complaint

Lameese, I think ZamanH means that the oppressed can help themselves also out of being oppressed and not relying solely on the other so they (oppressed) are also to blame for their oppression.

OK�..

I haven�t tolerated oppression; I have made this complaint (as well as numerous other complaints), all of which have not stopped your (academically trained*) leaders from ignoring me! (*As a pose to spiritually trained)

During my time within their version of Islam, I discovered that those leaders are as greedy, selfish, and snobbish as the freemasons leading my own country, and yet the Muslim population (must be duped by them to) allow them to remain in power. If your leaders were honest, I would not have had to make this (complaint), or any of the other complaints I have made.

As I cannot stop your leaders from blanking me, I am left with no option but to cease from supporting them, and to depart from their deceptive ideology. I feel sad that it has come to this, but their oppression has led - to me never wishing to attend a Masjid again (this is probably what they wished to happen). I have only ever felt even more isolated when attending a place where the leaders (and hence those following them) ignore me, hence this seems like the only way I am able to free myself from their oppression, as they have ignored me for so long, I now feel humiliated when attending Masjid�s.       

Maybe your leaders are used to lording it over you; maybe (for too long) you have let them get away with preaching (to you), while they neglect and lack the respect (or decency) to get involved in a discussion (based on equality) with you.

Maybe when I came along stating I was able to scientifically illustrate that the energy and gravitational forces were - One Force - The Almighty, Creator of the heavens and earth, they may have (become apprehensive &) assumed they could just treat me as you have allowed them to treat you!

That�s your game is it? Ignore people for long enough and hope they eventually become tired of trying, hence leaving you to continue in your position of worldly pride!  

(P.S. Sorry if you deem this post to be too harsh, I didn�t ask to be treated as your leaders have treated me) 

space wrote: I have posted this article as it illustrates why the Imams (and the comfortable older generations) in my country (and elsewhere for that matter) are so distant from their youth, and the problems they face.   Also of prevalence is the fact that those who have been born into wealth (such as the princess of saudi Arabia, along with most if not all of the current leaders in the world) have never known what it is like to be poor, and hence it is inconceivable for them to perceive what the poor have to endure. It is this absence of understanding that leads to their lack of compassion for the poor, hence they unknowingly (I�m been kind here) create the very oppression they are so keen to �wash their hands of�.        I wish to be part of Islam and for it to succeed, I want to forgive them�.. Hence I wait to see if they will show the compassion they so desperately need to!

Here is some information that might help one get a picture of what's going on.

http://www.usaid.gov/

"USAID provides economic and humanitarian assistance in more than 100 countries to provide a better future for all."

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/

	Documents & Reports  Popular Requests 1. Iraq - Emergency School Rehabilitation project 2. Afghanistan : Subnational administration in Afghanistan 3. Zambia - Country assistance strategy 4. West Bank & Gaza Update 5. Comparing land reform and land markets in Colombia: impacts on equity and efficiency

11/04/2005 - Official Development Assistance (ODA) to developing countries increased to USD 78.6 billion in 2004, its highest level ever. Taking into account inflation and the fall in the U.S. dollar, this represents a 4.6% rise in real terms from 2003 to 2004 and follows a 4.3% increase from 2002 to 2003.

The total represented 0.25% of Development Assistance Committee (DAC) members' combined gross national income (GNI), the same level as in 2003, but up from 0.23% in 2002 and 0.22% in 2001.

Several factors accounted for the USD 3.1 billion rise in real terms in 2004.  Among these were: 

• Contributions to international organisations increased by USD 3.7 billion
• Aid to Afghanistan and Iraq was up by a total of at least USD 1.5 billion
• Technical co-operation grants rose by USD 1.2 billion
• Gross debt relief grants fell by USD 2.1 billion, and
• Net lending fell by USD 1.3 billion.

Fifteen of the twenty-two DAC member countries reported increased ODA in 2004. The United States remained the largest aid donor in volume terms, followed by Japan, France, the United Kingdom and Germany. The only countries to exceed the UN target for ODA of 0.7% of GNI remain Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.

The United States' net ODA in 2004 was USD 19 billion, a 14.1% increase in real terms from 2003.  Its ODA/GNI ratio rose from 0.15% to 0.16%.  Most of the increase was due to a USD 1.8 billion contribution to the International Development Association (IDA), the grant and soft-loan arm of the World Bank.  Aid to Afghanistan (USD 875 million) and Iraq (USD 2.9 billion) also rose substantially.  United States ODA comprised 24.2% of the DAC total in 2004, its highest share since 1986, and nearly double the low point of 12.5% reached in 1995.

