Couldn't Be Bothered??
No, before AIDS they just had much more pressing things to worry about than sexual health, for example, famines, droughts, civil wars, and all the other diseases which are endemic in that part of the world.
If it's 'just' a sexual health problem, why is the American government pushing abstinance based programmes over condom based ones? When it's obvious that a physical barrier will be more effective than trusting to the willpower and good sense of an entire continent. Libya, an african country, did have the capacity to manufacture drugs, sadly, this meant it also had the capacity to produce chemical weapons, so when the US destroyed that capacity, it destroyed both.
Or the company could instead spend $4bn less on marketing the successful drug,
The point in this case is, that while what you say is true, are you honestly saying that the lives of all the people who could be saved by such a drug are worth less than the profits of a drug company?
Besides which America is often caught out by ignoring other sources. If you remember the furore surrounding the Human Genome Project, when the American private company was prevented from gaining a hold on the human genome by the Wellcome Trust.
The point is, that there seems to be an increasing tendency in the USA for property and money to take precedence over people, which quite frankly is wrong.
Furthermore, if Birdflu were to become a pandemic, the deathtoll might be so enormous that realistically the global economy would go into a serious depression, which would be bad for all companies.
My ass
Every european country offered all possible support following 9/11, the NATO members even invoked the attack on one is an attack on all clause in it's constitution.
The only thing which some of them didn't do was invade Iraq, which is why there are Germans in Kabul right now.
There was no 'urgent need' to attack Iraq, Saddam was an evil dictator who should have been removed from power, possibly by force, but to say that there was an urgent need to do so is just bullshit.
WTF - How is the Middle East going to invade Europe. Sure they have a growing population, that doesn't mean they are about to invade. How the hell will they form a coordinated front capable of attacking Europe? , what will they attack Europe with? ,
besides which, the whole point of the EU is to change the historical tendency of powers towards aggressive militarism and conflict.
Do you honestly believe that the combined industrial power of the EU would be incapable of repelling an actual conventional invasion from the middle east?
You'll notice that most of the people at that conference are now members of the same organisation and have been at peace for 60 years?
The EU's peaceful overcoming of the differences between European nations - differences which caused the 20th century's most horrific genocide - is what gives them faith in solving problems by 'sitting across a table'
The point is that the EU's armed forces are well enough funded and equipped to fulfil its own needs. The only time it needs to project power abroad is to protect its own citizens, and on peacekeeping missions, tasks which is more than up to. It is even capable of operating a large sized expeditionary war on its own, should the need arise. Specific problems - strategic airlift being one - are being resolved.
Effectively, the only military more advanced than theirs is the US, and no matter the state of international relations, the EU is not about to attack the US militarily any time soon.
I call bullshit - France spends more per capita on defence than the UK and has a larger population, larger navy and larger army. Who the fuck are the Americans defending Europe from Right now?
Answer - No one
Europe is effectively self sufficient when it comes to defending Europe from terrorism and faces no immediate or short term threats from a nation state.
Most foreign countries have stricter data protection laws than the US. I worked at an office which handled personal data from medical studies, in lots of cases they were worried about sharing data with their US counterpart because their data protection laws were not strict enough, likewise, the australian branch was less keen to share with us because their data protection laws are stricter still.
Woah, hold on a minute there.
Christians are followers of christ, how they interpret the Bible doesn't come into it. At no point in the bible is Jesus quoted as saying "oh yeah, and anything which my disciples write, you should believe that exactly" Bible != written by god. The new testament was written by other people after the death of Christ.
As for those "very religious people who believe in evolution" i dunno, how about the Pope? The catholic church has accepted evolution for some time now.
say you believe that Christ is the son of god, that makes you a christian, just because the bible also said that, what means that everything else within it is true?
Newton was a unitarian,
And he also believed in Alchemy, proper full on, lead into gold alchemy. He was a gifted mathematician and scientist, that doesn't preclude him from believing bollocks.
Sorry, but the Independent used to be an independent news source, but in recent months it's really gone downhill. I would describe myself as centre left, but a number of recent front page stories have been more pieces of opinion than news.
It's an interesting point about young soldiers standing guard for long periods with live ammo and trusting them not to shoot at cars, but it looks like what is happening in Iraq right now.
It would seem that they are more than a little trigger happy, considering the various friendly fire incidents which have occured.
I'm not criticising, but I am saying that perhaps had they been older/more experienced/better trained, they might not have made the same mistakes.
Abu Griahb in particular would appear to demonstrate a lack of maturity when placed in a position of responsibility.
