"DR" Shayo the plagiarist

[alexbm]

Haya ndiyo malalamiko toka Egypt. Niliyakopy toka MICHUZI leo.

 

[Arafat]

Tanzania Nchni ya ajabu sana, kuna watu Baba zao ni Dr nao wanajiita Dr.

Wengine wanajulikana fika kuwa na Elimu ya kubandia lakini wanapewa hadi dhamana ndani ya serikali!

Sijui tunaenda wapi?

 

[Genekai]

hiyo phd aliipata wapi? Ishamtoka sasa hiyo!

 

[Hukumuzuku]

Democracy at the barrel of a gun doesn't work!

By Dr Hildebrand Shayo


Will 2011 mark the year of the fall of Arab dictatorships and the end of the maxims that helped keep them alive? Egypt's unprecedented youth revolution, which brought millions of people from all the diverse sectors of society into the streets to tell that country's dictator for 30 years to leave, and its success in achieving this aim, furnishes tangible proof of the failure of the notion that democracy can be imposed from abroad by military force or by pressuring authoritarian regimes to democratise while supporting their self-perpetuation in order to safeguard foreign interests. Huge question marks now hang over the policies of Western powers, and the US in particular, not only in light of the results and repercussions of the Egyptian revolution but also in light of the events in other Arab countries, such as unfolding crisis in Libya and Yemen, where sustained mass protest campaigns strive to overthrow rulers who have been in power for decades.

Sometimes history can help countries avoid making the same mistakes, especially when the mistakes are repeated in the same general area, environment and culture. The attacks of 11 September 2001 galvanised the Bush administration into adopting a strategy aimed at eliminating what it regarded as the root causes behind this event, notably the lack of democracy, rampant corruption and the consequent spread of radicalism. The strategy was to employ military force in order to supplant despotic regimes with democratic governments. Afghanistan and Iraq were the first countries to be targeted by this strategy. There were significant differences between the socio-political orders in the two societies. In Afghanistan, conditions had so deteriorated as to clear the way for radical forces to outbid each other in the struggle for power, a process that resulted in Taliban rule and a secure base for Al-Qaeda, which masterminded the 11 September attacks. Iraq, meanwhile, had long been in the grip of an authoritarian regime that not only repressed its own people but also began to threaten its neighbours and the Western interests that were vested in these countries. In all events, almost 10 years later, following the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and the enormous human and material toll that ensued, it is palpably apparent that democracy did not win out. Indeed, the contrary occurred: radicalism increased, social and sectarian violence proliferated, and neighbouring powers extended their tentacles into these countries by manipulating sectarian and ideological divides, all of which worked to prolong tensions and perpetuate instability.

Not only did the US fail to bring democracy at the barrel of a gun, it also failed to do so through the use of "soft power", in the form of economic aid and educational training and assistance. The problem with this strategy was twofold. On the one hand, it was excessively idealistic and divorced from realities on the ground. On the other, it was closely linked to the promotion and protection of US interests. The use of soft power thus became prey to the logic of the use of military force. The absence of democracy and abuses of human rights were reduced from moral wrongs to foreign policy or negotiating instruments, wielded by the State Department as it saw fit, in order to pressure on non- democratic governments. To round out the picture, Washington funded many human rights and pro-democracy societies and NGOs in order to create a kind of bargaining front, regardless of how effectively these groups were in disseminating human rights awareness and democratic culture. Observers of such organisations soon discovered that they had become goldmines for certain segments of the intelligentsia, that the pace of their activities was synched with American election seasons, and the periodic conferences that accompany them, and that their publications were devoid of analytical and factual substance.

In sharp contrast to the two previous approaches to democratic transformation are the home grown modern revolutions that unfolded in Tunisia and then Egypt. To a large extent these were the product of the new virtual reality, which has become a major source for shaping the awareness of youth in many societies governed by dictatorial regimes. This, in turn, has worked to break down the barriers of fear and deception that had once been secured by the slogans and lies of government propaganda machines. The positive outcome of this was reflected in the rise of protest movements, as exemplified by the Kifaya (Enough) Movement in Egypt. Beginning as a relatively small activist movement in 2004, Kifaya sparked the growth of parallel movements in subsequent years. The mutual feedback between these groups in virtual space enhanced their ability to address social concerns while developing the political consciousness of young people through blogging and social networking websites.

