good article about african aid by bill o reilly

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

NYRangers78

War Child
Joined
Feb 26, 2004
Messages
540
Location
THE BRONX NEW YORK GOD BLESS AMERICA
as seen in the ny post :

http://www.billoreilly.com/currentarticle

Riddle me this: What do Madonna, Bono, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair all have in common? They want to help poor Africans, that's what. But how to do that is the rub.

Madonna has signed up for the latest Bob Geldorf concert series to heighten "awareness" of the dire African situation. She will join Paul McCartney and other pop stars in a series of shows next month.

This is a nice, if somewhat fuzzy, idea. The last time Geldorf swam into these waters, in 1985, his "Live Aid" project raised about $150 million dollars for Ethiopian famine victims. The project got great press and was a huge financial success. Then reality intruded.

According to the watchdog group Charity Navigator, the Ethiopian dictator Mengistu stole much of the donated money and used it to pay his thuggish army to continue to oppress starving people in the countryside. That part of "Live Aid" was mostly ignored by the press because it would have been politically incorrect to point it out. The truth is that in the chaos that is Africa, whoever has the most guns controls any aid that flows into their area. Madonna can sing her heart out, but that's the fact.

Enter Bono, the U-2 superstar who wants a coordinated effort by the industrial world to deliver help to the poorest people on the planet. Bono, a smart and good man, understands corruption and apathy. But while Bono has the power to persuade, he does not have the ability to coordinate a massive relief effort.

So who does?

The United Nations could do it, but will not, because that agency is almost as chaotic and corrupt as Africa. While U.N. diplomats dine in splendor in midtown Manhattan, thousands of destitute human beings waste away all over the world. Kofi Annan is ineffective, and until there is a crusader for justice at the helm of the United Nations, little will be accomplished there.

So that leaves Bush and Blair. Both men recognize the tragedy of a continent that cannot feed itself and can't even deliver basic medical care to its people. But with an intense war on terror going on, both leaders are a bit distracted, and resources, especially in the USA, are stretched very thin. However, if the President and Prime Minister would team up with private agencies like Catholic Charities and Doctors without Borders, which are already on the ground in Africa, then at least a good beginning could be made.

The money, food and medicine is available. This is a delivery and accountability situation. Africa needs a disciplined "Marshall Plan" that would provide the continent with medicine, food and an educational infrastructure. Unfortunately, few African nations have demonstrated the competence to implement such a plan, so the Western powers must take the whole thing over.

Remember, post-World War II Europe and Japan were rebuilt mostly by American administrators. It was literally "our way or no highways." And if African nations don't buy into that, then they should be on their own.

So it is good that the "Material Girl" wants to ship material over to Africa. I am with Bono when he sings "we have to carry each other." The world's wealthy nations do have a responsibility to combat suffering along with terrorism. But no longer can we allow chaotic nations to call the shots on how aid programs are run. If we really want to help the poor - we have to get up close and personal.
 
Take up the White Man's burden--
The savage wars of peace--
Fill full the mouth of Famine
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
The end for others sought,
Watch sloth and heathen Folly
Bring all your hopes to nought.

For the record I do think that it is noble cause to fight poverty and AIDS in Africa but history can be mirrored in attitudes even when we think that we have outgrown them.
 
Last edited:
I've never heard of this Bill O'Reilly dude, but as I said in another thread, I am sceptical about aid for Africa too given concerns about corruption.
 
as a convervative, i agree with bush. i think things should be sorted out first in terms of corruption in africa before money is sent there sothat it is not wasted .bill o reilly even confronted bono on this about the first live aid and bono had to admit that money never got to where it was meant to go to. now if the us used force in africa which surely is needed, it seems, because any diplomatic means wouldnt work, but maybe im wrong, wed be seen as the bad guys using force.
 
Quote - "If the US used force in Africa which surely is needed..."

Dude you better come up with a damn well argued case for where and why force is "surely needed" and your recommendations for implentation of your plans, or you're gonna get flamed by people infinitely better informed than you (or me) on Africa.

On that note of advice, I will bid you adieu.
 
Last edited:
Bill O'Reilly hasn't had an original thought in his life. His lying rhetoric spewed in the air daily makes me sick.

I wouldn't take his advice on my cat, much less such an important issue.
 
to the civilized ones willing to work to get thjings straight, our political power...to the warlords who go around killing and raping people left and right and stealing aid and using it as bartering tools, possibly our military power. maybe the military power would be deemed harsh, but if the end results were exactly what bono and geldof and everyone wants, than maybe it wouldnt be as bad as it sounds...and by that i mean have hte us miliary go in there, somehow eliminate the warlords and if needed, distribute and oversee all aid distribution....and protect aid workers.
 
ive read horror stores where almost none of the money from live aid got to where it was supposed to. like i said, bono was on bill o reilly and admitted that the money never got to where it needed to get to. if the US and europe got together and could guarantee the money would not be wasted somehow, than by all by means do it..if not, i dont see how the money is going to fix anything.

also im not arguing with you but i i dont understand why rumsfeld has to be brought up...im trying to keep this as an african topic and not an iraqi war topic. and im sure rumsfeld isnt in washington raping women left and right and killing people for food like the warlords in africa do.
 
