice is strange for a second reason. Krah is a member of a political party, but not the Greens. Krah is a prominent political activist and officer in Dresden, in the east of Germany, of the liberal, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual Christian Democratic Union, led by Angela Merkel. Chancellor Merkel also comes from the east of Germany and is commonly referred to in that country as “Stasi-Merkel” after revelations and photographic evidence came to light hinting that she was recruited and formed by the Stasi, the former East German State Secret Police; a common approach made to young people, particularly those seeking professional careers, in the former Communist State of the German Democratic Republic. The same Merkel that publicly reproached Benedict XVI for having lifted the so-called “excommunication” of “holocaust denier” Williamson, and demanded that the Pope reverse the decision.

Krah is pictured on the editorial page, page 3, of a CDU publication, of May 2006, in the link below:

Link: Die Dresdner Union, May 2006.
http://www.cdu-dresden.de/index.php?mo=mc_...40107b868a48%7D


He portrays himself in the journal as some kind of Christian (though we are informed via SSPX faithful that he attends the SSPX chapel in Dresden), yet chooses an attorney for Williamson that could not have been worse.

Remember, too, that after the first Der Spiegel hatchet job on Williamson, Krah turned up at the British HQ of the SSPX in London at short notice and sought to get Williamson to do a second interview with the disreputable magazine. Williamson refused to do so, in spite of the fact that Krah had come with these journalists with the express sanction of Bishop Fellay! How in God’s name could Mgr. Fellay have thought that a second bite at the apple by Der Spiegel journalists would help the cause of Williamson or the SSPX? Go figure.

Moreover, consider the approach of both Krah and Lossmann in Williamson’s first trial. There was no attempt to defend him, though it is plain that Williamson had not broken German law, contrary to public perceptions generated by the media. What occurred, according to non-Catholics who attended the trial, was a shocking parody of a defense: Krah, unctuous, smug and mocking in respect of the bishop; Lossmann, weak, hesitating, insipid. Both effectively “conceded” Williamson’s “guilt,” but nevertheless argued for “leniency.” At no time did they address the legal questions at hand, questions that did not relate directly to the “Holocaust” and its veracity or otherwise, but as to whether or not the provisions of the law actually applied to the Williamson case. In other words, a Caiphas defense.

It can, therefore, come as no surprise that Williamson decided to appeal the Court’s decision, and to engage an independent attorney who would address the actual legal questions of the case. That Bishop Fellay, on the basis of media reports, ordered him publicly to sack this attorney or face expulsion is a great surprise, one might even say a scandal, for such situations require knowledge of all the facts, serious reflection, and sagacity. The Press Communiqué demonstrated none of these requirements, and merely represented one more example of Bishop Fellay’s unexplained public hostility to Mgr. Williamson. It is significant that the DICI statement referred to Williamson’s new attorney as someone who was associated with “neo-nazis,” this being a reference to the German National Democrats, an organization that has been in existence for about 50 years and has elected members in some regional German parliaments. If it had been “Nazi” it would have been banned under the German Constitution a long time ago – as many such groups have found out over the years in Germany. Moreover, while DICI chose the term “neo-nazi,” the British Daily Telegraph chose “far right,” as did those well-known anti-semitic journals, The Jerusalem Post and Haaretz.

Did Krah have an input into this communiqué? We cannot know for sure, but we do know something about Krah that is not common knowledge. Maximilian Krah is Jewish. He presents himself as some sort of ‘Christian’ in the link provided above, yet we find a more revealing picture of Maximilian Krah, at this link below, in attendance at a fundraising event in New York during September 2010.

Link: American Friends of Tel Aviv University
http://www.aftau.org/site/PageServer?pagen...0_AlumniAuction

The attendees of this fundraising party are alumni of Tel Aviv University. They are raising scholarship funds to assist diasporan Jews to travel to the Zionist State of Israel to receive a formation at Tel Aviv University. Look at the photographs. Every single person is identified and every single one is clearly Jewish. There is no problem whatever with this, Krah included.

However, Krah is at the financial center of the SSPX; he has done no favors to Williamson and his case by his statements and actions; and may be responsible for things yet unknown or unseen.

Since his arrival on the scene, traditionalists have witnessed

1) The abrupt disappearance of important theological articles from District websites regarding Judaism and the pivotal role played by our “elder brothers,” as Bishop Fellay referred to them this year, in Finance, Freemasonry and Communism, none of which could have been construed as “anti-semitic” by the time honored standards of the Catholic Church.

2) Bishop Williamson being continuously and publicly denigrated, humiliated and grossly insulted.

3) The communist journal, Der Spiegel, being favored with arranged interviews and stories to keep the “Williamson Affair” on-the-boil, thereby tending toward the “marginalization” of Williamson.

