Many more food items will be rejected from the Cameroons because we are doing everything possible to get rich over night. My wife ventured into coffee business with a German who was looking for coffee grown with organic manure since fertilizers were harmful to the health of caucasians. They were lucky to find such coffee only amongst poor farmers who could not afford a bag of fertilizers to increase their yield. The guy was willing to pay a higher price for such organic produce. Poverty here became a virtue. I remember very well while studying in England that fertilizers were banned from Europe in the cultivation of quick maturing crops like corn and other vegetables in 1986. Fertilizers companies immediately turned towards Africa where all the 'njamnjama' we eat now has fertilizers as ingredients hence the sudden surge in cancerous diseases. When all our crops shall be turned down because of the presence of toxic chemicals the poverty rate shall increase 100 fold. Cry thy beloved continent. Visha --- On Mon, 3/6/13, Tumasang Martin <tumasangm@hotmail.com> wrote:
From: Tumasang Martin <tumasangm@hotmail.com>
Subject: Coruption: Cameroon cocoa totally rejected by European Union: Total Doom for Farmers
To: "ambasbay@googlegroups.com" <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>, "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>, "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com" <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, 3 June, 2013, 14:42
EU tightens laws on African cocoa exports  Cocoa producing countries in Africa stand to lose billions of euros in exports as the European Union has tightened laws on the importation of cocoa beans into the economic group. In April this year, Cameroon had their exports totally rejected. Cameroon is the world's fifth largest cocoa grower. Aside Cameroon, the bulk of the world's cocoa beans originates from West Africa. Ivory Coast is the world's leading exporter of the crop with a whopping 40 percent market share. Together with Ghana, Nigeria and Cameroon, the West African region produces more than 50 percent of the world's cocoa beans. Cameroon was the first African country to have its cocoa harvest rejected by the European Union, when 2,000 tonnes of beans failed to be certified in April. This the EU said, was due to high levels of chemicals found in the product which they considered to be harmful to human health, Ventures Africa reports. A Regulatory Manager at the food distribution company Cargill, Mark Yonker told DW TV in Paris that the sub-standard conservation methods used is the root cause. "The main problem is drying the cocoa artificially. When smoke comes in touch with cocoa beans, then you risk higher levels of what we call polycyclic aroma to hydrocarbons," Yonker explained. Cocoa farmers in Cameroon generally dry their cocoa beans on tarred roads or smoke the produce in traditional ovens. European buyers had previously warned Cameroon's cocoa farmers that such practices could have negative effects on the health of consumers. Chocolate, which is derived from cocoa has become a multi-billion euro industry and the mainstay of countries like Ivory Coast and Ghana. Farmer Kane Peter said it has been difficult for growers to abide with the new EU cocoa export legislation. "The farmers are in a hurry, they will not persevere enough to ferment [the cocoa beans]. They will just take every thing and pack in the oven for two days in order to be able to go and sell it." Susan Ako, another farmer, added that poverty is to blame for their rush in wanting to get their cocoa harvest to the market. By so doing, they fail to observe the regulations. "You know that cocoa comes from the farm during the rainy season. So farmers don't persevere to dry their cocoa, they need fast money so they dry it anywhere." Huge quantities of bagged raw beans lie in villages across the Cameroon country waiting to be quality-controlled before being exported. Cameroonian authorities are cracking down on sub-standard cocoa processing practices too by confiscating poorly dried beans, especially those dried on tarred roads. Food preservation remains a challenge for African farmers as the practice of drying cocoa beans in unhealthy means is not limited to Cameroon. Lack of investment in the sector means that cocoa farming is largely in the hands of uneducated peasant farmers, who have little support to modernise their operations. Cameroon's Minister of Trade, Luc Magloire Atangana, said the government was taking measures to tackle the problem. "On all roads farmers use to dry cocoa beans, the government has to decided to distribute tarpaulins free of charge. And in the south-west where heavy rains make it difficult for cocoa to dry, the government has distributed ovens for drying cocoa." EU Consumer Federation representative, Phil Sigley says Cameroon has no choice but to modernise its cocoa sector. "If they [farmers] produce good cocoa and it gets blended or mixed with bad cocoa, then that farmer may not be getting the best he deserves." Cocoa is Cameroon's main export. A slump in commodity prices of the product in the mid 1980s is said to have caused a decade long recession in the country.
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 13:38:34 +0100 From: vifa57@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Re: [Cameroonpatriots] Unification 1959-1961 To: ambasbay@googlegroups.com | The UK and the UN had been in write-ups long before now but we buried our heads in sand and refused to see this because it was coming from the doubtful quarters as per you. I did mention in one of my write-ups that Britain was to blame for our demise citing their attitude towards the Falklanders as a point in issue. Had it been that they settled their brothers and sisters in the Cameroons they would not have treated the territory with reckless abandon as they did. Racism I said was at the root of it all for they were treating us like bundles of wood and rice that could be shifted to any direction without complaining. Margaret Thatcher PM at the time of the Falkland wars described the Falklanders as being more British and were thus to be defended at all cost. Could anyone say so about the British Cameroons? We are blacks and our bodies are good for the British soldiers boots.