Last edited:
Correct me if i wrong, but does Bush also refuse to give aid to organitations ( sp ) that give out condoms for free ?
 
im not sure..maybe in africa it should go to it because of the seriousness of the situation over there...

as for america? people who dont want to catch sexually transmitted diseases or unwanted pregnancy should practice abstinence. i dont see why in new york, my tax dollars should go to paying for condoms for people. if your grown up enough to wanna have sex so bad than you should be able to pay for condoms. money could be used on cops and firemen and teachers and other stuff, but isntead condoms are given out for free all over the place.
 
A_Wanderer said:
A culture of life for the unborn trumps those who are condemned to death with AIDS.
Well, it sounds nice but i don`t get it,...i am not a native english speaker.
 
Because for less than a buck you can prevent a few teenage girls becoming lifetime dependents on state welfare perhaps.
 
NYRangers78 said:
im not sure..maybe in africa it should go to it because of the seriousness of the situation over there...

as for america? people who dont want to catch sexually transmitted diseases or unwanted pregnancy should practice abstinence. i dont see why in new york, my tax dollars should go to paying for condoms for people. if your grown up enough to wanna have sex so bad than you should be able to pay for condoms. money could be used on cops and firemen and teachers and other stuff, but isntead condoms are given out for free all over the place.
Maybe not your taxmoney but my taxmoney they can use .

It is better than abortions or awfull disseases . Do you actualy know how many people are living under the poverty line in your country ?
 
Rono said:
Well, it sounds nice but i don`t get it,...i am not a native english speaker.
Basically it means that Bush as a politician and a good section of the conservative christians talk about opposition to abortion and stem cell research as a "culture of life". But the hypocrisy of that line of thinking is when it means that it cuts money to certain aid agencies and only supporting certain programs (such as abstinence only) it condems some people to death.
 
Rono said:
Maybe not your taxmoney but my taxmoney they can use .

It is better than abortions or awfull disseases . Do you actualy know how many people are living under the poverty line in your country ?


its got nothign to do with the poverty line for me.....its about responsibility and condoms arent a 100 percent effective anyway...but hey what the hell lets have 8 year olds havin sex with each other using free condoms, they have an excuse: poverty...lol.
 
How responsible can we make people?

It isn't about excuses, it is about human behaviour and the best approach to dealing with it.
 
NYRangers78 said:
im not sure..maybe in africa it should go to it because of the seriousness of the situation over there...

as for america? people who dont want to catch sexually transmitted diseases or unwanted pregnancy should practice abstinence. i dont see why in new york, my tax dollars should go to paying for condoms for people. if your grown up enough to wanna have sex so bad than you should be able to pay for condoms. money could be used on cops and firemen and teachers and other stuff, but isntead condoms are given out for free all over the place.

Let's stay on topic and stay educated please.
 
NYRangers78 said:
what do u mean stay educated? i started the thread and if i want, i can bring something else up...and its not totally off topic because were talking about condoms in africa as well...

Oh, so if you start the thread you can take it off subject whenever you want? I wasn't aware of that rule.

And yes I meant stay educated because teaching abstinence while not allowing sex education doesn't work it's been proven over and over again. That's exactly one of the reasons Africa is as bad as it is. Religion wouldn't and still doesn't allow sex education and so the people are clueless as to the dangers and the precautions to take.
 
Yep. Give em condoms. Planeloads of them. If it offends the religious freaks, hey, that's an added bonus.
 
reply

A_Wanderer said:
A culture of life for the unborn trumps those who are condemned to death with AIDS.


And the orphans of AIDS.

Interesting quote:

GODISNOWHERE = God is no where or God is now here.

:|
 
Re: reply

wizard2c said:
Interesting quote:

GODISNOWHERE = God is no where or God is now here.
:|

Hey I didn't even notice that. I just read it as the former. Takes a poet's imagination I guess. :wink:
 
Re: Re: reply

financeguy said:


Hey I didn't even notice that. I just read it as the former. Takes a poet's imagination I guess. :wink:


I have a thing for words.....I do it all the time driving...if I see a word on a passing vehicle or a license plate I transpose the letters to form words.

:|
 
After reading the subject line I automatically thought of three ideas that O'Reilly would bring up in his "article":

1. The UN is corrupt
2. Entertainers are bleeding heart liberals who don't know how to get things done.
3. Unilateralism from America is the best way foward.

Any O'Reilly being O'Reilly didn't fail to disapoint.

As a point of view, it is a weak mix-and-matched opinion, made solely out of cliched Republican talking points. It's redundant, wrong... and just plain boring.

And as an article it's just as bad. I fail to see what point he is trying to make other than the 3 talking points listed above. To the uninformed right-winger this may be a ray of light, but for most informed right and left wingers this is merely reworded talking point drivel.
 
Back
Top Bottom