4) A scandalous and erroneous article being published in The Angelus, in which the faithful were taught that a Talmudic rabbi was a saint, and that the said rabbi was positively instrumental in preparing the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the conversion of St. Paul.


All these facts combined necessarily raise a whole series of questions. These questions can only be answered by those in a position to know all the facts. In this case that person is Bishop Fellay, since he is the Superior General, has unrestricted access to all aspects of the Society’s work, and obviously has taken Mr. Krah into his confidence on both the financial and legal levels.

This writer is making no accusations or insinuations against Bishop Fellay at any level. He is simply requesting that he make public reply to the following questions in order that the doubt and worry, which is widespread among the clergy and faithful since the events of last year, is allayed, and soothed by the balm of Truth.

Your Excellency,

1) Were you aware that Maximilian Krah, who currently has significant power and influence in important areas of the internal workings of the SSPX, was Jewish when he was taken into your confidence?

2) Who introduced, or recommended, Maximilian Krah in his professional capacity to the Society of Saint Pius X?

3) If you were not aware of Krah’s background and political connections, why was he not carefully investigated before being brought into the inner-circle and inner-workings of SSPX?

4) Why does Krah, who is not a cleric of the SSPX or even a longtime supporter of the Society, have such singular power to handle SSPX funds?

5) Who are the shareholders of Dello Sarto AG? Are they all clergy of the SSPX or related congregations? Are the shares transferable through purchase? In the event of the death, defection or resignation of a shareholder, how are the shares distributed? Who in any of these cases has the power to confer, designate, sell or otherwise dispose of these shares? You? The Bursar? The Manager? The Board Members? The General Council?

6) Why is the Society of Saint Pius X engaged in financial activities which may be common in modern society, but which are hardly likely to be in conformity with Church teaching pertaining to money, its nature, its use and its ends?

7) Why was Krah allowed to keep the pot boiling in the “Williamson Affair” by arranging interviews and providing stories for Der Spiegel magazine? How could an alleged Christian Democrat be the intermediary with a notorious communist journal?

8) Why was Krah permitted to impose upon your brother bishop an attorney belonging to the extreme left-wing Die Grünen?

9) Why was your brother bishop threatened with expulsion from SSPX for merely hiring an attorney who was actually interested in fighting the unjust and ridiculous charge of incitement? Is it not the case that those of the Household of the Faith must take precedence over those who are without?

10) Can you explain why your public attitude to Williamson has changed, why you have continuously belittled him in public – while he has not responded in kind at any time?

11) What do you intend to do about Mr. Krah given that his position within the Society is one of influence, but who cannot seriously be regarded as someone who has the best interests of Catholic Tradition at heart? Will you move as quickly to resolve this question as you have in respect of Williamson?

There is no malice meant or intended in this communication. There is quite simply a tremendous fear for the future of the SSPX and its direction


POST SCRIPT


For those who think that the writer is muckraking, I would like to point out that it was me that made public the impending sell-out of the Transalpine Redemptorists several months before it took place. I received brickbats for the relevant post at the time, and some calumniated me – but I was shown to be correct after a short period. This writer has not posted anywhere since that time. He does so now because he possesses information, as he did in regard to the Redemptorists, which needed to be made known widely for the good of Catholic Tradition. Nothing would please me more than to have Bishop Fellay answer these serious questions and put Catholic minds everywhere at rest.

"Papal Ambiguity" has a Clear Trajectory

This is a reference to discussion underway HERE and HERE.

The usefulness of puzzling over, debating and discussing papal double-speak is limited. While we 'dialogue' over these two-faced statements, a single agenda forges steadily on a clear trajectory. Oh, it may zig a hair to the 'left' and zag a bit to the 'right' at times, but trajectory is determined from long-term trends, not on short term events.

Now, it may not seem very 'traditional' to some Traditionalists to take first principles from the founding text of Christianity rather than pious 15th-century mystical works or apparitions, but I guess it's my cross to be 'weird' or 'Protestant' in that sense. I look to the Gospel and see Jesus stating the principle that it's fruits, not words, that we know intent by. This is a crucial Christian principle. Why do so few heed it? Why do so many Christians behave as though Jesus taught, "Respect prevaricators and give them the benefit of the doubt in spite of all evidence" or "Yea-no speech should be 'dialogued' over until a consensus interpretation divorced from observable facts is arrived at"? The very presence of yea-no speech is proof that we're hearing evil rather than Christian teaching according to the Gospel principle taught by Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount.

The Pope proclaims in his book, Light of the World, essentially, "Jesus is Savior of the Jews - to pray for Jews to convert to Jesus is to wound them." This is patent yea-no speech. According to Jesus' principle, we know we're hearing evil: "Let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil." The whole of yea-no speech is of evil. To seize upon the yea as evidence of orthodoxy as if the no didn't accompany it is to participate in the same evil.