Japan's net ODA fell by 4.8% in real terms to USD 8.9 billion or 0.19% of its GNI.  However, in gross terms its ODA rose by 24.5% to USD 16.1 billion.  This was due partly to aid for reconstruction of Iraq, though mainly to greatly increased debt relief to some of the most heavily indebted countries in the world.  But this debt relief had little effect on net ODA since the bulk of the forgiven loans were counted as ODA when they were extended.  Increased repayments of ODA loans, notably by countries that have recovered from the Asian financial crisis, also affected Japan's net ODA.

The 15 DAC countries that are members of the European Union (EU) increased their combined ODA by 2.9% in real terms to USD 42.9 billion - some 55% of DAC ODA.  It represented 0.36% of these countries' combined GNI, up from 0.35% in 2003 and broadly on track towards the EU target of 0.39% by 2006, although five EU members still need to increase their ODA substantially to reach the minimum country target of 0.33%. EU members committed themselves to these targets before the 2002 Monterrey International Conference on Financing for Development.

Among EU member countries Belgium has committed to meeting the UN target of 0.7% by 2010 and France by 2012 (with an interim target of 0.5% by 2007).  Sweden has announced its goal to reach an ODA/GNI ratio of 1% by 2006, Spain to attain 0.33% in 2006 and 0.5% in 2008, and the United Kingdom to reach 0.47% by 2007-08 and 0.7% by 2013.

The largest rises in aid in real terms in 2004 by EU countries were in:

• Austria (22.0%), mainly due to debt relief grants
• Greece (13.1%), due to increased technical co-operation and emergency relief
• Luxembourg (10.5%), due to increased contributions to regional development banks
• Portugal (an exceptional 187.5%), due to a large debt relief operation for Angola
• Spain (14.5%), due to the timing of contributions to international organisations
• United Kingdom (8.8%), due to higher project and programme aid expenditure and debt relief.

ODA also rose in real terms in Denmark (3.5%), Finland (5.9%), France (4.3%), Ireland (2.2%) and Sweden (1.4%), and remained practically unchanged in Germany (-0.4%).

ODA fell in real terms in Belgium (-30.3%), after the peak in 2003 caused by a large debt relief operation for the Democratic Republic of Congo.  The fall in Italy (-9.7%) was mainly due to reduced debt forgiveness (down about USD 400 million).  ODA from the Netherlands fell (-4.0%) as India repaid all its outstanding Dutch aid loans.  These early repayments brought the Netherlands' ODA down to 0.74% of its GNI, below its target of 0.8%, which it intends to maintain, on average, over the period 2004-07 through above-target performance in 2005-07.

Aid managed by the European Commission (EC), funded by EU members from the amounts shown above, increased by 7.1% in 2004, continuing a trend towards more efficient disbursement of their resources.

Other DAC members saw the following changes in real terms in their ODA:

• Australia's ODA rose slightly by 2.3%
• Canada's ODA rose by 12.2% as reimbursements declined compared to 2003 when India had repaid its Canadian ODA loans
• New Zealand's ODA rose by 8.2%.  This included a significant increase in grants to South Pacific Agencies.
• Norway's ODA fell slightly (-2.9%)
• Switzerland's ODA fell (-3.0%).  However, this figure may be revised substantially if Switzerland decides to report the initial costs of asylum-seekers from developing countries arriving in Switzerland.

Among non-DAC OECD donors, only Poland has provided preliminary data showing that its ODA rose to USD 124 million in 2004 as Poland joined the EU and started contributing to its development budget.

Further substantial rises in ODA are expected in 2005-6.  If members meet the ODA volume commitments they made at and after the Monterrey conference, the ODA/GNI ratio should improve from 0.25% in 2004 to 0.30% in 2006.  The main sources of the rises are likely to be:

• Contributions to the World Bank's International Development Association - In February 2005, donors agreed to contribute USD 18 billion to IDA to increase its grants and loans by at least 25%. 
• Increases in bilateral aid budgets - Several DAC members are implementing significant expansions of their bilateral aid programmes.  For example, the United States' Millennium Challenge Account is now operational and two other large donors - France and the United Kingdom - are increasing their bilateral ODA as part of ambitious plans to meet the UN 0.7% target by 2012-13. 
• Tsunami aid - The devastating Indian Ocean tsunami has led to exceptional mobilisation of both private and official resources for relief and reconstruction. The DAC will track disbursements arising from the pledges made.
• Debt relief for Iraq - At the end of 2004, the Paris Club agreed to relieve much of the debt owed by Iraq.  Depending on the pace of bilateral agreements between Iraq and its creditors, up to USD 15 billion of this relief may be reportable as ODA by DAC members in 2005.