Amen
--- On Sun, 3/2/13, Kum Bezeng <kgbezeng@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Kum Bezeng <kgbezeng@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Cameroonpatriots] Unification 1959-1961
To: "ambasbay@googlegroups.com" <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>
Date: Sunday, 3 February, 2013, 12:07
Sent from my iPhone
Ebai George has seen the route of the problem.
Please, get your email across to me so that you may know what SCAPO has been doing.
----- Original Message ----- From: Ebai George Sent: 01/22/13 09:47 AM Subject: Fw: [Cameroonpatriots] Unification 1959-1961
I think we have been hammering on the wrong door LRC another slave state, instead of facing the real enemies Britain and the UN to rectify their errors and restore our sovereignty! That's the target! Think about that! george bulshit,what we need in Cameroon is not separation. Cameroon by nature is one
--- On Thu, 12/27/12, Fungwa Samuel <sc_fungwa@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Fungwa Samuel <sc_fungwa@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Cameroonpatriots] Unification 1959-1961
To: "Cameroonpatriots@yahoogroups.com" <Cameroonpatriots@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thursday, December 27, 2012, 1:10 PM
| People, Take a step back and reflect on this. According to the same British government, the Southern Cameroon leadership had passed the test of Self governance by gradually or progressively asserting its identity, gaining institutional autonomy in accordance with Article 76(b) of the UN charter. By 1958, the British government set a timeline for full independence to be achieved by 1960 when the objectives of Article 76 (b) were expected to be achieved. So what exactly happened that before 1960, the British had changed stance and started talking of economic viability with nothing to prove the point. What did they use to measure the economic viability? The corporations, CDC, the marketing boards, the banks and even oil resources were already mapped in the early part of the 19th century. So what is all this nonesense about economic viability? It is recorded in a UN General Assembly Resolution 1282(XIII) of 5th December 1958, with the British saying that since the Southern Cameroons had already attained self government status since 1954, the only objective to be achieved in 1960 was FULL INDEPENDENCE. And according to their time table, this was achievable by 1960. By this time, the economic viability of the Southern Cameroons was not an issue. Self government institutions were already in place pending foreign affairs and defence. Foreign affairs was not so much the issue. But crucial was defence for there was the fear of attack by the Western neighbour Nigeria and the Eastern neighbour East Cameroon. Now, if there was any reasonable fear of an invasion, how logical was it to make a choice completely void of self defence? Instead of building a military to foster the people's right to self defence and guide them through, their only one choice was to join either one of the potential belligerent and nothing else. Minor arguments like economic viability then gripped in to mask their true intentions and took centre stage. What is crucial is latent. And it is what happened between the key actors (France, Britain and the UN) between 1958 and 1961 that changed the debate to lame arguments like the economic viability of the Southern Cameroon. If that was the case, then the British government would not have made the case for independence in 1958. And if it was obliged to make the case, then that would have been included as one of the achievable objectives leading up to indendence. Fungwa | From: Steve NEBA FUH ;
To:
Cc: Cameroonpatroit ;
Subject: [Cameroonpatriots] Public Documents On Southern Cameroons Unification 1959-1961 by Verkijika FANSO
Sent: Thu, Dec 27, 2012 5:17:19 AM Public Documents On Southern Cameroons Unification 1959-1961Monday, December 24, 2012 By Verkijika FANSO CameroonPostline.com -- Declassified Colonial Office (CO) documents at the PRO (Public Records Office), now British Archives at Kew Gardens, London in the UK give much information about the various behind the scene (secret/confidential) discussions and decisions that were taken on account of the Southern Cameroons concerning the termination of the British trusteeship and the granting of self-government and/or independence. Some of these discussions took place in Buea in the Southern Cameroons, Yaounde in French/Cameroun Republic, Lagos in Nigeria, New York at the UN, London in the UK and even in Paris. Some these were centered on why the territory must not be granted independence in its own right and the requirement that it must gain independence by either integrating with Nigeria or unifying with the Cameroun Republic. We will be making public so that the reader be informed about how independence by integrating or unifying was explained as a way of not contravening the UN Charter on the independence ot colonial and/or trusteeship territories. One of the documents (CO554/2412 XC3343) concerns the economic viability of the Southern Cameroons if it was to be left on its own. This ridiculous discussion took place in October 1959 at the UN where the UK representative, Sir Andrew Cohen, made it clear that it was difficult for the Southern Cameroons to become a viable economic entity if it gained independence in its own right. He told the Fourth Committee of the General Assembly that the territory would face serious financial difficulties particularly at the outset. Participating from the Southern Cameroons was the Premier J.N. Foncha who argued for the territories right to independence, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition N.N. Mbile, and integrationist who was against Southern Cameroons going on its own, and Ndeh Ntumazah of the One Kamerun, a unificationist who was also out-rightly against independence for the Southern Cameroons. Another document concerns the debate in the British House of Commons in August 1961 about the distinct and independent existence of the Southern Cameroons at unification. We take up this extremely important discussion from when a Member of the British Parliament (MP), Mr. G.M. Thomson was anxious to know about the situation in the