Did the G8 concerts exceed expectations?

[Pengwuino]

Probably is! From what the british folks on this other board imply, most of the participants are British. We had one of the major networks show the live 8 concerts but i don't know how well it was publicized to be honest. All I am doing lately is playing Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas :-/

 

[pattylou]

Your way off base here. This is basically what happened. Someone blames Bush for Live 8 not receiving much promotion here. A few of us realize "wait a second, our President ISNT A CONCERT PROMOTER". You then decide "well, he's a bad person anyway so i think he still deserves to be blamed for it". Truely amazing what partyline following will do to some people.

Sorry, I didn't get that. Here's the sequence I saw:

(1)I saw Brewnog say:

We've not been able to escape from it. It's been on every piece of news, every TV and radio station, and in every newspaper for the past few weeks. I was going to say I'm shocked that it hasn't made an impact there (Moonbear didn't know what I was on about either), but it really doesn't surprise me. I think Bush is trying to play it down anyway...

The portion in bold is a clear reference to the G8 summit, not Live 8. Bush may be downplaying the G8 summit - and who would blame him - he's the "bad guy" for not signing onto Kyoto.

No one said "Bush should be a concert promoter." (And Brewnog is British! So your reaction to democrats is even more odd!)

(2) Next thing, loseyourname says Bush is not a concert promoter.

(3) Then you say: "Everything that goes wrong is Bush's fault" (you were mocking the left.)

I agree, Bush is not a concert promoter. (But that isn't even what Brewnog was talking about, in my understanding.)

I disagree, that the left (of which I am a proud part and thus should know) blames everything on Bush. (We blame some stuff on Diebold ) I took issue with your generalization. Gross generalizations of the other end of the political spectrum does not serve our country.

Thank you for taking the time to clarify your position. I certainly didn't say what you said I said: "You then decide "well, he's a bad person anyway so i think he still deserves to be blamed for it". " ... and I do hope you can recognize that.

 

[pattylou]

On a side note, from the Wall Street Journal online

http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB112016799914374625,00.html?mod=opinion_main_europe_asia
(subscription required... ugh i don't have it either :( someone just quoted me from it)

I *think* that's the same guy that was interviewed on NPR. He made a good case.

 

[brewnog]

I agree, Bush is not a concert promoter. (But that isn't even what Brewnog was talking about, in my understanding.)

No, I hold my hands up to that one. My comments about the concert promotion and Bush were unrelated, and it didn't make sense to put them in the same paragraph. I was really just asking myself whether Bush's desire to play down certain G8 issues (and particularly African poverty) was reflected by the media's lack of publicising Live8, but didn't really know because I'm not over there. Sorry.

 

[The Smoking Man]

Every thread, every word, almost every discussion about live 8 I have read or heard about so far has been about who performed. This was only changed when someone jumps in and goes "hey, i thought this event was suppose to be about poverty, who are you trying to fool".

Kind of contradictory, don't you think?

Every thread ... LOL

Except this one ... and that one over there and ooooh, look at that one!


By bringing out comments like this Geldoff has given YOU the power to mutate even this discussion into the 'war on poverty'.

Don't you see that your very objection provides the result he envisioned?

 

[Pengwuino]

No, I hold my hands up to that one. My comments about the concert promotion and Bush were unrelated, and it didn't make sense to put them in the same paragraph. I was really just asking myself whether Bush's desire to play down certain G8 issues (and particularly African poverty) was reflected by the media's lack of publicising Live8, but didn't really know because I'm not over there. Sorry.

And IRT post above that

See, there's the confusion. The sentences were about Live 8 and then you jump to Bush and commented on his G8 motivations or whatever and didnt make a noticable switch in topic. Thats why i thought you meant Bush didnt promote Live 8 as much as he should have. Thank you for clarifying.

On a side note, Bush's goals rarely reflect in what the media does as of late. Bush can downplay something and the media wraps their finger around hte issue and 24/7's it and visa versa a lot of the time.