Simultaneously, the proliferation of the independent media became the "unknown soldier" who cast into relief all the protest movements and other activist movements over the years and helped catalyse an ongoing process of fermentation. The result was that barely a day went by without a strike by the workers of a privatised factory, a sit-in by employees demanding salary raises to help them meet the soaring costs of living, and other protest actions of various forms with varying aims. These, too, combined to shape the new mentality of the youth, whose determination to bring change grew all the more resolved in the face of the deliberate blindness and entrenched stubbornness of a regime that refused to respect their aspirations for real economic growth, as opposed to the plundering of the country by a coterie of super wealthy business magnates, and for political rights and an effective voice in public affairs, as opposed to a voice artificially produced by forged elections.

The result of the interaction between all these factors was the explosion of the revolution of anger that surpassed all expectations and that simultaneously put paid to all arguments and assumptions that change can be imposed from abroad by the use of military force. While that logic has hopefully died in the debris of the tragedies it wrought in Afghanistan and Iraq, the voices of the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt resound with the news that democratisation and change can come from within, spearheaded by the robust and vibrant mentality of our new generations.

God bless Africa
shayoh@lsbu.ac.uk​

 

[VUVUZELA]

Huyu jamaa wajinga wajinga na wavivu wa kutafikiti ndio wanammuona DR......aliwahi kaundika atiko..yeye ni kwa michuzi tu najua anatafuta sifa....yeye na january makamba....kakopi kila kitu...
4th Valentine’s Day: How did it start?
kama kawaida michuzi akiona jamaa kachemka anaibandua......DR shayo alidesa kila kitu....huyu jamaa kumbukeni anafundisha OUT

Sasa kama DR anadesa ama ana-copy and paste, hao students kwenye universities zetu wanakoelekea sio kuzuri. Kutakuwa hakuna creativity wala critical thinking.

 

[Taso]

Democracy at the barrel of a gun doesn't work!

By Dr Hildebrand Shayo


Will 2011 mark the year of the fall of Arab dictatorships and the end of the maxims that helped keep them alive? Egypt's unprecedented youth revolution, which brought millions of people from all the diverse sectors of society into the streets to tell that country's dictator for 30 years to leave, and its success in achieving this aim, furnishes tangible proof of the failure of the notion that democracy can be imposed from abroad by military force or by pressuring authoritarian regimes to democratise while supporting their self-perpetuation in order to safeguard foreign interests. Huge question marks now hang over the policies of Western powers, and the US in particular, not only in light of the results and repercussions of the Egyptian revolution but also in light of the events in other Arab countries, such as unfolding crisis in Libya and Yemen, where sustained mass protest campaigns strive to overthrow rulers who have been in power for decades.

Sometimes history can help countries avoid making the same mistakes, especially when the mistakes are repeated in the same general area, environment and culture. The attacks of 11 September 2001 galvanised the Bush administration into adopting a strategy aimed at eliminating what it regarded as the root causes behind this event, notably the lack of democracy, rampant corruption and the consequent spread of radicalism. The strategy was to employ military force in order to supplant despotic regimes with democratic governments. Afghanistan and Iraq were the first countries to be targeted by this strategy. There were significant differences between the socio-political orders in the two societies. In Afghanistan, conditions had so deteriorated as to clear the way for radical forces to outbid each other in the struggle for power, a process that resulted in Taliban rule and a secure base for Al-Qaeda, which masterminded the 11 September attacks. Iraq, meanwhile, had long been in the grip of an authoritarian regime that not only repressed its own people but also began to threaten its neighbours and the Western interests that were vested in these countries. In all events, almost 10 years later, following the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and the enormous human and material toll that ensued, it is palpably apparent that democracy did not win out. Indeed, the contrary occurred: radicalism increased, social and sectarian violence proliferated, and neighbouring powers extended their tentacles into these countries by manipulating sectarian and ideological divides, all of which worked to prolong tensions and perpetuate instability.