Southern Cameroons that was about to join the Cameroun Republic to where arrangements were being made that would enable expatriate civil servants officers in the Southern Cameroons (British and Nigerians) to stay on after 1st October 1961. The document is revealing about the understanding behind the complicated question of independence by joining and what was to become of the Southern Cameroons when the British trusteeship ended at midnight on 1st October, 1961. The Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Mr. Hugh Fraser made it clear that at that moment â€Å"it would both be a question of granting independence and of creating a new unit from the Cameroun Republic and the Southern Cameroons�. He said agreement had been reached about it between the parties concerned.VIABILITY OF THE SOUTHERN CAMEROONS Fourth Committee of the General Assembly – October 1959 In the Fourth Committee, the following remarks were made on the above subject. Mr. Foncha (Premiere of the Southern Cameroons) â€Å"recognized that separation would entail economic hardship for some time to come�. (885th meeting). Mr. Mbile (Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Southern Cameroons) said â€Å"the Southern Cameroons could not achieve independence as a separate country because it was not economically viable�. (Same meeting). Sir Andrew Cohen said (to the representative of Czechoslovakia who had asked for his personal opinion on the possibility of the Southern Cameroons becoming a viable economic entity, he replied) that the Southern Cameroons had a potential for considerable agricultural development; the realization of that potential however called for capital which was not available in the territory itself. Moreover, if it became independent, the Southern Cameroons would have to face serious financial difficulties particularly at the outset. That was one of the important considerations which leaders and people of the Southern Cameroons – and the administering authority so long as it retained responsibility – must take into account in considering a permanent solution�. (888th meeting). At a later meeting â€Å"in reply to the second part of the Indian representative’s question, he said that the territory would undoubtedly be faced with a formidable problem; he did not see how it could solve that problem from its own resources particularly in the early years. At present, nearly all professional and technical posts and a large proportion of the more senior subordinate posts were filled by non-Cameroonians…� â€Å"A few days previously in reply to a question by the representative of Czechoslovakia, he had given his personal views regarding the viability of the Southern Cameroons as a separate economic unit and he would not repeat them. He would merely recall that he had said then that in his opinion an independent Southern Cameroons would have serious financial and economic problems; added difficulties concerning staff would make those problems even harder to solve�. (892nd meeting)Fears Others spoke on the same point. Mr. Ntumazah (One Kamerun party) said â€Å"the Southern Cameroons could not of itself constitute a viable economic unit�. (889th meeting�) Krishna Menon (India) said â€Å"he would also like the administering authority to indicate whether the present financial resources of the Southern Cameroons were such as to enable it to govern itself. An independent territory which is not economically self sufficient might in a very short time, find itself under foreign economic domination�. (890th meeting) Espinosa (Mexico) said â€Å"no satisfactory definition had ever been given of the necessary prerequisite of an independent state but it was all too evident to what perils a country was exposed when it attained independence without possessing the requirements necessary to make it viable. The southern Cameroons clearly formed a unit but after listening to the various statements that had been made his delegation had serious doubts whether it was capable of existing as an independent state�. (892nd meeting) Edmond (New Zealand) said â€Å"the independence of the Southern Cameroons as a separate entity was ruled out by the economic considerations�. (896th meeting) Miss Brooks (Liberia) said â€Å"Paragraph 2 [of a draft resolution] would serve to allay any apprehension that the Southern Cameroons might become independent as a separate entity, and eventually which all were agreed should be ruled out in view of the territory’s limited economic potential�. (898th meeting) One or two others such as Afghanistan and Guinea said that economic viability did not matter.
Check out www.nebafuh.com for political,economic and social analyses on CAMEROON, AFRICA and the WORLD. | |
| __._,_.___ Appreciation for your participation. Any expression with good intenttion can be good contribution for evolution We believe that relevant expression can yield important evolution. "We owe our children a better future and a better Cameroon for the future" Cameroon as nation should have efficient constitution with provisions for proper enforcement together with proper institutions and vision for proper emulations to foster national and individual evolutions from generations to generations. Any relavant ideas or input with good intention can be great contribution for the "ULTIMATE CHANGE WE CRAVE and "THE EVOLUTION WE NEED" "Cameroon belongs to all Cameroonians in the Universe. Any member of this e-group can also email this link to any fellow Cameroonian to join and become a member of this e-group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cameroonpatriots/joinOR Cameroonpatriots-subscribe@yahoogroups.comThanks for your cooperation. Sincerely, Managing Directors Cameroonpatriots-owner@yahoogroups.comhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cameroonpatriots/![Yahoo! Groups]() . ![]() __,_._,___
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambasbay" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambasbay" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
| | -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambasbay" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambasbay" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambasbay" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
|
0 comments:
Post a Comment