As far as Bush being the "bad guy" For not signing Kyoto; oh well, good for him. Even clinton realized it was a stupid idea that doesn't help anything (or i dunno, how many politicians really "realize" anything these days). If the international community wants to fool itself, so be it. Its unfortunate that the US takes the blame for everything because we don't hop onto the bandwagon feel good treaties.

 

[Pengwuino]

Kind of contradictory, don't you think?

Every thread ... LOL

Except this one ... and that one over there and ooooh, look at that one!


By bringing out comments like this Geldoff has given YOU the power to mutate even this discussion into the 'war on poverty'.

Don't you see that your very objection provides the result he envisioned?

lol i wrote it and thought "oh god... i hope no one catches me on that". Thanks a lot jerk jk

The guy didnt envision anything. Discussions on poverty are rather normal in the forums and discussions I've been in. All he's doing is bringing ignorant people into the discussions because he gives bleeding hearts some miss america one liners. They then proceed to jump into conversations, say their one line, and become a waste of time when they are unable to explain any real world problems facing Africa. Either that or they pull temper tantrums and repeat the line over and over and over and call anyone who argues with them "evil".

 

[pattylou]

No, I hold my hands up to that one. My comments about the concert promotion and Bush were unrelated, and it didn't make sense to put them in the same paragraph. I was really just asking myself whether Bush's desire to play down certain G8 issues (and particularly African poverty) was reflected by the media's lack of publicising Live8, but didn't really know because I'm not over there. Sorry.

I haven't had the feeling that the African poverty thing has been downplayed here at all.

Blairs visit last month has been mentioned repeatedly, along with the agreement on debt cancellation and Bush's repeated statement of how much more we give now than in the past (one third more than in the past? I forget.)

So I think the poverty thing is covered - though not being *there* it's hard to make a comparison.

 

[The Smoking Man]

lol i wrote it and thought "oh god... i hope no one catches me on that". Thanks a lot jerk jk

The guy didnt envision anything. Discussions on poverty are rather normal in the forums and discussions I've been in. All he's doing is bringing ignorant people into the discussions because he gives bleeding hearts some miss america one liners. They then proceed to jump into conversations, say their one line, and become a waste of time when they are unable to explain any real world problems facing Africa. Either that or they pull temper tantrums and repeat the line over and over and over and call anyone who argues with them "evil".

Well ... Excuuuuuse me as Steve Martin used to say. LOL

As Patty pointed out in the post just before this, Blair is doing a bang up job counteracting what he knew was comming.

It is not just the ignorant who are walking up to the line and having a hissi fit.

We are also seeing politicians being forced to act and, while another politician may be accused of soapboxing to get a better position in the political race, this guy has already got his knighthood... What is next, sainthood?

Frankly, I care little how good gets done as long as it is not done at the point of a gun or water cannon.

No matter how stupid and ill informed those people are who stop up to the mike for a brief moment, they do pick up further quotes to use at a later date ... I guess you could call this a bit of an education and again ... this is yet just one more benefit.

And if all else fails ... it was a good party with nobody getting hurt.

 

[Pengwuino]

It took up an entire night of ABC programming... wait... yah probably no one got hurt them.

 

[alexandra]

So are you going to make the announcement about the manditory self education or should I?

What part of 'cloud cuckoo land' did you say you lived in?

Wait up there, TSM - I think you misunderstand me, and this is probably my own fault: I did not explain myself as clearly as I should have. Here is an elaboration of what I meant, and it is based on some important lessons I have learned not only from history in general but also from my own personal history, and they amount to this:

1. If you are going to fight a battle, you have to know exactly what/who your enemy is and what you are fighting for. To effect fundamental change, I have no doubts that battles will have to be fought - but your understanding must be clear and you must know what your goals are before you agree to enter the fight, otherwise you risk being used as a pawn in other groups' agendas. This is a lesson I have learned from both sources I mentioned above. I have participated in broad-based 'protest politics' and I have seen the results. Instead of achieving greater justice and a better society, all that happened as a result of those struggles is that a particular group of the privileged were supplemented by another group of privileged, and the lot of the mass of the population did not improve. I see you quoted John Pilger in another of your postings; he is someone whose work I also follow. I wonder if you have ever seen his documentary Apartheid Did Not Die? That was the battleground on which I learned my lessons, and the outcome was disgraceful, as the Pilger documentary demonstrates (the reality is much worse than what is shown in the documentary). I was incredibly naive to believe that things could have turned out any differently given the major players involved - my analysis was flawed, and this is a mistake. I would advise everyone who wants to change the world to first understand the situation else your actions may contribute to creating a situation that favours the 'bad guys'.

2. Small terrorist actions do nothing but rightfully antagonise the population in general - one needs highly politicised, mass-based action to effect fundamental change. But before people will act, they have to know what sort of world they are living in, why it is necessary for them to act, and what sort of action they should take - thus my advice that people educate themselves. People need to understand politics before they engage in political action.

What is it you are trying to say? On the one hand you quote what happened and then you contradict yourself by doubting what you said.

Could you please be more specific? I don't see where I contradicted myself.

Geldoff was Knighted for what he did in the past. What he managed to do was to raise the consciousness of people, load up trucks with food AND get it delivered to starving people.

My argument is that Geldoff is applying band-aids. Perhaps this is why you disagree with me - I believe that capitalism cannot be reformed (which is what Geldoff is trying to do - "Let's ask the politicians to 'be nice'." "Yeah, sure, Sir Geldoff!" - and then you accuse me of living in 'cuckoo could land'?). I believe that equality and justice will only come with fundamental structural social change, ie. if capitalism is replaced by socialism (real socialism, not the varieties that have existed so far). Is this what you meant by asking me if I live in 'cloud cuckoo land'? Is this aim so unrealistic? Well, I think it is humanity's only hope. Sorry, TSM, I just can't see a 'benevolent' capitalism; to me, this is a contradiction in terms.

Politicians are not the solution to the problem. They are slaves to the process.

I totally agree. Politicians are the executive branch of capital, and are entirely on capital's side and against the common people. I have said this over and over again on these boards. I find it odd that you think I believe politicians are redeemable; perhaps you have not read any of my other posts?

Geldoff has a knack of doing in just a couple of months what it takes politicians years to achieve.

My argument is that Geldoff has not brought about any structural, lasting change, and that he cannot bring about such change. He provides temporary salves to a festering wound; that's the best he can do. To bring about change, one has to challenge the structure of social organisation; he does not do that.

Would you say that if he made even 5% of the crowd aware of what the problems truly were ... if he managed to drag them kicking and screaming into reality he had done a good thing?

I do not know whether or not Geldoff himself is aware of what the problems really are; from my own experience I know that it has taken me years and years of intensive study to understand them, however. I do not think a music-focused event (and I have been to a few myself - though none of these recent ones) really focus on the issues. There are catchy slogans, yes - 'Make Poverty History'. Sure, guys, but how? How do we do this? What will it take?

The event cost nothing save what people were willing to pay out of their own pockets. There were no 'taxes' and few administrative costs.

But I am not arguing that anyone made or paid anything - I don't see the relevance of this point.

The fact that you are here debating the issue is proof enough it has people talking about the issue.

Good point - but still, I would argue that people need to be talking at a deeper level.

Are you talking about a US Centric perspective?

Most of the world signed Kyoto. Most of the world went ahead and decided they woud attempt to pick up the extra 'cost' of American protectionism.

The US is responsible for about a third (30.3%) of greenhouse gas emissions (Reference: http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/tables/globalwarming.htm ), so the US administration's refusal to contemplate any environmental policy similar to Kyoto has serious implications:

Bush rejects Kyoto-style G8 deal

Mr Bush said he would resist measures that were similar to the 1997 UN Kyoto Protocol, involving legally binding reductions on carbon emissions, which Washington never ratified. ..."The Kyoto treaty would have wrecked our economy, if I can be blunt."