Yea-no speech cannot proceed from a good motive. Neither can there be any good motive for an observer pretending that the yea hasn't a negating no attached. To do so is self-deception at best. On the test of Matthew 5;37 this Papal teaching is of evil.

Then, according to Jesus' test of Matthew 7;16-20 we look at the fruits. There is no evidence of Joseph Ratzinger in his 83 years ever converting one of these people he calls "Jews" to Jesus as far as I am aware, and I'm an avid researcher of such things. I've been asking doubters to produce such evidence since 2008 to no avail, but it seems a nonsensical exercise. Why would a man try to convert "Jews" if he believes so much as a prayer for their conversion that they don't even hear wounds them?

It's not for lack of opportunity that this man doesn't evangelize "Jews." He 'dialogues' with them weekly, visits their synagogues regularly and never uses it as an occasion to evangelize. On the contrary, he uses these occasions to confirm their error and delusion. The fruits of Joseph Ratzinger's work concerning "The Jews" are of the most rotten sort: not one conversion and mass delusion among "Jews" and Christians alike on this key Gospel doctrine.

Let's be frank, the fruits of the Pope's apocalyptic theology--praying for the end to come quickly so "The Jews" will convert--is of the same lunatic tree that bore "Pastors" John Hagee and Tim LaHaye's eschatology. What is Hagee and Benedict doing when they discourage evangelizing "Jews"? They've made the Gospel of no effect. They've neutralized the one thing that has the power to save their souls and impede their hostility against us. They're buying these "children of the covenant" time to build up Pharisaic Talmudism. How much time? All of it! For whatever time there is left until the end of time we're to refrain from "wounding" evangelization of "Jews" according to the Hagee-Ratzinger dispensation.

Think about this. This is as fraudulent and pernicious as the time-buying "Peace Process" by which an Israeli state steadily emerges on Palestinian land allegedly allocated for a Palestinian state. In that case the Israelis make an occasional token concession and feign a light at the end of a very long tunnel. Benedict's theology is a more plain raw deal than that; there's no concessions and the time-frame, by design, is until the end of time; we're to "deepen our religious relations" with people who're undermining our religion until there's no time left. What of the souls that will be lost, Christians, "Jews" and all, during this strange dispensation lasting until the eschaton? How do we begin to account for such a loss? It would be a spiritual catastrophe on a much greater scale than the temporal Palestinian catastrophe.

What can be said of 'traditionalists' who call this sucker deal--these innovations and their objective rotten fruits--consistent with tradition? Whether it be self-deception or willful deception of others, it's part and parcel of the evil from whence the teaching itself proceeds.

Thursday, November 25, 2010

REAF - Registrou um importante avanço em acordos para reduzir a pobreza rural


Argentina, Brasil, Paraguai e Uruguai assinaram um protocolo para implementar políticas nacionais de compras públicas da agricultura familiar

A 14° Reunião Especializada sobre Agricultura Familiar no MERCOSUL, conhecida como REAF, registrou um importante avanço em acordos para reduzir a pobreza rural. Argentina, Brasil, Paraguai e Uruguai assinaram um protocolo para implementar políticas nacionais de compras públicas da agricultura familiar. O acordo foi firmado durante a abertura oficial do evento no dia 18 de novembro em Brasília. O Programa de Aquisição de Alimentos, já vem sendo aplicado pelo Governo brasileiro com sucesso para a expansão da produção familiar no Brasil.

O Fundo Internacional para o Desenvolvimento Agrícola (FIDA) tem um papel fundamental na REAF como articulador, como explicou Paolo Silveri, Gerente de Programas do FIDA para a América Latina e Caribe. “Através da Secretaria técnica desta reunião especializada em agricultura familiar, o FIDA organiza e apóia as reuniões semestrais. Além disso, os trabalhos das seções nacionais da REAF são financiados por uma doação do FIDA.”

O FIDA participa ativamente do esforço das instituições nos acordos para permitir que os pequenos produtores tenham acesso ao mercado e reforçando renda e a segurança alimentar. Esta agência das Nações Unidas que combate a pobreza rural também financiou, com fundos de doação, um programa de desenvolvimento de compras públicas para a agricultura familiar no Uruguai . “Por outro lado, o trabalho do FIDA em fortalecer grupos e associações de produtores nas suas capacidades de gestão e de produção de alimentos em todo o MERCOSUL está bem inserido no apoio à implementação destes acordos” disse Paolo Silveri.

A REAF desenvolveu uma plataforma de diálogo entre as organizações de agricultores familiares e os governos, tanto dentro de cada país do MERCOSUL como a nível regional, tratando de temas de políticas que condicionam diretamente a vida dos pequenos produtores agrícolas. O FIDA segue apoiando esta política como articulador.