For further information, journalists are invited to contact Helen Fisher, OECD's Media Relations Division (tel. 33 1 45 24 97 00).

See table and graphs

For further information, see www.oecd.org/dac/stats

Dear Jazz,

You post this article, as though the economic problems mentioned in the article I posted, are the result of the rich worlds compassion in wishing to relive poor countries problems! I�m afraid the truth couldn�t be further away from this!

I�d like to ask you, whose man-made system is responsible for those problems?

Initially, I would suggest that the wars Bush has led our countries into, amounts to a far greater sum (of funds) than that which is given in aid. And the reason behind those wars!? Does colonialist  - New World dis-Order ring a bell? So yeah, I�m afraid far more money is been channelled into world domination, as a pose to the rosy picture you have brought (that it is been channelled into aid), which is exactly what those deceptive freemasons want you to think!

The government in my own country has been busy drawing up plans (or should that be - plots) for relieving debt in Africa, however (it is not without ties &) in reality this is a smoke screen, behind which is hidden sinister motives of colonialism.

I say this as those who have created economic dependency, do so as a means to force those in debt/strife to seek their countenance. It is this need that allows the rich to determine what the poor must do to receive - that much needed help, and in this case that amounts to the government (in my country) been able (to an extent) to dictate how rulers in Africa run their countries, hence their apparently generous gift is really a type of sly & devious colonialism!      

(I don�t know if you have seen the film �The Matrix�, but there is no coincidence that the star of the film is called Neo (one), as in Neo-Conservative (Bush & his dads mates), as in the one-eye at the top of the pyramid on the one-dollar bill, as in the one-eyed anti-Christ � ad-dajjal.

If you have seen the film, you maybe aware of the phenomena of the �agent smith�, whom is basically a person that has not been unplugged from the system, hence they wonder around in their lives thinking they are acting in an independent manner, however as they are still part of the system, [without realising] they do  the bidding of the dajjal.)

Secondly, I would suggest that the greedy people at the top of the pyramid are largely (if not solely) responsible for the poverty we witness in the world. Take Michael Douglas & Catharine Zeta-Jones for example, whom I believe have recently purchased their sixth mansion (or should I say castle, their houses are that big).

No wonder people require butlers & maids; their greed drives them to continually grasp at luxuries it is impossible for them to maintain by their-selves (eyes bigger than their bellies � comes to mind). They are only ever able to live in one place at a time, hence they are really just exposing the fact that they have chosen their own greed (the life of this world) at the cost of helping the poor, and hence a harmonious society/world.

Thirdly, when the rich (in my country) realised how volatile the stock market was/is, they sought different areas in which to invest their wealth. Most purchased �bricks & mortar�, not because they needed the property to live in, rather they sought to lease those properties to those less well off.

This in turn drove up the prices of bricks & mortar, so that eventually the poor were unable to afford any properties whatsoever, this forced them into either council accommodation (which there are huge waiting lists for), or renting from the rich, which can only ever have the effect of lining their pockets with ever more wealth, creating an ever increasing gap between rich & poor.

Fourthly, I would like to mention the stagnating wages of the poor. I cleared out a load of old receipts recently, and came across a job vacancy slip I had picked up seven years ago; to my astonishment the salary of the job was exactly the same as similar vacancies nowadays! So after seven years of inflation the poor are expected to live on exactly the same amount, while everything from food to fuel, has increased dramatically!

This is in direct contrast to the rewards the rich & powerful (in worldly terms) treat them-selves to. A recent example of this occurred within a major corporation here in the UK, where the directors and executives �laid off� thousands of workers, citing economic difficulties & loss in profits, only then to reward each of themselves a �250, 000 bonus on top of their already ludicrously high annual salary!

So to conclude this post, the aid you speak of certainly isn�t the root cause of the poverty in my country (greed is). And yes that aid is obviously taken from the poor, as the rich are as wealthy as they ever have been (if not more so)! 

So as a result of their deception, the freemasons claim credit for generously relieving poor countries debt, when in fact they created that debt in the first place, and are really playing the colonialist game, using the money of those (in their own countries) who are already poor, in (dis-) order to receive adulation from those they have kept in ignorance - oppressed!

The Prophet�s build their empires upon the foundations of truth, compassion and wisdom; the wicked build theirs on deception, ruthlessness and ignorance. The reason why your leaders need to offer an alternative (to this system), as otherwise are they not just an extension of that oppression?   

Peace - antony