Not only did the US fail to bring democracy at the barrel of a gun, it also failed to do so through the use of "soft power", in the form of economic aid and educational training and assistance. The problem with this strategy was twofold. On the one hand, it was excessively idealistic and divorced from realities on the ground. On the other, it was closely linked to the promotion and protection of US interests. The use of soft power thus became prey to the logic of the use of military force. The absence of democracy and abuses of human rights were reduced from moral wrongs to foreign policy or negotiating instruments, wielded by the State Department as it saw fit, in order to pressure on non- democratic governments. To round out the picture, Washington funded many human rights and pro-democracy societies and NGOs in order to create a kind of bargaining front, regardless of how effectively these groups were in disseminating human rights awareness and democratic culture. Observers of such organisations soon discovered that they had become goldmines for certain segments of the intelligentsia, that the pace of their activities was synched with American election seasons, and the periodic conferences that accompany them, and that their publications were devoid of analytical and factual substance.

In sharp contrast to the two previous approaches to democratic transformation are the home grown modern revolutions that unfolded in Tunisia and then Egypt. To a large extent these were the product of the new virtual reality, which has become a major source for shaping the awareness of youth in many societies governed by dictatorial regimes. This, in turn, has worked to break down the barriers of fear and deception that had once been secured by the slogans and lies of government propaganda machines. The positive outcome of this was reflected in the rise of protest movements, as exemplified by the Kifaya (Enough) Movement in Egypt. Beginning as a relatively small activist movement in 2004, Kifaya sparked the growth of parallel movements in subsequent years. The mutual feedback between these groups in virtual space enhanced their ability to address social concerns while developing the political consciousness of young people through blogging and social networking websites.

Simultaneously, the proliferation of the independent media became the "unknown soldier" who cast into relief all the protest movements and other activist movements over the years and helped catalyse an ongoing process of fermentation. The result was that barely a day went by without a strike by the workers of a privatised factory, a sit-in by employees demanding salary raises to help them meet the soaring costs of living, and other protest actions of various forms with varying aims. These, too, combined to shape the new mentality of the youth, whose determination to bring change grew all the more resolved in the face of the deliberate blindness and entrenched stubbornness of a regime that refused to respect their aspirations for real economic growth, as opposed to the plundering of the country by a coterie of super wealthy business magnates, and for political rights and an effective voice in public affairs, as opposed to a voice artificially produced by forged elections.

The result of the interaction between all these factors was the explosion of the revolution of anger that surpassed all expectations and that simultaneously put paid to all arguments and assumptions that change can be imposed from abroad by the use of military force. While that logic has hopefully died in the debris of the tragedies it wrought in Afghanistan and Iraq, the voices of the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt resound with the news that democratisation and change can come from within, spearheaded by the robust and vibrant mentality of our new generations.

God bless Africa
shayoh@lsbu.ac.uk​

Jamani eeh, JF nayo itaandikiwa barua na mwenye mali akili.

Hapo kwenye article ni vizuri iwe qualified kama "allegedly authored by Prof. Shayo."

Vinginevyo na sisi tunakuwa grouped na kina Michuzi maana na sisi tume lipost li article kama lilivyo.

 

[Hukumuzuku]

Wajameni, na hii nayo imekaaje? Amueni wenyewe:

Source 1: Tanzanian Affairs » STOP BIOPIRACY!

Tanzanian Affairs


STOP BIOPIRACY!

May 1, 2007 at 12:44 am · Filed under Issue 87


Using the properties of plants from Tanzania, companies in the western world are making huge profits while giving nothing to the local people. An example is the ‘Busy Lizzie' or impatiens usambarensis, one of the most popular plants among British gardeners, providing instant colour in even the most challenging flower beds. It is native to East Africa; its centre of origin is in the Usambara mountains.
The launch of a strain of ‘trailing' Busy Lizzie by the multinational biotech giant Syngenta is a classic example of ‘biopiracy', the term being increasingly used by environmental groups to portray a new form of ‘colonial looting' where Western corporations reap large profits by taking out copyrights on indigenous materials from developing countries and turning them into, for example, medicines or cosmetics. In very few cases are any of the financial benefits shared with the country of origin. Usambarensis make excellent hanging basket displays, a demand which feeds a lucrative market for the horticultural industry in the western world.

