POSTING GUIDELINES
This forum is intended to provide an atmosphere of open communication, where each member can share his or her own insights and opinions. To help achieve this goal, we ask that you:
Do not post libelous or illegal material.
Do not post harassing or discriminatory comments based on race, ethnic origin, gender, or sexual orientation.
Do not solicit or advertise.
If you have questions or comments about this forum (such as technical difficulties or performance issues), please contact your forum administrator for the appropriate channel for your inquiry.
Moderation
Any post that violates the above conditions, or departs from the intended purpose of this forum may be removed without notice by the administration.
We reserve the right to edit any post for reasons including, but not limited to: language, length, or content not appropriate to the topic of this forum.
Older threads or messages may be removed from time to time, to main to maintain categories or threads of manageable length.
Any member who breaches these Guidelines through hostile, abusive or other inappropriate behavior may find their account privileges revoked.
Privacy
Remember that this is a public forum, and you have no guarantee or expectation of privacy. Your post could be read by anyone.
Posts can be traced. We record information about every user of this forum, and will honor any court orders or requests by recognized law authorities for information about individuals posting libelous material.
All communications on this board are deemed to by public and not private communications. We reserve the right to remove without notice any message posted for any reason, but we have no obligation to remove content you find objectionable.
Regarding your email address and other personal information
Although we require your email address for verification purposes, we recommend that you do not post it or any other personal information such, as phone numbers or your home address. Your posts can be searched by bots or third parties that have no affiliation with the administrator of this forum.
Disclaimer
The views expressed by members of this forum are their own and do not reflect the position of the administrator or other members. Each member is responsible for the content of his/her own posts.
Please report any activity that you notice which is libelous, inflammatory, or in violation of common decency to the management immediately.
"There are two Bob Geldofs. One is an articulate and persuasive speaker, who commands the attention and respect of world leaders as well as experts in the field of global poverty. The other is completely mad."
I've been wondering about this myself, re all the news of Live 8 and associated events (Edinburgh, for instance), despite my loyalty to Bob - and maybe because of it.
This quoted paragraph is the beginning of the wonderfully controversial article, "Bob Geldof's brazen appeal to popular outrage won't make poverty history." Go on, read the rest of it at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1062-1644783,00.html and share your opinion.
The writer gets a vital fact wrong re Live 8, in stating it's about raising money rather than what it's really all about - raising awareness. But if you can forgive that blunder, the article is well worth a read, a ponder and an opinion (all of your own choice, of course!).
And remember, as put so eloquently by Clint Eastwood, "Opinions are like arseholes; everyone has got one." So conflicting opinions are almost guarenteed.
A handy guideline from the old Forum: if need be, attack IDEAS not PEOPLE.
I don't understand the man writing the article. It is on a British site, so I assume he's British. But he seems to take the side of George Bush more than Tony Blair.
I think it is because Tony Blair and Bob Geldof have a very similar mindset. You are correct: The writer seems persistant in claiming that Live 8 is for charity. It is not. Tony Blair's idea is to cancel debt. If you want to spin that as "charity," go right ahead.
But the writer seems to just not care about Africa. He doesn't seem to understand that while some of these governments are corrupt, the majorty of the poor people living there are not, and they need support - Live 8 - and aid - G8 summit and Tony Blair.
He really doesn't understand that Live 8 is free...
It's in terms of finding a solution that the author states a preference for Bush over Blair; I'm not sure he's being partisan overall, as he criticizes the US "grotesquely subsidising" its cotton industry.
Re the authour's blunder re Live 8, I tend to think it's a genuine mistake - though of course I could be wrong.
"But the writer seems to just not care about Africa." I'd have to disagree - it seems to me the author cares a great deal about Africa, which is why he is so concerned about the manner in which aid is distributed. This goes to the heart of the statement "that while some of these governments are corrupt, the majorty of the poor people living there are not", because it is the direct negotiation with African governments - in terms of the corruption and secretive factors - that is being questioned; with transparency, independence from government, openess and accountability being advocated.
Not to mention the message for Western nations, which involves the debate and agreement of the G8 leaders; to stop using Africa as a dumping-ground for their surpluses, as well as addressing the huge subsidies given to their own industries.
Thanx for reading the article - and sharing your opinion