The map overlay thing on mapquest is good
But it's not as seamless as the Google one, which moves relatively smoothly rather than having to click a button and wait for it to reload.
Fool, it doesn't matter if it receives or is capable of receiving, only what it is being used for. If it is not tuned in and is connected to something else then the device is exempt.
My teeth are fine, everyone has free dental care up until age 16 anyway and it stays free if you go to an NHS dentist.
But as NHS dentists are like unicorn shit, lots of people go to private dentists instead.
That's why i think that morally, if you have already paid the license fee there is nothing wrong with downloading BBC programming as you have already paid for it.
The reason that 24 is at the top is not just because it is great, but because the first two series were broadcast 'free' on the BBC, but then, for various reasons Fox/Sky/Murdoch didn't sell them the rights for series 3 or 4. They were only broadcast on Sky One which fewer people had access to. Hence more people download them.
The real reason for the problems with the British railway system is nothing to do with a lack of technical expertise. It is more to do with chronic underinvestment and a botched attempt at privatisation.
Plus most of the accidents on British Rail in recent years have been less to do with "the right switches" being open, and more to do with drivers running red signals and the fact that the rails hadn't been maintained adequately for years.
1. Al Jazeera are a news organisation much like any other, it of course has an editorial point of view, however it is criticised just as much in the middle east for giving the US and Israel time to put across their points as it is in the US for giving time to terrorist groups. This is because its reporters are doing their best for press freedom in the middle east. They are no worse than Fox news.
2. The fact that other countries are less free than America and commit worse crimes does not justify the committing of crimes by America. In order to have the moral authority to act internationally it has to be better than the places it criticises. We should not accept other peoples failings as excuses for our own. As the premier democracy in the world, the USA should lead by example. We should not let it get away with more because it is already a free democracy, we should let it get away with less because it really should be above that. We should criticise it more for its abuses because it is a democracy, and each abuse demeans its good reputation more than that of a dictatorship.
Slashdot Mirror
Couldn't Be Bothered??
No, before AIDS they just had much more pressing things to worry about than sexual health, for example, famines, droughts, civil wars, and all the other diseases which are endemic in that part of the world. If it's 'just' a sexual health problem, why is the American government pushing abstinance based programmes over condom based ones? When it's obvious that a physical barrier will be more effective than trusting to the willpower and good sense of an entire continent. Libya, an african country, did have the capacity to manufacture drugs, sadly, this meant it also had the capacity to produce chemical weapons, so when the US destroyed that capacity, it destroyed both.
Or the company could instead spend $4bn less on marketing the successful drug, The point in this case is, that while what you say is true, are you honestly saying that the lives of all the people who could be saved by such a drug are worth less than the profits of a drug company? Besides which America is often caught out by ignoring other sources. If you remember the furore surrounding the Human Genome Project, when the American private company was prevented from gaining a hold on the human genome by the Wellcome Trust. The point is, that there seems to be an increasing tendency in the USA for property and money to take precedence over people, which quite frankly is wrong. Furthermore, if Birdflu were to become a pandemic, the deathtoll might be so enormous that realistically the global economy would go into a serious depression, which would be bad for all companies.
Abandoned in your time of need?
My ass
Every european country offered all possible support following 9/11, the NATO members even invoked the attack on one is an attack on all clause in it's constitution.
The only thing which some of them didn't do was invade Iraq, which is why there are Germans in Kabul right now.
There was no 'urgent need' to attack Iraq, Saddam was an evil dictator who should have been removed from power, possibly by force, but to say that there was an urgent need to do so is just bullshit.
WTF - How is the Middle East going to invade Europe. Sure they have a growing population, that doesn't mean they are about to invade. How the hell will they form a coordinated front capable of attacking Europe? , what will they attack Europe with? ,
besides which, the whole point of the EU is to change the historical tendency of powers towards aggressive militarism and conflict.
Do you honestly believe that the combined industrial power of the EU would be incapable of repelling an actual conventional invasion from the middle east?
You'll notice that most of the people at that conference are now members of the same organisation and have been at peace for 60 years?
The EU's peaceful overcoming of the differences between European nations - differences which caused the 20th century's most horrific genocide - is what gives them faith in solving problems by 'sitting across a table'
The point is that the EU's armed forces are well enough funded and equipped to fulfil its own needs. The only time it needs to project power abroad is to protect its own citizens, and on peacekeeping missions, tasks which is more than up to. It is even capable of operating a large sized expeditionary war on its own, should the need arise. Specific problems - strategic airlift being one - are being resolved.