“Além disso, financia o programa COPROFAM junto com as associações Oxfam e Action Aid , para reforçar a articulação das principais federações nacionais de agricultura familiar da região. A finalidade é que os camponeses possam desenvolver capacidades analíticas e de gestão que lhes permitam melhorar as bases de diálogo e de negociação com as próprios governos na definição destas políticas.” comentou Silveri.

Há uma década que o FIDA vem apoiando a cooperação entre os países do MERCOSUL e há sete anos através da plataforma REAF. Agora as sementes plantadas pelas iniciativas desta agência das Nações Unidas estão apresentando frutos concretos.
.
“Com o apoio do FIDA e de outras instituições vamos prestar assistência técnica aos países receptores para que possam replicar este modelo de compras públicas da agricultura familiar. Isto implica que será necessário reformar e revisar as políticas que impediram aos pequenos produtores o acesso ao mercado da cadeia básica de alimentos” disse Josefina Stubbs, Diretora do FIDA para a América Latina e Caribe.

Ela citou também o exemplo positivo do Brasil, cujo governo compra dos pequenos produtores os produtos da cadeia básica de alimentos que, por sua vez, são usados nos hospitais públicos, na merenda escolar e para outros centros comunitários. Estas compras públicas vão se replicar nos demais países do MERCOSUL por iniciativa dos governos destes países sul americanos, que querem aproveitar a experiência do Brasil para desenvolver políticas públicas semelhantes.

“Países como o Brasil mostram que políticas e investimentos corretos ajudam a melhorar a qualidade e segurança alimentar, permitindo que camponeses pobres possam participar ativamente da economia, comprando alimentos que não produzem e vendendo seus excedentes” comentou Josefina Stubbs.

A reunião da REAF contou com representantes dos governos e organizações sociais dos países do MERCOSUL como Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Paraguai e Uruguai. Organizações de agricultores familiares da Bolívia também estiveram presentes nos grupos temáticos. Outros países do continente Africano, entre estes África do Sul, Gana, Quênia, Zimbábue, Costa do Marfim e Ruanda, além de acadêmicos da China e da Índia, puderam assistir os debates como observadores.

“A REAF foi o cenário para que a cooperação dentro do MERCOSUL cruzasse as fronteiras com acordos assinados com países africanos” disse a Diretora do FIDA.

Além de transferência de tecnologia e conhecimento, o governo brasileiro disponibilizará uma linha de crédito para financiar máquinas e equipamentos agrícolas para agricultores familiares de Gana, do Quênia, Zimbábue, da Costa do Marfim e de Ruanda.

A REAF ocorreu paralelamente à Conferência de Alto Nível sobre Políticas Públicas para a Agricultura Familiar, Desenvolvimento Rural e Segurança Alimentar entre Países de Renda Média. Nesta conferência os países emergentes Brasil, China, Índia e África do Sul conversaram sobre as políticas mais efetivas para a redução da pobreza rural.

Escritora: Gina Marques

Fotógrafo: Ubirajara Machado

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Historical Global Gathering of Women Pastoralists in Gujarat – from dream to reality!

By IFAD Reporters: Mattia, Antonella, Silvia, Judith, Soma and Luisa


On 21 November in a small village 100km from Ahmedabad, over 200 pastoral women, men and children danced, clapped and banged tambourines to the accompaniment of their jingling jewels and lowing animals. This colourful pageant - a joyous celebration of the inseparable relationship between pastoralists, their animals and land - was a fittingly emotional opening ceremony for a truly historic gathering.

Over 130 pastoral women from 27 countries are gathered together in the gujerati village of Mera to discuss the challenges they face - and how they can become forces for change. MARAG leaders had the vision to organize the gathering in a genuine Indian pastoral setting, where pastoralists have lived for several generations. After the event the mobile and permanent huts and buildings built specially for the Gathering will be used as a research and cultural centre for the maldhari (pastoral) communities themselves, where MARAG and their wide network of volunteers can preserve and encourage the continuation of pastoralism as a unique and valuable way of life.

The commitment and mobilization of the communities here is palpable – opening speeches overflow with emotion and their efforts make this a unique event. Mattia Prayer Galletti highlighted the importance of pastoralist women’s knowledge, which is needed by the world, while Carlo Petrini from Slow Food/Terra Madre, who was determined from the start to be present at the event, said that he was overwhelmed by the energy and the sense of community of this event, which would remain in his heart for a long time. Many are volunteers, from the exhausted international interpreters, furiously connecting participants in heated discussions in 12 languages, to the freelance photographer, the artist and facilitators - but most especially the pastoral men and women themselves, who spontaneously contributed more than 300 beds and blankets, and the elder women, who decorated the traditional huts to welcome their fellow pastoralists.