Launching the Busy Lizzie with a fanfare, the company claimed that ‘after many years of research' it had produced a plant that ‘can achieve, at maturity, trails including up to 70cm masses of large flowers throughout the summer until the first frost'. The plant retails at from £2 for a single small potted plant to over £10 for a hanging basket. In the US the impatiens usambarensis market is worth $148 million a year.

Despite admitting that such hybrids happened naturally in Tanzania, Syngenta claimed the new plant was its ‘invention' and the British authorities granted the company exclusive rights. Syngenta has applied for copyright in Europe and the US claiming that all trailing growth in crosses of usambarensis are its property including all plants, sexually or asexually produced, seeds, ovules, embryos and pollen. The copyright reveals that Syngenta obtained the seeds of the Tanzanian plant from the Royal Botanical Gardens in Edinburgh that had cultivated them ‘from a wild collection from Tanzania'. The seeds were from the Royal Botanical Gardens at Kew collected in 1982.

I reviewed the relevant Syngenta sources in search of information about how Tanzania might have benefited over the years. The only mention I found concerned a contribution of a portion of its profits from impatiens to a British hospice for ill children. Nothing at all to Tanzania's poor people. More interestingly, there is nothing to suggest or explain how the application to own the copyright of a plant originating in Tanzania was acquired without Tanzania being involved.
I am of the view that this is a classic case of biopiracy that responsible authorities in Tanzania need to look into. To date there are more than 30 examples of western medical, horticultural and cosmetic products alleged to have been ‘pirated' from Africa. An analysis of these copyrights reveals that impatiens usambarensis is one of seven granted by the UK authorities without involving Tanzania.
Even though the development of such products is widely hailed and the companies involved deny the accusations of biopiracy, there is a need to be aware of the fact that it is no longer acceptable to trawl across other countries taking what you want for your own commercial benefit. As there are internationally recognised rights for oil, so there should be for indigenous plants, resources such as tanzanite and knowledge. To Tanzania this biopiracy can be described as ‘a silent disease', it is hardly detectable, it frequently does not leave traces. Regrettably, such issues do not attract the same media coverage or public outcry as other environmental problems, such as deforestation, pollutant emissions and the threat of global warming.

A few years ago a British drug firm known as Phytopharm patented an active ingredient in a plant called hoodia found in some parts of Tanzania. This is a cactus-like plant that is used by the Hadzape people in Singida to ward off hunger before hunting trips. Phytopharm linked with Unilever are developing this as a diet drug to curb the obesity problem which is said to claim about 30,000 lives every year in the UK. Unilever has agreed to pay up to £21m to Phytopharm.

Some form of benefit sharing is what is needed. I would like to challenge Tanzanian lawyers to forge a benefit-sharing agreement that would see the local people getting a small share of any profits. It is not just in the world of medicine and horticulture but also in fashion that there is a debate over biopiracy. In 2004 British university scientists working with a US firm copyrighted bacteria that are found only in the caustic Lake Natron Rift Valley in Tanzania. When jeans are washed with a chemical made up of the microbes, an enzyme is produced that ‘eats' the indigo dye, giving them a naturally faded look. The company making this product makes more than $1million a year in sales of this detergent to textile firms.
Entering into a benefit-sharing agreement is the only way forward.

In the case of impatiens usambarensis there are unanswered questions. For example who would Syngenta share the benefits with? The Royal Botanical Gardens in Edinburgh where it got the seeds? Or The Royal Botanical Gardens at Kew where the seeds had come from previously? Or The Tanzanian government – Tanzania being the only country on the planet where the plant with the trailing characteristic is found? Or a local community in Tanzania?

The International Convention on Biological Diversity that promised to recognise property rights was signed in 1994. This agreement did not prohibit the collection of indigenous material but it did recommend that agreements should be reached to share any commercial benefit that later emerges.


Hildebrand Shayo




Source 2: The new piracy: how West 'steals' Africa's plants | Science | The Observer


The new piracy: how West 'steals' Africa's plants

Swiss and British firms are accused of using the scientific properties of plants from the developing world to make huge profits while giving nothing to the people there. Antony Barnett reports

• Sunday 27 August 2006 <li class="history">Article history<li class="history">
  The Busy Lizzie is one of the most popular plants among British gardeners, providing instant colour to even the most challenging flower beds. Yet this humble plant now finds itself caught up in an international row over patents, human rights and the exploitation of poor communities in the developing world.
  
