Welcome to PatsFans.com

Clinton brokered deal on Aids drugs to save lives

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by mikey, Nov 30, 2006.

  1. mikey

    mikey Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

  2. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams pfadmins PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,286
    Likes Received:
    38
    Ratings:
    +91 / 31 / -3

    #75 Jersey

    Mikey do yourself a favor, check out how much money Bush has sent to Africa to fight aids, and compare it to what Clinton did.


    The bigger question here is what are these pharamacutical companies getting in return for trying to give Clinton a good name? Maybe some help from his wife? Listen to Air America, these companies do nothing for free, so why would they do this?

    I know it is hard for you commies when one lie disproves another one your trying to put forth!

    Well at least, now that the Democrats are in charge of Congress they are going to implement the 9/11 commissions recomendations, oh wait, they have already renigged on that promise.
  3. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Oye, I hate how mikey always polarizes everything where it's not needed.

    To answer your question, FTW, I'd be shocked if the companies weren't getting kickbacks and preference from Hillary (and Bill, being that he's still well connected in DC), but I do think Bill cares about the problem as a person, too. I've been impressed with George H.W. Bush & Bill Clinton putting aside their differences for good causes recently. Maybe it's that they're getting old and starting to think about heaven & hell, but they do seem interested in doing a few good things without the promise of a reward in this life.
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2006
  4. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,793
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +289 / 4 / -2

    Sure does, as long as your not from Rwanda.

    US chose to ignore Rwandan genocide


    Classified papers show Clinton was aware of 'final solution' to eliminate Tutsis

    Rory Carroll in Johannesburg
    Wednesday March 31, 2004
    The Guardian


    President Bill Clinton's administration knew Rwanda was being engulfed by genocide in April 1994 but buried the information to justify its inaction, according to classified documents made available for the first time.
    Senior officials privately used the word genocide within 16 days of the start of the killings, but chose not to do so publicly because the president had already decided not to intervene.

    Intelligence reports obtained using the US Freedom of Information Act show the cabinet and almost certainly the president had been told of a planned "final solution to eliminate all Tutsis" before the slaughter reached its peak.

    It took Hutu death squads three months from April 6 to murder an estimated 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus and at each stage accurate, detailed reports were reaching Washington's top policymakers.
    The documents undermine claims by Mr Clinton and his senior officials that they did not fully appreciate the scale and speed of the killings.

    "It's powerful proof that they knew," said Alison des Forges, a Human Rights Watch researcher and authority on the genocide.

    The National Security Archive, an independent non-governmental research institute based in Washington DC, went to court to obtain the material.

    It discovered that the CIA's national intelligence daily, a secret briefing circulated to Mr Clinton, the then vice-president, Al Gore, and hundreds of senior officials, included almost daily reports on Rwanda. One, dated April 23, said rebels would continue fighting to "stop the genocide, which ... is spreading south".

    Three days later the state department's intelligence briefing for former secretary of state Warren Christopher and other officials noted "genocide and partition" and reported declarations of a "final solution to eliminate all Tutsis".

    However, the administration did not publicly use the word genocide until May 25 and even then diluted its impact by saying "acts of genocide".




    http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1182431,00.html
  5. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,953
    Likes Received:
    97
    Ratings:
    +173 / 5 / -21

    You don't need classified or secret documents from the foreign press to be aware that George Bush is ignoring the genocide taking place in Darfur and in other African nations.. otoh this is one of these threads that do not need to be so polarizing, but in this internet world guess it is what it is.
  6. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,793
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +289 / 4 / -2


    My point was simply that something dumb like:

    Bill Clinton = life

    George Bush = death


    Needs to be corrected. GW is no saint, and niether is Slick Willy. Look back in time and tell me what president doesn't have blood on his hands? They all do. Even JFK does. Ever heard of Operation Mongoose? Bay of Pigs? Reagan had gallons on his, as did Jimmy Carter. Look back, and most of them either acted in less than peaceful ways, or ignored deaths they could have possibely prevented. That's all.
  7. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,953
    Likes Received:
    97
    Ratings:
    +173 / 5 / -21

    My point is that any of these threads that point to the embarassing and shortsighted politics of this and previous gov't's do not need to be as polarizing as they are, but in this internet false world is what happens. There is too much blood on all of these so called christian administrations...
  8. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,793
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +289 / 4 / -2

    Oh I agree about that threads don't need to be so polarizing, but when you have party sheeple posting, or are the victim of a flawed two party political system, that's the result. It's why I always say that polarization will get worse before it gets better. A 3rd party's rise to prominence would serve to lessen the polarization I think. We can hope can't we?