He said he hoped the other G8 leaders would "move beyond the Kyoto debate" and consider new technologies. Reference: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4647383.stm

Geldoff ISN'T American.

I seriously doubt that if the thing did have effects that there would be any coverage in the US press unless there were significant sound bytes in support of US politicians.

AT no point did I argue that Geldoff is American - his nationality is irrelevant to me. And I don't live in the US, but there was very little on Australian mainstream media about these concerts, and what there was was apolitical except for the bits that showed the 'small group of anarchists' who were 'ruining' the whole thing with their 'politics'. People are allowed to demonstrate, you see, as long as they are 'apolitical'. Well, I don't believe that one can do anything if one is apolitical. These gatherings were totally controlled by the 'establishment', and it is not unreasonable to conclude that they are allowed to proceed only as long as people don't actually 'rock the boat':

Protesters breach G8 march route Riot police and protesters have clashed after the demonstrators broke away from the agreed route of a march near the G8 summit venue at Gleneagles. ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4654767.stm

 

[The Smoking Man]

For the life of me, I am failing to see your point.

You seem upset that things are being 'done'.

You would prefer a handful of truly educated people rather than 26 million signatures educated or otherwise?

Now you claim Geldoff offers 'bandaids'?

Okay, then offer something else.

IS there anything else on offer?

Sure, Pilger is out there and even SOME of the people here might just see some of his stuff if they watch PBS or pick up a 'liberal' newspaper. The rest of the crowd seem to be watching Hannity and Limbaugh in the states. Most are awaiting the next replacement of 'Friends'.

Face it, NOBODY is going to educate themselves least of all without a push.

Most of the world was unaware there even was going to be a G* summit if it wasn't for all the atention that Geldoff has brought to the issue.

We've had the concert itself. We've had the plea for boats to take people over from France AND we have had eBay reacting to scalpers on the internet.

Now I could hack through each and every point you have thrown out in your post but what is the point?

If you want world opinion and action, you don't do it educating one person at a time.

You mobilize ... you create an army of people ... educated or not and have them directed by people who do know the problems. After all, an army is not staffed with Generals.

I think you have to realize that Pilger has been around for about 30 years doing this stuff. There are a lot of devotees and most are looked upon as kooks.

Geldoff and Bono have done more to legitimize those people who do know the score in a VERY short time.

It is estimated we have 50 years of fossil fuels left in this world.

It is probably going to be half of that before the various parts of the world split into warring factions.

We don't have another 30 years of Pilger type activism to reign in the governments of the world.

I'm an old fart.

I'm not going to see the end of fossil fuels but this isn't something that can wait.

I applaud ANYBODY who gets people off their asses even if just for an afternoon.

Get a copy of this:

http://www.thecorporation.tv/

and do something about educating others if you feel BOB isn't doing enough.

 

[alexandra]

TSM, we're on the same side. I can see the reasoning behind your arguments. I do not propose that people should be educated 'one at a time' (I agree with you that the fuel situation is urgent - and I am more worried about the environmental dangers, which are really, really urgent), and I agree with you that much can be learned in the process of taking action. I just know the dangers of taking uninformed action. I also know that a lot of those demonstrations end up with everyone going home, talking about it for another week or so, then going back to sitting in front of the TV and watching 'Friends'. The momentum must somehow be sustained and the initial spark of interest/debate built on - and that rarely seems to happen. But ok, something is better than nothing...

 

[Andy]

How many people do you think have gone out and educated themselves about africa after the live8 concerts?

Does it really matter if people arent well educated on the problem? How many people are smart enough to understand what needs to be done to solve the problem anyway? I think its enough for average joe to know of the problem and leave it to the smart people to work out the details of how to solve the problem.

 

[The Smoking Man]

How many people do you think have gone out and educated themselves about africa after the live8 concerts?

