Alf Roberts said:
Funny how in the past, when i post a statement uve criticized me for not supplying links...and this time i do and u criticize me for not supplying personal input....u should contact Mr Blair...i hear hes on the look out for a new `Minister for Information'.
I agree with the article. Would u prefer that i type it all out again as my own comment? Of course not...
...I also note that u havent actually commented urself on the article in question. Ur silence screams at me
1. Ahh, still not thinking logically. You've provided a link to a general rant by the Guardian, which itself provides no links to any proof or backup for its points. Off the top of my head, and just for a kick off, the point it makes about wicked western capitalists screwing the third world out of cheap drugs via IP rights is at best, half true. Anyone who has read the papers or seen the news recently would have noticed that the wicked capitalists are now being forced to provide cheap generic anti-aids drugs to the third world.
http://www.aegis.com/news/bbc/2002/BB020112.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1207571.stm
But I like this one best - you obviously ignored this little gem in your desire to rant against capitalism:
http://education.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,5500,478373,00.html
(its even from your fave commie rag too, making it all the sweeter)
In other words, South Africa has beaten those wicked capitalists at their own game in their own courts, and forced them to make cheap generic anti-aids drugs available.
:0wned:
:lickme:
Now, typical example of only half dealing with the problem. Why should one set of people have to pay more than others for the same drugs? Or, even better, why should countries whose religious and political views ignore the AIDS problem be bailed out of the hole they've dug for themselves? Part of the reason AIDS is so rampant in Africa is because the prevailing religions, which still exert undue influence on those countries, ban contraceptives (like condoms) and education of the people about sexual risks - which would actually
prevent the spread of aids, as opposed to simply squealing for cheap drugs to treat the problem.
I'm not blind to the humanitarian issues, but to blame the west for expensive anti-AIDS drugs is simply ignorance. Those drugs are expensive,
period.
No, my real problem was you made a few half assed insinuations. No attempt to digest the article, argue a few points and provide proof. That's what I was meaning. If this wasn't clear to you, I w-i-l-l t-y-p-e s-l-o-w-l-y a-n-d c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y in future alfie poos.
2. Silence on the article. Well, quite frankly, half of it is simply untrue, having been overtaken by current events. The rest is just generalised ranting. What is there to comment on?
Have a nice day.