  The launch of a new strain of 'trailing' Busy Lizzie by the multinational biotech giant Syngenta is, say campaigners, a classic example of what they have dubbed 'biopiracy'. This term is being increasingly used by environmental groups to describe a new form of 'colonial pillaging' where Western corporations reap large profits by taking out patents on indigenous materials from developing countries and turning them into products such as medicines and cosmetics which can be extremely valuable in western markets. In very few cases are any of the financial benefits shared with the country of origin.
  An analysis by The Observer of patents issued by the British authorities reveal they have granted several companies patents for at least seven products that orginated from naturally occurring African plants or organisms.
  
  The dispute over the Busy Lizzie revolves around the drive to create the perfect hanging basket display, a demand which feeds a lucrative market for the horticultural industry. Despite its massive popularity the Busy Lizzie - or Impatiens walleriana - has always had one downside: it is too upright.
  For years botanists had been hunting for a way to make Busy Lizzies trail downwards. Researchers believed that if they could find this magic extra, the plant would be ideal for hanging baskets and a botanical gold mine would be theirs for the taking.
  
  With great fanfare in April last year Syngenta launched the Spellbound Busy Lizzie. The company claimed that 'after many years of research' it had produced a Busy Lizzie that 'can achieve, at maturity, trails of 70cm [about 28 ins with] masses of large flowers throughout the summer until the first frost'.
  The Spellbound went on sale at garden centres across North America and Europe for £2 a plant and Syngenta promoted it through retailers such as B&Q and Wyevale Garden Centres with its own mascot: Lizzie the Spellbound Fairy. It was a great commercial success and more varieties have been launched.
  
  But behind the marketing glitz and talk of magical creatures, an analysis of the British patent taken out by Syngenta for its new floral 'invention' reveals that Spellbound's magical secret comes from a rare African plant, the Impatiens usambarensis. This grows in the unique ecological habitat of the Usambara mountain range in Tanzania, just south of Mount Kilimanjaro. In its patent Syngenta describes this plant as having 'no commercial significance'.
  Syngenta's botanists discovered that by crossing the two plants, the Busy Lizzie displayed the much sought after 'trailing growth habits'. Despite admitting that such hybrids happened naturally in Tanzania, Syngenta claimed the new plant was its 'invention' and the British authorities granted the company a patent on 6 February 2004.
  The patent reveals that Syngenta obtained the seeds of the African plant from the Royal Botanical Gardens in Edinburgh that had cultivated them 'from a wild collection from Tanzania'. A botanical gardens spokeswoman said it had received the seeds in 1982 from the Royal Botanical Gardens at Kew. They had been deposited there in 1976 by Christopher Grey-Wilson, a former president of the Alpine Garden Society.
  
  'This appears to be a classic case of biopiracy,' says Alex Wijeratna, a campaigner from ActionAid. 'This is the silent plunder of natural resources from developing countries. Here we have a large multinational taking out a patent on a plant that grows naturally in a part of Africa and claiming it is their invention . Now the company is making a fortune selling it to the mass market, but the Tanzania communities that live in these regions will not receive one penny.'
  
  In 1994 more than 100 countries, including Britain, signed the International Convention on Biological Diversity that promised to recognise the property rights of developing countries. It did not prohibit the collection of indigenous material but recommended that agreements should be reached to share any commercial benefit that later emerges.
  
  A Syngenta spokesman admitted it had paid nothing for the seeds. He said: 'We got them in 1990 before the international convention came into force. In any case our paperwork shows that when we received the seeds nobody knew exactly which country they came from.'
  He rejects the claim of biopiracy. 'Many plants that grow today in a British garden originate from another part of the world and I would not describe that as a type of piracy.'
  