As key agents of their communities’ livelihoods, pastoralist women have seized this opportunity to network with alacrity. It is a breathtaking sight to see so many of them from all over the world, sharing their experiences, and swapping stories about their daily life. A Jordanian woman stood, eagerly explaining to an Indian lady the secret to making the bread typical of her region, whilst a group of colourfully clad Gujerati women demonstrated to an audience of women from Africa how to use their hand looms. Over in another corner, a delegate from the Cameroon listened with interest to the story of how a woman pastoralist from Kenya became a Member of Parliament and worked to raise the voice of other women in her situation…the power of sharing knowledge! But behind the ebullience lies a serious desire to go home with something concrete, and the break-out sessions of the first day are lively with debate.

There is tremendous diversity in the situations facing the women here, with women from highly marginalized and patriarchal communities sharing experiences with relatively well-organized womens’ groups - but they also have much in common, from problems with land rights to marginalization as pastoralist and as women, to keeping their children fed and healthy. The Gathering is a small but concrete step towards enabling women to share experience and knowledge and plan ahead strategies to strengthen their roles in pastoral societies and within the wider community.

The world gathering of women pastoralists, sponsored by IFAD, will last till 26 November. We will keep you informed on the issues emerging from the reach discussions and thematic working groups.

Monday, November 22, 2010

In Benedict's Own Words: His Latin Good Friday Prayer

An except from Pope Benedict XVI's new book, Light of the World:
... naturally what happened in the Third Reich struck us as Germans, and drove us all the more to look at the people of Israel with humility, shame, and love.

In my theological formation, these things were interwoven, and marked the pathway of my theological thought...

A change also seemed necessary to me in the ancient liturgy. In fact, the formula was such as to truly wound the Jews, and it certainly did not express in a positive way the great, profound unity between Old and New Testament. For this reason, I thought that a modification was necessary in the ancient liturgy, in particular in reference to our relationship with our Jewish friends. I modified it in such a way that it contained our faith, that Christ is salvation for all. That there do not exist two ways of salvation, and that therefore Christ is also the savior of the Jews, and not only of the pagans. But also in such a way that one did not pray directly for the conversion of the Jews in a missionary sense, but that the Lord might hasten the historic hour in which we will all be united. For this reason, the arguments used polemically against me by a series of theologians are rash, and do not do justice to what was done.

Obviously, this prayer is not a papal masterstroke and I don't anticipate a retraction of The Remnant's sugar coating of this poisonous prayer even after the Pope himself has admitted its intention is entirely eschatological and does not desire conversion at the present time.

I stand by what I wrote of this prayer in February 2008:

... The problem with the new prayer, despite its hearkening to Romans 11;25-26, is that it takes the present-time intention of the original prayer and thrusts it into the realm of mystery and prophesy dealing with the future. The intention and meaning of the original prayer was perfectly clear: Christians pray for the conversion of the Jews here and now. Romans 11;25-26 deals with a mystery prophesied to take place in the future at the last days. The message seems to be that we should pray for the end-times to come quickly so the "Jews" will convert, and that they don't need Christ in the meantime. This is not, nor has it ever been the position of the Church. The Church always sought the conversion of Jews--real and fake "Jews" alike--not just at the second coming, but from the Pentecost until the time of the Second Vatican Council--at all times. St. Vincent Ferrer and all of the evangelists knew nothing of the new theology of the "elder brothers." Apparently, he was wrong?

Benedict wrote a new prayer as a means of remedying what he viewed in the traditional prayer's intention of present time conversion as "a wound to the Jews." What he has done is severely wound Jesus' mission and His Gospel and the spiritual welfare of these 'Jews' that he calls 'elder brothers.' If the Pope's role as shepherd and vicar of Christ has any meaning at all it is to seek the salvation of ALL souls. But he has contrived a dispensation from the Church's mission for a particular class of people just as Vatican II peritus Gregory Baum said should be done at a 1974 B'nai B'rith conference titled, "Auschwitz: A New Era?":

After Auschwitz the Christian churches no longer wish to convert the Jews. While they may not be sure of the theological grounds that dispense them from this mission, the churches have become aware that asking the Jews to become Christians is a spiritual way of blotting them out of existence and thus only reinforces the effects of the Holocaust. The churches, moreover, realize the deadly irony implicit in a Christian plea for the conversion of the Jews; for after Auschwitz and the participation of the nations, it is the Christian world that is in need of conversion.

Benedict says that his German 'Holocaust' "humility and shame," among other things, "marked the pathway of [his] theological thought" causing him to see traditional prayer for the conversion of "the people of Israel" as "a wound to the Jews" and so, "a modification was necessary." There's little difference between what Benedict XVI says and what Gregory Baum says other than the degree of subtlety. The message is clear: Because of 'The Holocaust' Christians, not "Jews," must be converted. The intention within Christian prayer must change.