Does it really matter if people arent well educated on the problem? How many people are smart enough to understand what needs to be done to solve the problem anyway? I think its enough for average joe to know of the problem and leave it to the smart people to work out the details of how to solve the problem.

Bravo to you both Alexandra and Andy.

We just need to keep on hammering at it until the idea sustains itself.

Maybe not a remake of 'Friends' is in the offing but a remake of 'Steptoe and Son'/' Sanford and Son' in a 21st Century recycling station!?

 

[Burnsys]

Talking about poverty in africa. i hope this help to clarify what is happening there:

NIGERIA
General Sani Abacha was the reportedly corrupt dictator of oil-rich Nigeria. He 'rigged' elections. More than 100 government executions occurred in 1994, and numerous pro-democracy demonstrators were killed by police.
"Shell Oil provides most of the country's wealth by extracting oil from the Ogoniland region, while in the process causing severe environmental destruction and devastating the local economy."
"More than 700 Ogoni environmentalists protesting the destruction of their way of life, were executed."
In November 1995, environmental leader Ken Saro-Wiwa and 8 associates, were hanged despite an international outcry.
"Shell supported Abacha's policies by its silence."
"Despite an outcry that Nigerian oil be boycotted, the US government refused to do so."
~~

UGANDA
General Amin once ruled Uganda.
When Amin had been a non-commissioned officer in the British Army he had helped to manage Britain's concentration camps in Kenya.
"Amin was picked by the British to replace the elected Ugandan government in a 1971 coup."
"Amin brutalized his people with British and US military aid and with Israeli and CIA training of his troops."
He murdered friends, clergy, soldiers, and ordinary Ugandans.
~~

LIBERIA
Pro-American Samuel Doe came to power in a bloody 1980 coup.
He received 'US aid and corporate kickbacks'.
Under his regime, the gross domestic product decreased by 13%.
Those who protested were jailed or killed.
Doe purchased over sixty $60,000 Mercedes Benz cars for his government ministers.
~~~

MOROCCO
King Hassan ll ruled Morocco.
'95% of the population lives in abject poverty.'
In 1975, Hassan took his nation into a war in the Western Sahara that was costing the country over $l million a day.
The US backed Hassan 'diplomatically and financially in his war to annex the area'.
The US also took an active role in stopping coup attempts against the King.
Opposition figures were 'arrested and tortured'.
~~~

ZAIRE/CONGO
"When Zaire's first elected President, Patrice Lumumba, appeared to be getting too close to socialism, US companies feared they might lose control of Zaire's precious cobalt, copper, and diamonds.
"So the CIA stepped in, assassinated Lumumba, and replaced him with Mobutu Sese Seko.
After 1965, Mobutu was "the US's main man in Central Africa."
Mobutu amassed an estimated $5 billion personal fortune at his nation's expense.
In 1974, when the US sent $1.4 million to assist troops fighting a civil war, "Mobutu pocketed the entire sum."
Malnutrition takes the lives of one-third of Zaire's children, and one child out of two dies before age five.
Mobutu's regime imprisoned and tortured its opponents.

 

[Andy]

So basically if we hadnt interfered with Africa we wouldn't need to sort it out now. Even i could see that it would come back to bite them in the ass.

 

[Astronuc]

Interesting perspective -

SPIEGEL INTERVIEW WITH AFRICAN ECONOMICS EXPERT

"For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!"

The Kenyan economics expert James Shikwati, 35, says that aid to Africa does more harm than good. The avid proponent of globalization spoke with SPIEGEL about the disastrous effects of Western development policy in Africa, corrupt rulers, and the tendency to overstate the AIDS problem.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,363663,00.html

 

[alexandra]

Oh, another thing - let's just see what the results of this event actually are. Not long to wait now. We already have the answer about climate change: what are our great leaders going to do? Nothing, that's what!

Well, the G8 summit is over now - I quote from some articles analysing the results...