Effectively, the only military more advanced than theirs is the US, and no matter the state of international relations, the EU is not about to attack the US militarily any time soon.
I call bullshit - France spends more per capita on defence than the UK and has a larger population, larger navy and larger army. Who the fuck are the Americans defending Europe from Right now? Answer - No one Europe is effectively self sufficient when it comes to defending Europe from terrorism and faces no immediate or short term threats from a nation state.
Most foreign countries have stricter data protection laws than the US. I worked at an office which handled personal data from medical studies, in lots of cases they were worried about sharing data with their US counterpart because their data protection laws were not strict enough, likewise, the australian branch was less keen to share with us because their data protection laws are stricter still.
Woah, hold on a minute there. Christians are followers of christ, how they interpret the Bible doesn't come into it. At no point in the bible is Jesus quoted as saying "oh yeah, and anything which my disciples write, you should believe that exactly" Bible != written by god. The new testament was written by other people after the death of Christ.
As for those "very religious people who believe in evolution" i dunno, how about the Pope? The catholic church has accepted evolution for some time now.
say you believe that Christ is the son of god, that makes you a christian, just because the bible also said that, what means that everything else within it is true?
Newton was a unitarian,
And he also believed in Alchemy, proper full on, lead into gold alchemy. He was a gifted mathematician and scientist, that doesn't preclude him from believing bollocks.
Sorry, but the Independent used to be an independent news source, but in recent months it's really gone downhill. I would describe myself as centre left, but a number of recent front page stories have been more pieces of opinion than news.
Seeing as New Labour is now a centre right party, wouldn't that make its news broadcasts centrist?
It's an interesting point about young soldiers standing guard for long periods with live ammo and trusting them not to shoot at cars, but it looks like what is happening in Iraq right now.
It would seem that they are more than a little trigger happy, considering the various friendly fire incidents which have occured.
I'm not criticising, but I am saying that perhaps had they been older/more experienced/better trained, they might not have made the same mistakes.
Abu Griahb in particular would appear to demonstrate a lack of maturity when placed in a position of responsibility.
I want a Red BMX
The map overlay thing on mapquest is good
But it's not as seamless as the Google one, which moves relatively smoothly rather than having to click a button and wait for it to reload.
Fool, it doesn't matter if it receives or is capable of receiving, only what it is being used for. If it is not tuned in and is connected to something else then the device is exempt.
I heard that the BBC already records most of its stuff in HD, it just doesn't broadcast it in HD.
WTF? ... You've never lived in the UK have you?
My teeth are fine, everyone has free dental care up until age 16 anyway and it stays free if you go to an NHS dentist.
But as NHS dentists are like unicorn shit, lots of people go to private dentists instead.
That's why i think that morally, if you have already paid the license fee there is nothing wrong with downloading BBC programming as you have already paid for it.
The reason that 24 is at the top is not just because it is great, but because the first two series were broadcast 'free' on the BBC, but then, for various reasons Fox/Sky/Murdoch didn't sell them the rights for series 3 or 4. They were only broadcast on Sky One which fewer people had access to. Hence more people download them.
They did play on his weight, the tag line was
"You know the big dollop's right"
Hmm.....
.... Keep your beef.
Steroids and no BSE testing
According to IMDB (and lord knows that can be wrong) Stephen Fry is doing the voice of the book, in which case it will be perfect.
Did you SEE the Shawshank Redemption?
The real reason for the problems with the British railway system is nothing to do with a lack of technical expertise. It is more to do with chronic underinvestment and a botched attempt at privatisation.
Plus most of the accidents on British Rail in recent years have been less to do with "the right switches" being open, and more to do with drivers running red signals and the fact that the rails hadn't been maintained adequately for years.
Two points,
1. Al Jazeera are a news organisation much like any other, it of course has an editorial point of view, however it is criticised just as much in the middle east for giving the US and Israel time to put across their points as it is in the US for giving time to terrorist groups. This is because its reporters are doing their best for press freedom in the middle east. They are no worse than Fox news.
2. The fact that other countries are less free than America and commit worse crimes does not justify the committing of crimes by America. In order to have the moral authority to act internationally it has to be better than the places it criticises. We should not accept other peoples failings as excuses for our own. As the premier democracy in the world, the USA should lead by example. We should not let it get away with more because it is already a free democracy, we should let it get away with less because it really should be above that. We should criticise it more for its abuses because it is a democracy, and each abuse demeans its good reputation more than that of a dictatorship.