It's not Christian to await the conversion of a remnant of Jews in the last days and to disregard the spiritual welfare of real or counterfeit Jews until then. Any Christian who buys this message will have been converted, and that would be a satanic masterstroke.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

No field visit! No successful implementation workshop!


The organizers had identified four different sites for field visit and each participant has to sign up for one. The visit took place on 17 November. I asked advice from Alessandro Marini the CPM for Mozambique who knows better the projects in the country and I chose to join the group II to visit a Microcredit branch and one of its clients as well as the Maragra Sugar Company.

It rained all long the night before and continued raining all the day of the field visit. Although the rain, we were all ready at 7 am at the conference centre but the buses to pick up each group were not there. It is now 8:30 am, the organizers were a little anxious; some participants started saying “if we have to leave late, why we wake up early to be here at 7 and no transportation available”. Some thought that the field visit has been cancelled due the rain. But no field visit! No successful implementation workshop. Later, we discovered that the transportation company contracted has also an on-going contract with another company to collect the workers from their place to the work place. So they must first drop the workers before the field visit. In Africa time is “not money” and everything can be fixed. At 9 am, the first bus arrived followed by others.

We can finally leave Maputo. After one and half hour we arrived at Manhiça where the CEO of MicroCrédito Mr Alfredo Chilaule was waiting for us.
He welcomed the group and made a short presentation on the Microcrédito. Microcrédito, established on 18 May 2009 is a private business entity and has 5 shareholders. It benefited from an incentive of the Government of Mozambique through the IFAD supported Rural Finance Support Programme to encourage a private sector to open a financial services bureau in rural areas: Manhiça, Xinavane, Marracuene, Ponta de Ouro, Magude, Chicualacuala and Maputo. The main activities of Microcrédito are to provide loans for commercial enterprises business, agricultural based enterprises, construction works, capacity building and training. Before providing loan to the poor people, they provide them with training on how they can manage the loans. The loan portfolio of Microcrédito Manhiça Branch was US$ 21,000 in May 2009 when started activities. In one year Microcrédito has a portfolio of US$ 500,000 and has 100 clients and 56% are women. “Women pay back the loans. You do not need to give them a call to remind them the repayment date. They are already at the door waiting before I arrive in office” said Alfredo Chilaule. The loan period is 14 months with the interest from 4 to 6.5% per month. One of the conditions to get a loan from Microcrédito is that the borrower has to use the loan for commercial or agricultural activities and commit to recruit at least one employee.

Just next door to Microcrédito, there is Barclays commercial bank.
We asked the CEO of Microcrédito how come a small rural financial services provider set a business next to a commercial bank like Barclays. Mr Chilaule smiled and said that his clients are the poor people who cannot afford the guaranty requested by the commercial banks. “The loans I provide to my clients are not based on collateral like in commercial banks. I rely on their commitments, their honesty, trust and sincerity” he concluded.

From Microcrédito Branch, we moved to visit one of the clients Mr Jose Alfiado. He is businessman and deals in construction materials such timber, cedar posts, iron rods, sand, cement, bricks. He was loaned progressively up USD 10,000 with repayment period of 14 months. But he has almost repaid in full within a year an indication of a good response from the debtors in terms of loan repayment. He had managed to expand his business and is constructing a permanent house an indication of improvement of wellbeing. Mr Afiado with the loan has increased his business and also has created employment. Now three persons are working with him. “Before the loan to expand my business, my income was around US$ 2,000 per 3 months. Now my income is around US$ 3,500 per 3 months and as you can see I am rebuilding my house” said Mr Alfiado.

The group moved to Maragra Sugar Company where we were welcomed by Ray Ducray, the Manager of the company.
He presented the company which employed other 4,500 local workers in the sugar cane plantation, the relationship with 8 associations of the sugar cane farmers and other 100 individual small farmers as their clients. The Maragra Sugar Company helps the local producers to get access to financial services through Banco Terra by issuing the letters of guaranty to the farmers, buys a lot of fertilizers at cheap price and resell to the producers at the same cheap price as incentive to encourage the farmers to produce more sugar canes to sell to the company. Also the company helps the producers of sugar cane to have access to European Union fund. The company has also recruited three trainers at its own cost to provide adequate training to the farmers on capacity build through the financial service provider GAPI. As today, with its own plantation, the sugar cane bought from the associations of the producers and the individual producers, the factory will still need other 250 tonnes to meet their need in sugar cane. The Maragra Sugar Company anticipated the transportation cost of the sugar canes from the plantations to the factory when the producers do not have a cash to pay to the transporters.