On 'Making Poverty History':

Justice for Africa postponed

ActionAid UK

For immediate release: Friday 8 July
Justice for Africa postponed. The campaign continues.

Hints towards cutting strings on aid

Verdict:
· The summit has failed to deliver justice for Africa. A comprehensive package on aid, trade and debt relief has not materialised.
· The deal announced today will not tackle poverty effectively. Some steps have been made, but it falls far short of what is needed.
· Make Poverty History campaigners have succeeded in putting poverty and Africa at the centre of the G8 agenda, but there is still a yawning gulf between expectations raised and policy promises delivered.

Trade:
· G8 leaders failed to end the scandal of forced liberalisation. There is also deep concern that we will see a further push on liberalising services and non-agricultural markets that will threaten livelihoods and jobs in poor countries worldwide.
· No date has been set to end export subsidies. George Bush’s offer to axe subsidies by 2010 comes at the same time as derisory proposals on cotton subsidies. US cotton exports will be reduced by just 1.7%, dashing the hopes of 10 million cotton farmers in West Africa.
· Despite word games in Gleneagles, in ongoing trade talks in Geneva the US and EU are still pushing to retain subsidies by another name.
· The developing world is deeply disappointed that the announcement on trade contains no increase in poor countries’ access to markets; no special treatment, such as allowing them to protect their farmers; and no undertaking to make multinationals legally accountable for their social and environmental impact.

More: http://uk.oneworld.net/article/view/115047/1/

On climate change (Source: Financial Times - note, this article only outlines the financial (insurance) implications, not the human or long-term environmental implications) :

The cold and costly reality of climate change
By Charles Batchelor
Published: July 8 2005 16:07 | Last updated: July 8 2005 16:07

World leaders meeting at the Group of Eight summit in Gleneagles on Friday promised to take urgent steps to meet the challenge of climate change but failed to set targets or a timetable for action.

Environmental groups criticised the politicians’ lack of urgency at a time when many experts believe the impact of climate change is being felt with increasing ferocity around the world.

More: http://news.ft.com/cms/s/30bd0d0a-efc1-11d9-bd3b-00000e2511c8.html

 

[Art]

Well, the G8 summit is over now - I quote from some articles analysing the results...

On 'Making Poverty History':

On climate change (Source: Financial Times - note, this article only outlines the financial (insurance) implications, not the human or long-term environmental implications) :

To be fair the whole summit was abbreviated by the events in London.
I don't think we can say that it was an unwillingness this time to find solutions as at previous summits. It was more a case of the participants' time and attention being overtaken by events

 

[alexandra]

To be fair the whole summit was abbreviated by the events in London.
I don't think we can say that it was an unwillingness this time to find solutions as at previous summits. It was more a case of the participants' time and attention being overtaken by events

Art, you are very generous to the policy-makers. Poverty and starvation in Africa kills thousands every day - the issues are urgent:

The numbers are astounding : 24 000 people die of hunger every day. That’s one person every four seconds. 815 million human beings suffer from malnutrition and 30 million, mostly children under five years of age, die from it every year, according to estimates from the FAO. The largest number of victims live in Africa, where 34 percent of the population is severely malnourished. An recent FAO report, "The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2002," states that "widespread hunger in a world of abundance is essentially the result of poverty." A World Bank study estimated that between 1991 and 2001, when the gross global product doubled and the volume of international trade tripled, the average revenue per person in 81 of the 100 poorest countries declined.
Reference: http://www.alternatives.ca/article511.html

 

[Art]

Art, you are very generous to the policy-makers. Poverty and starvation in Africa kills thousands every day - the issues are urgent:

To give credit where it is due as well as the commitment already made by the G8 members for debt relief the US have agreed to increase their aid (I'm not sure by how much - the source I was reading doesn't say), Canada said they would increase by as much as they can afford (bit iffy that one) and the EU have said they will increase their support to 0.7% of GDP by 2015. All together this will amount to an increase from the current level of $25 billion a year to $50 billion a year) There is also a new $3 billion aid package for Palestine and a pledge from all the leaders to set a date for the abolition of food export subsidies at the WTO meeting in December. So all in all not a bad start.