  The US-based Edmonds Institute recently published a report listing more than 30 example of western medical, horticultural and cosmetic products it alleged had been 'pirated' from Africa. An analysis of these patents by The Observer reveals that the Syngenta patent is one of seven granted by the UK authorities that now face accusations of biopiracy.
  These include:
  · A diabetes drug being developed by a British firm that comes from the Libyan plant Artemisia judaica
  · An immuno-suppressant drug being developed by GlaxoSmithKline that comes from a compound found in a termite hill in Gambia.
  · A treatment for HIV taken from mycobacteria discovered in mud samples from the Lango district of central Uganda.
  · Infection-fighting drugs made from amoebas in Mauritius and Venezuela.
  · An anti-diarrhoea vaccine developed from Egyptian microbes.
  · A slug barrier made from a Somalian species of myrrh.
  Although the development of such drugs is widely welcomed and the companies involved deny the accusations of biopiracy, there is a growing debate about whether profits should be shared between western companies and developing countries.
  
  Beth Burrows, president of the Edmonds Institute, a non-profit body specialising in education about intellectual property rights, said: 'Times have changed. It is no longer acceptable for the great white explorer to trawl across Africa or South America taking what they want for their own commercial benefit. It is no more than a new form of colonial pillaging. As there are internationally recognised rights for oil, so there should be for indigenous plants and knowledge.'
  
  The Brazilian ambassador in London, Jose Mauricio Bustani, described biopiracy as 'a silent disease'. He said: 'It is hardly detectable, it frequently does not leave traces and is an elusive activity perpetrated and often abetted by many well-known multinational companies.
  
  
  'Unfortunately, it does not attract the same media coverage or public outcry as other environmental problems, such as deforestation and pollutant emissions. But this silent pillage is robbing developing countries in Africa, Latin America and Asia of the means to finance important sustainable development projects, and is a powerful disincentive for their biodiversity conservation efforts.'
  Five years ago The Observer became the first newspaper to reveal how the British drug firm Phytopharm had patented an active ingredient in a plant called hoodia. This is a cactus-like African plant that is used by the San bushmen in South Africa to ward off hunger before hunting trips. Phytopharm has linked with Unilever to market this product, now being developed, as a diet drug. Unilever has agreed to pay up to £21m to Phytopharm, which originally claimed the tribe was extinct.
  
  The Observer article prompted an international outcry and lawyers representing the surviving African bushmen managed to forge a benefit-sharing agreement that will see the tribe collect a small share of any profits.
  Yet Phytopharm's chief executive, Richard Dixey, strongly rejects the claims of biopiracy and accuses campaigners of scoring an own goal. He said: 'Biopiracy is such an emotive term for a highly complex issue. The fact is that many of these plants grow in more than one place and have been used by many people throughout history. It is almost impossible to discover who 'owns' them.
  'In any case it takes a huge effort and a lot of money from recognising a particular property in a plant and developing it into a drug. It can cost between $200m and $500m [£100m-£250m]. If companies could not get the protection of a patent then they simply would not bother. Then what would happen is that the traditional knowledge of these communities would die out with the people or be lost as they become westernised.'
  
  It is not just in the world of medicine and horticulture but also in fashion that the debate over biopiracy rages. In 2004, The Observer revealed how British scientists from Leicester University worked with US firm Genencor to patent a microbe that lives in the caustic lakes of Kenya's Rift Valley.
  It was discovered that when jeans are washed with this, the microbe produces an enzyme that 'eats' the indigo dye, giving them a naturally faded look. The company, which denies any wrongdoing, has since made more than $1m in sales to detergent makers and textile firms.

 

[Manda]

Duh! hii kali..ile skendo ya kwanza nilipoisoma hapa JF nkampa 'benefit of doubt' hyu mwalimu wangu, lakini hii ya pili..mh!
Sitaki amini yake madude aliyokuwa anatema darasani alikuwa ana-desa..hahahaha!

BTW amenifundisha pepa moja katika MA level (Economics), jamaa kumbe alikuwa anachakachua.?

Bongo kazi ipo.

 

[Manda]

Sasa kama DR anadesa ama ana-copy and paste, hao students kwenye universities zetu wanakoelekea sio kuzuri. Kutakuwa hakuna creativity wala critical thinking.