Pedro Mabasso, member of the Combat Poverty Organization attended the meeting at the sugar company.
He informed the group that the organization has 8 associations independent including the Mozambique Women Organization. The associations with 33 members, 17 women and 16 men had received the support from IFAD financed Agricultural Markets Support Programme (PAMA, Portuguese acronym) for capacity building. The associations have 52 hectares of land and use 42 hectares for sugar cane plantation and the other 12 hectares for diversified food crops production. “We are happy to collaborate with the private sector Maragra Sugar Company. They help us a lot to get access to financial services and ensure the market for our sugar cane and pay one month after we delivered the sugar cane” said Pedro Mabasso. “They also provide the associations and individuals small farmers with several services free of charge and create job in our area” he concluded. When we asked Pedro who fixed the price of the sugar cane, he said the company. The Manager of the company explained that we cannot say that the company fixed the price. The price is fixed at national level. “When we sell our sugar in Europe, we also do not fix the price but the international market” said Mr Ducray, the Manager of the Sugar Company.
It was planned to visit also the sugar cane plantations to meet and discuss with the farmers. Unfortunately, it was raining so heavily that we cannot have access to the plantations. We had to return back to Maputo.

On our way back to Maputo, in the car, the group discussed and commented on the two sites we visited. Since the organizers had asked each group to report on their visit, our group has decided to add to the report, the following recommendations that we presented at the plenary session on 18 November:

Microcredit branch and it beneficiary:

• need to look again at the targeting issue,
• review the interest rates to enhance accessibility of credit facilities by the rural poor,
• need enhance knowledge sharing between the management of the facility on matters related to loaning and loan facilities.

Maragra Sugar Company:
• clear involvement of all members of associations,
• associations should be seen to possess more bargaining power as opposed to individuals. They need to be strengthened by forming one umbrella body representing the outgrowers,
• members of the associations should strive to invest in other income generating activities other than sugar cane farming.


The field visit was a learning experience for me.
I was the only IFAD staff in the group and it’s fascinating to hear the projects staff from Burundi, Kenya, Madagascar, Rwanda and Uganda etc… sharing their experiences or commenting on the field visit. We never stop learning new things about IFAD supported projects!

Berlin calling: Development world, please wake up. There is an urgent need to put back #ICT4D on the global development agenda

The ICT for Rural Economic Development conference jointly organized by GTZ and BMZ from 18-19 November 2010 in Berlin, concluded on Friday 19 November with an engaging panel discussion on “What role can development cooperation play in ICT for rural economic development?”

The two day event brought together numerous practitioners, policy makers, donor organizations and private sector players. The event allowed colleagues to interact, network and share their rich experience and at the same time put on the table a number of challenges.

I think, it is safe to say that there was quite a bit of apprehension about the fact that some major donors have abandoned ICT4D sector. For those of us in the agriculture world, this is a déjà vu. But if there is one lesson to learn from our experience, that is under-investing in this sector – similar to under investing in agriculture -  will have negative impact in the lives of poor rural people.  We’ve learnt that ICTs are tools and for these to add value and improve the livelihoods of poor rural people, they need to be:
  • Affordable
  • Scalable
  • Self-sustaining
  • Sensible
  • Appropriate
We also learnt that we need to:
  • Focus on PEOPLE and not technology
  • Ensure ownership and appropriation
  • Develop local content
  • Ensure language and cultural pertinence
  • Ensure participation
  • Mainstream ICT4D activities as part of development projects
  • Build local capacity and scout for local talent and local innovations
This is the message that came out loud and clear from the concluding panel, moderated by Corinna Kuesel, Head of section for economic policy and private sector development of GTZ.

Ms Kuesel kicked off the panel discussion by sharing her impressions about the event. “I am impressed to see what an important role ICTs play in economic development and at the same time perhaps I am a bit concerned that development cooperation is moving out of ICT4D”, said Kuesel.

While recognizing that development agencies are competing for funds and funds are getting scarce, Kuesel made the case that this should not lead to abandoning ICT4D, because we’ve now have the evidence that ICTs can indeed make a difference in the lives of poor rural people.

Kuesel underscored the importance of public-private partnership and called on development world to:
  • play a facilitation role in forging partnership
  • build the capacity national governments, grass-root organization and poor rural people
  • create an enabling environment so that ICT4D initiatives can be implemented and scaled up
Susanne Dorasil, head of division economic policy, financial sector of BMZ underscored the importance of using ICTs to get better outcomes. Recognizing that the ICT4D community has a challenge of being heard, she talked about:
  • importance of working towards putting in place regulations to reach the goal of universal access
  • challenges and opportunities of linking up and broadening cooperation with the private sector to develop a robust ICT sector
  • importance of showing impact and showing how ICTs contribute to and add value to “hot development topics”  such as rural development, food security, rural finance and more
Ekwow Spio-Garbrah, CEO of Commonwealth Telecommunications Organization talking about private-public partnership brought in the missing dimension – namely PEOPLE. He talked about public-private-people partnership. Spio-Garbrah talked about importance of involving not only national governments, but also local governments. He talked about not exclusively partnering with multinational private sector, but local enterprises and grass-root entrepreneurs. And most importantly he talked about the very PEOPLE, who we work with and work for – the poor rural people and civil society.