 

[Pengwuino]

Interesting perspective -

SPIEGEL INTERVIEW WITH AFRICAN ECONOMICS EXPERT

"For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!"

The Kenyan economics expert James Shikwati, 35, says that aid to Africa does more harm than good. The avid proponent of globalization spoke with SPIEGEL about the disastrous effects of Western development policy in Africa, corrupt rulers, and the tendency to overstate the AIDS problem.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,363663,00.html

Yah, all I am hearing out of the people who actually have lived or worked in Africa is that these debt relief things and 'throwing money at the problem' haven't worked for decades. Too bad its almost illegal to criticize debt relief.

 

[Burnsys]

To give credit where it is due as well as the commitment already made by the G8 members for debt relief the US have agreed to increase their aid (I'm not sure by how much - the source I was reading doesn't say), Canada said they would increase by as much as they can afford (bit iffy that one) and the EU have said they will increase their support to 0.7% of GDP by 2015. All together this will amount to an increase from the current level of $25 billion a year to $50 billion a year) There is also a new $3 billion aid package for Palestine and a pledge from all the leaders to set a date for the abolition of food export subsidies at the WTO meeting in December. So all in all not a bad start.

When you say aid, are you referring to some kind of loans? if so this is absolutly any viable solution, loans have to be repayd plus interest, so for countrys of the 1st world it's like some kind of profit making busineses.. they "Invest" $25 billion a year, and make a lot of profits on the interests While africans may "Eat" for some time with that money (at least the money they corrupt government doesn't stole) they will have to pay double tomorrow..

 

[Art]

When you say aid, are you referring to some kind of loans? if so this is absolutly any viable solution, loans have to be repayd plus interest, so for countrys of the 1st world it's like some kind of profit making busineses.. they "Invest" $25 billion a year, and make a lot of profits on the interests While africans may "Eat" for some time with that money (at least the money they corrupt government doesn't stole) they will have to pay double tomorrow..

No, not loans, more like gifts. In fact I believe there will be far less strings attached to the aid than is currently the case. i.e. previously aid was often conditional on something in return but apparently not so anymore. There will be new strings such as level of democracy etc.. but these new conditions are designed to ensure that this time the money gets to where it is intended for.

 

[Smurf]

I don't think we can say that it was an unwillingness this time to find solutions as at previous summits.

Really now, I'm quite comfortable thinking that.

 

[alexandra]

In response to the statement "I don't think we can say that it was an unwillingness this time to find solutions as at previous summits",

Really now, I'm quite comfortable thinking that.

I have to agree with you, Smurf. In some quarters, the London bombings are even seen as some sort of 'good' thing, as this exchange between Fox News Host Brian Kilmeade and Fox News business contributor and substitute host Stuart Varney, shockingly demonstrates (again, why, why, why am I shocked? I keep on believing in human decency, for some odd reason!):

KILMEADE: And he [British Prime Minister Tony Blair] made the statement, clearly shaken, but clearly determined. This is his second address in the last hour. First to the people of London, and now at the G8 summit, where their topic Number 1 --believe it or not-- was global warming, the second was African aid. And that was the first time since 9-11 when they should know, and they do know now, that terrorism should be Number 1. But it's important for them all to be together. I think that works to our advantage, in the Western world's advantage, for people to experience something like this together, just 500 miles from where the attacks have happened.

VARNEY: It puts the Number 1 issue right back on the front burner right at the point where all these world leaders are meeting. It takes global warming off the front burner. It takes African aid off the front burner. It sticks terrorism and the fight on the war on terror, right up front all over again.

KILMEADE: Yeah.

Reference: http://mediamatters.org/items/200507070005

 

[ron damon]

I keep on believing in human decency, for some odd reason!

you know, disagreeing with your priorities does not constitute human indecency