Mkuu..
He once happen kuwa mwalimu wangu katika MA level, BTW the way alivo kuwa anatema madude ilikuwa ngumu sana kujua kama jamaa anadesa, let alone wengi wetu tulikuwa wageni katika yale aliyokuwa anafundisha. Kimsingi, at the class level, mm sina shida na mwalimu anayedesa/kariri na kuja kutema madude, much as atafundisha vizuri na kuweza kujibu maswali tutakayo mu-ask, though at the personal level, si haki kuenda pblic ku publish kitu ambacho SIO chako na kudai ni CHAKO, tena at the 'Phd' level, that's soooo UNFAIR dude!

Poor him.

 

[Hukumuzuku]

Nyingine hii hapa:

Source 1: Realising President Jakaya Kikwete's Vision « TanzaniaSports.com | All About Sports in Tanzania

Realising President Jakaya Kikwete's Vision

Presentation Made to Tanzania High Commission in London

By Hildebrand Shayo

Sport is a dynamic and fast-growing sector with an underestimated
macro-economic impact and can contribute to the objectives of
economic growth and job creation. It can serve as a tool for local
and regional development, urban regeneration or rural development.
Sport has synergies with tourism and can stimulate the upgrading of
infrastructure and the emergence of new partnerships for financing sport.
.....blah blah blahh


Source 2: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/publ/pdf/sport/whitepaper_en.pdf (Soma page 20 Section 3, first paragraph)

3. The economic dimension of sport

Sport is a dynamic and fast-growing sector with
an underestimated macro-economic impact, and
can contribute to the Lisbon objectives of growth
and job creation. It can serve as a tool for local and
regional development, urban regeneration or rural
development. Sport has synergies with tourism
and can stimulate the upgrading of infrastructure
and the emergence of new partnerships for financing
sport and leisure facilities.

 

[Hukumuzuku]

Hii kideo hapa chini amua mwenyewe as to who's supervising whom...teh tehteh

Dr Shayo supervising a PhD Student's work at LSBU

YouTube - Dr Shayo supervising a PhD Student's work at LSBU

 

[Eqlypz]

wewe John umemuumumbua inatosha,unataka uandike barua asimamishwe kazi ili iweje?aje kula kwako???

yoyote mwenye contacts za shayo naomba jamani,mie namzimiaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!nilikuwa namuogopa kuwa ni liprofesa na akili zangu za kushikia nitamuweza vipi? hili desa limenipa confidence i can handle him hahahahaahah!

Hahaha yani nimecheka kwa sauti baada ya kusoma hii thread.

Ashazoea kucopy na kupaste mwaka miaka michache nyuma alicopy Historia ya Valentine's Day neno kwa neno.

 

[Freema Agyeman]

Jamani eeh, JF nayo itaandikiwa barua na mwenye mali akili.

Hapo kwenye article ni vizuri iwe qualified kama "allegedly authored by Prof. Shayo."

Vinginevyo na sisi tunakuwa grouped na kina Michuzi maana na sisi tume lipost li article kama lilivyo.

JF ikiandikiwa barua na mwenye haki nakili, utakuwa responsible. Umequaote article kama ilivyo, hata mwenye original post akifuta, nadhani itabaki ina display kwenye post yako.

 

[Geza Ulole]

Kwa vile humu ndani ni home of great thinkers na kwa vile huyu bwana hasikii wala haambiwi kuhusu suala la plagiarism! Na kwa heshima ya PHD yake naomba tuipitie upya thesis yake maana inaonyesha huyu bwana hastaili kuwa nayo hiyo PHD na amekubuhu kwenye kunakili people's ideas na kuzifanya zake (yaani copy and paste)!

Kwanini basi? Kwa kawaida mtu kama yeye huambatana na heshima ya kuelimisha jamii na kudhamini kazi ya wenzie! sasa inakuwaje leo hii na mara kadha wa kadhaa huyu bwana anaiba kazi za watu na hata akikanywa haskii? yaani sikio la kufa? naomba mwenye thesis ya jamaa aibandike humu ndani maana hawa watu ndio huuza nchi hii! Hatuna haja ya kuwa na madokta wasiodhamini intellectual property rights za kazi za ma-scholar wenzie namna hii! Hii inakera wajameni!

Lets do it for the sake of serving our face from further shambles...mie niko mbioni kuandika barua ya malalamiko huko chuoni kwake alipoipata hiyo PHD na huko anapofundishia/anapofanya kazi nikiambatanisha na vielelezo nimechoshwa na huu ujinga! kha...!