    As for the christian part, I again must point out that while most everyone wants separation of church and state, or move to express how they don't want policy to be driven by religion, we can't then criticize these same politicians for not being religious enough. Sure christianity, islam, buhdism, et al each preech peace, but as a president or leader, such ideological beliefs are sometimes irrelevent.
  9. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,379
    Likes Received:
    137
    Ratings:
    +278 / 9 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    I guess I'm a cold hearted sh!t but I really don't care about Africans and it's not our job to support them. Not because of their color, I don't care about, say, Yugoslavians either. In fact I would have been perfectly happy letting Hussein kill Iraqis if not for the terrorism coming out of the middle east.
  10. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,055
    Likes Received:
    123
    Ratings:
    +327 / 1 / -9

    Let the UN and France handle Dafur, isn't it funny how the Sore Loser Bush Haters seem to think that the People in Dafur need help but the people being slaughtered and raped by Saddam didn't, "Racist Bastards".

    George Clooney and Danny DiVito have enough money to buy their own army, they can take care of Dafur America is busy trying to help those ungrateful f-cking savages in the middle east.

    Hey Koffi Crook and you French Weasles, go help the Africans you two faced son of a b!tches.
  11. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,953
    Likes Received:
    97
    Ratings:
    +173 / 5 / -21

    Maybe Laura and her cooking crew can forego the extravagant desserts and funnel that cash in the form of food to the people of Darfur??

    BTW Harry aren't you a major critic of the UN< or is this situational ethics once again??
  12. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,793
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +289 / 4 / -2

    Personally, I think the UN is a joke. They don't do anything unless the US sends troops or foots the bill. All the UN does is blame people, and blackmail others. Total waste of an institution whose creation was otherwise noble.

    As for Durfur, forget it. The UN should have been there years ago. If the UN isn't going to get involved in situation like these, then what is the purpose of the UN? Why we need to always get involved is ridiculous. They love to criticize us, but they NEVER do anything worthwhile without our involvement. Why don't the other nations in the UN send troops? Why not let Venenzuella send them? China? Iran? Seriously. If the USA is so evil, then where are these other members when push comes to shove and innocent civilians are dying? Have the Saudi's send soldiers there, they got the money to support it. The only country that gets involved out of the muslim/Arab nations is Pakistan. The Paki's always seem to send peacekeepers. As for the ME nations, where are they? China, anyone ever seen them send peacekeepers? They got over a Billion people too. Chavez and his big mouth have done what for the UN?

    Call a spade a spade I say.
  13. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,055
    Likes Received:
    123
    Ratings:
    +327 / 1 / -9

    The UN sucks your right, the American Democrat Liberal is just now starting to make a little noise about Africa, soon they will be wanting America to send troops to Africa WELL F-CK THEM, if we shoudn't fight in Iraq we should by no means send our young people to die in Africa, LET THE BASTARD UN AND THE WINE DRINKING WEASLES FROM FRANCE FIGHT THE AFRICAN WAR.

    Does Dafur have WMD's.

    NO MORE WAR--NO MORE AMERICAN TROOPS DYING--THE HELL WITH AFRICA--BUSH SHOULD STOP POURING MONEY INTO AFRICA--THE UN SHOULD BE TAKING CARE OF THEM.

    YOUNG PEOPLE, DON'T FIGHT IN AFRICA, GO TO CANADA (OR ENGLAND LIKE CLINTON DID)

    THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO START ANOTHER WAR :singing: :singing:

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>