Wow, what a concept….. During the course of the two days, I must admit, we focused primarily on technology and perhaps not enough on People. So thank you Dr Spio-Garbrah for putting PEOPLE in the forefront and for sharing your vision of intra-institutional cooperation.

Giacomo Rambaldi, Senior Programme Coordinator, Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation, CTA echoing Dr Spio-Garbrah reminded the audience of the need to involve the civil society. Rambaldi talked about the risks of ICTs and how ICTs could both help disseminate/preserve but also usurper indigenous knowledge.

He talked about how ICTs have provided access to information that previously was not readily available and how ICTs have democratized access to information, citing the examples of services such as YouTube or Google maps have given a voice to the previously voiceless segment of the population.

Rambaldi reminded us of the importance of generating localized and relevant content.  He talked about how as development workers, we have to make sure that ICTs actually add value and contribute to knowledge generation and becoming a catalyst to disseminate locally generated knowledge.

After all we have to remember that  ICTs are tools and if they are not used to generate and disseminate relevant and local content, they are nothing but a useless device which can end up gathering dust!!

David Grimshaw, Head of International Programme: New Technologies with Practical Action and Senior Research Fellow, DFID, made the case for mainstreaming ICT4D initiatives where we have solid evidence that these have improved the livelihoods of poor rural people. Grimshaw underscored that technology has no magic power and is not a silver bullet. It is what we do with technology and how we use it that will make the difference.

“We need to focus on the HOW and on the process to move to ICT for DEVELOPMENT”, said Grimshaw.
Challenging the development world, he said: “You cannot work with logframes when you are doing a research project. These types of projects are different”. Concluding his remarks, Grimshaw said: “We need to focus on the process and focus on people’s need.”

Anton Mangstl, Director of the Office of Knowledge Exchange, FAO, underscored the importance of conducting impact assessments and learning from existing activities and pilots. He urged us to work with governments and other key stakeholders to scale up those activities that have worked. He reminded the audience that similar to development projects, for  ICT4D projects  to succeed they too need be sustainable.

Given the key role that ICT4D activities play in rural development, Mangstl put his finger on a crucial challenge, namely why have bilateral development donors such as DFID and SDC stopped their ICT4D programmes and investments.

Mangstl echoing the other panellists made the case, that donor agencies – be it bilaterals or multilaterals – need to mainstream ICT4D activities in their core activities and integrate these more and more with their respective knowledge sharing and communication for development activities.

Ilari Lindy, Advisor, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Finland asked the fundamental question of whether ICT4D activities were well positioned to show impact in rural development and agriculture related activities.

He urged the participants to pay attention to policy and regulatory frameworks when designing and implementing ICT4D activities and repeated Mr Mangstl’s call for action – that is the need to improve knowledge sharing on ICT4D activities and integrating ICT4D activities with organizational knowledge sharing activities.

Lindy pointed out that to innovate, there is a need to bring together and create bridges between development and scientific communities. He also talked about the importance of convergence between North-South networks and last but not last the fundamental prerequisite of responding to grass-root demands.

Our colleague Tobias Eigen from Kabissa, reminded the audience that Africa is the hot bed of innovation and made the case that we should have more African innovators in events such as these.

Madam Dorasil from BMZ in her closing remarks reiterated the following fundamental points:
  • there are no silver bullets in development
  • we need to listen to and cater to the needs of the people who we work with and work for
  • we need to build local capacity and groom local talents
  • we need to get better in documenting, sharing and capturing the impact of ICT4D projects and feed these back into the learning and development loop
  • we need to have indicators that clearly demonstrate how ICTs are changing the lives of poor rural people
  • as a development community, we need to join hands to make sure that developed and developing countries governments and decision makers understand the importance of ICT4D activities and assist them in putting in place an enabling environment so that these activities flourish and replicate
  • we need to raise awareness about ICT4D and make a concerted effort to put this topic on the G20 agenda
  • we need to adopt an integrated approach and mainstream ICT4D activities in rural development projects and programmes
  • we need to show how ICTs are reaching those living in the “bottom of pyramid”
As the event came to a close, I asked myself – how long will it take for ICT4D to make it back to the global development agenda? Do we need two decades of under-investment in this sector before we hear the wake-up call – or can we show that we learnt from the negative impact of under-investing in agriculture and start mainstreaming and investing in scaling up ICT4D activities?

At this event I talked about "Development 2.0: Putting ICT4D Lessons into Action to Make M-Development a Reality" and shared IFAD's experience in Zambia with the Zambia National Farmers Union - better known as ZNFU4455!

Popular Posts