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Shayo (simuiti Dr.) amefanya dhambi kubwa kabisa katika usomi (grave intellectual sin) kutumia maneno ya mtu mwingine na kuyafanya kama ya kwake. Kuna umuhimu mkubwa sana wa kutaja chanzo cha maoni unayotumia kwani kufanya hivyo si jambo la aibu au unyonge bali unafanya kile ambacho tunaweza kukiita ni "intellectual/academic honest".

Kama bado alikuwa na nafasi kwenye Open Univerisity ni lazima CHuo Kikuu Huria kimfukuze.
Kama kwa namna yoyote ametambuliwa na taasisi za kitaaluma za Tanzania ni lazima zichukue hatua.

Hili jambo lisichukuliwe kwa udogo wake wote na hii ndio maana wengine wetu ni bora tutoe maoni yetu wenyewe tupingwe kuliko kudandia maoni ya watu wengine tukijua hayatapingwa. Ukitaka kutumia mawazo au maneno ya mtu mwingine ambayo hayako kwenye public domain au hayajulikani sana ni lazima useme umeyatoa wapi. Mtu akisema "there is nothing to fear but fear itself" anaweza asilazimike kusema nani alisema kwani ni mojawapo ya kauli zinazojulikana sana. Lakini unapochukua wazo zima la mtu mwingine na kulifanya la kwako au kulitumia hata watu wakadhania ni la kwako NI LAZIMA UWEKE CHANZO! Hakuna "kama, mbona, ikiwa, labda, n.k".

Ni wazo Shayo hajajifunza wala hajui uzito wa kosa hili hadi atakapowajibishwa. Kwa sababu baada ya mjadala mzito wa 2008 tulitarajia labda kajifunza; au amefikiria tumesahau?

 

[Abdulhalim]

A comedy of 'intellect', chronic plagiarist.

BTW, huyu jamaa ana mahusiano yeyote na yule memba mwene ID ya "SHY"?, these people bana lolz

 

[maselef]

Just click Find ETDs &mdash; NDLTD. Andika Shayo au kama unajua title ya reserch yake kila kitu hadharani

 

[Malafyale]

''Dr" Shayo awaombe radhi watanzania wote popote walipo duniani;hii ni aibu yetu sote as country!Na huyu msomi uchwara asiaminiwe tena na ikibidi hao jamaa wamfikishe mahakamani kwa kosa la"kunakiri",na kwa ushahidi huu wa Michuzi blog nina uhakika atafungwa jela!

Shame on you "Dr"wa ku-copy and paste Shayo;ukitumia kazi za watu lzm ueleze chanzo cha habari hiyo ni wapi na lini!

Shame on you na umetuabisha sana!

 

[Abdulhalim]

Thesis ya nini? jamaa ni chronic plagiarist, na ameshadhihirisha hilo mara kibwena tu..

 

[Ogah]

Duh! hii kali..ile skendo ya kwanza nilipoisoma hapa JF nkampa 'benefit of doubt' hyu mwalimu wangu, lakini hii ya pili..mh!
Sitaki amini yake madude aliyokuwa anatema darasani alikuwa ana-desa..hahahaha!

BTW amenifundisha pepa moja katika MA level (Economics), jamaa kumbe alikuwa anachakachua.?

Bongo kazi ipo.

Mkuu..
He once happen kuwa mwalimu wangu katika MA level, BTW the way alivo kuwa anatema madude ilikuwa ngumu sana kujua kama jamaa anadesa, let alone wengi wetu tulikuwa wageni katika yale aliyokuwa anafundisha. Kimsingi, at the class level, mm sina shida na mwalimu anayedesa/kariri na kuja kutema madude, much as atafundisha vizuri na kuweza kujibu maswali tutakayo mu-ask, though at the personal level, si haki kuenda pblic ku publish kitu ambacho SIO chako na kudai ni CHAKO, tena at the 'Phd' level, that's soooo UNFAIR dude!

Poor him.

Duuhh.....yaani mazee ulipigwa shule na huyu jamaa!!.........wee "Shetani"............itabidi ukapigwe msasa aisee!! hahahah