July 2005 G8 meeting in the United Kingdom

[Nick]

Greetings Folks,

Taking my lead from the "Bush Sucks" thread, I wondered what members thoughts were on the gathering of G8.

If you want a quick rundown on WHY you should be interested, and how the summit affects YOU a good place to start are the links I've set out below.

While many agree "Bush Sucks", there does exist a gathering of folks who can and do make some rather important global decisions. I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on G8. Do you have an opinion?
[/color]

To get started - the basic overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G8

The official website: http://www.g8.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1078995911932

And a view from the opposition: http://www.g8alternatives.org.uk/

[Shinobi]

...

[Hans Solo]

While there are certainly legitimate questions around the appropriate role for government in handing out money, I can't help but hope for some real progress

Government has NO right to stick a gun to my head and FORCE me to give money to this cause, or any other cause.  This will be about as effective as the US giving foreign "aid" to these African dictators.  Basically what happens is that all the aid meant for the people gets confiscated by their regimes and sold on the black market.  Rarely does any of this aid get distributed to the people.  Meanwhile, our governments get to prance around acting like THEY are the humanitarians while they Stole our money at the point of a gun.  NO government program works the way it is designed, and usually they have the opposite effect.  Let us look at the UN sanctions on Iraq that was supposed to contain Saddam and do all sorts of wonderful things for the Iraqis in the long run.  Instead, over 200,000 Iraqis died due to food and medical supplies not being available.  This is more than Saddam even killed.  So they came up with the OIL FOR FOOD program that was supposed to help the people of Iraq get food.  Instead Kofi and Pals were in league with Saddam and stole BILLIONS! (largest fraud every committed in history)  This allowed Saddam to do all sorts of Humanitarian things like build more palaces, etc.  How much of this went to the citizens, you guessed it...just a trickle, bureaucratic waste and fraud stole the rest.

Instead of helping the African populous these dictators will seize this money to help build up their regimes in order to exploit their citizens more.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Government is force,
Han

Ps. if you want to help give money to a private organization, but dont run to government to have them stick a gun in my mouth for your cause.  This is not compassion it is thievery!

[no_leaf_clover]

Yeah, the 'aid' thing sadly does not work. I think the G8 business is really some world leaders getting together and figuring out how they can scratch each others' backs in terms of each of their agendas. If they were really concerned about Africa, they'd send UN forces down there to halt the genocide that has already claimed upwards of 2 million lives.

[Nick]

Here is an additional point of view that I've come across on G8:

"The membership of the G8 has evolved over time to include the UK, France, Germany, Italy, US, Japan, Russia, Canada and the president of the European Union.  

The scope of the topics of discussion have also evolved from the first meeting that focused on macro-economic policy. Now issues of security, trade, relations with developing countries and other trans-national issues and even domestic issues, such as employment have been discussed.

The G8 Summits are not a policy-making forum. They are a time for the leaders of these states to network and build relationships. They are a time to discuss complex international issues and crises, to allow for a more powerful collective response.

The co-ordination of these nations and their unequal influence over international institutions such as the WTO, IMF and G20 ensures that their interests dominate the world order.

As such the G8 Summits have always been a focus for protests and counter summits... the Summit protests have, however, grown and strengthened, forcing the G8 Summits to more and more remote locations with ever increasing security costs."

- ABOVE QUOTE TAKEN FROM http://www.dissent.org.uk/component/option,com_frontpage/Itemid,1/

[Hans Solo]

If they were really concerned about Africa, they'd send UN forces down there to halt the genocide that has already claimed upwards of 2 million lives.

The reason for the genocide is due to western Governments arbitrarily drawing lines on a map to make states out of Africa.  They seem really good at combining waring tribes into the same states, so when one tribe comes to power they try and wipe out the other tribe.  This is the same with the "created" country of Iraq with the Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis (sorry for the spelling).  If government would BUT OUT then much of these problems wouldn't exist. This is also the reason for much of the conflicts in the Middle East.

Also, the UN is a Powerless, corrupt organization.  When they tried to help in Bosnia the military personnel would have to check with their captains each day to check what side they were on!  It is like when the Iraq-Iran war was going on the U.S. armed both sides, so they would have both bases covered!  And guess what, what countries are we having trouble with today!  We armed Alkaida when they fought against the USSR, and lo and behold they used those arms and vast sums of money against Us!  We armed the USSR in WWII against Nazi Germany which led to a 40 year cold war.  lets not forget that after WWII we carved up most of Eastern Europe and gave it to the Soviets so Stalin could continue with the Genocide that Hitler could no longer do.  Hitler came to power because of the Sanctions placed on Germany after WWI that lead to poverty and a ticked off citizenry (perfect breading grounds for tyranny).  In WWI 15,000,000 (15 MILLION) died because some Duke got assassinated,
------------------------>WHAT!!!!!??!??!?!?!?

Governments should get out of the war racket, and the UN is an evil organization that is trying to erode the rights of US citizens (although, not quite as efficient as the Bush administration).

Down with the UN,

Han

[Shinobi]

...

[no_leaf_clover]

Hans - thanks for the insight into the problem behind the genocide.

I agree the UN should be put down. There are some areas in which such an organization would be useful, but it isn't being used properly today. Ironically, even Bush is moving away from the UN, for his own reasons no less. Along with all the Michael Bolton bullcrap, I saw an article from the BBC the other day that really made us out to look like Iraq: the US was buying time to keep UN inspectors from visiting Guantanamo. Looks like someone needs a good invasion!

[no_leaf_clover]

Shinobi, I don't doubt that some real progress has been made in Africa by such organizations. It's just that government-funded aid (aside from being technically unconstitutional, but that's never been a problem for the executive order) has a reputation of being horribly carried-out.

Take the tsuanmis for example. Reports have came out saying that most of the aid just ended going to the rich, and the least of it went to the poor that were affected by the disaster because of the systems that were in place before the disaster. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4621365.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/4623807.stm

Another example was some big world-wide aid donation to starving Ethiopians. The name of it exactly escapes me, but tons upon tons of food was sent to feed Ethiopians. It would've been plenty to last for a while, except there was no means to deliver to the people, and it ended up sitting on the ports in Ethiopia and rotting, infested with rodents.

The charity organizations, I don't doubt, are much more effective, seeing as how they actually go in with those people and care for them in person. It's the big, government-sponsored funds that are just send blindly towards the countries with no means of delivering aid that end up such failures.

Btw - Bush may have sent the most money to date, but I doubt much good will come of that money anyway, unless he put it into the private organizations and not the government-backed aid programs, which he probably did. To top it off, the money he donated most likely didn't even exist, and went straight into the national debt. We're careening head-on towards a massive depression with that debt, rising oil prices, and China and Japan switching to supporting the Euro. It's only a matter of time.

[Hans Solo]

There are some areas in which such an organization would be useful, but it isn't being used properly today

This is the attitude that keeps them in power.  No offense, 98% of the population will agree with you.  Here is what people think "If only MY leaders were in power then this organization would be used for GOOD reasons".

Private charitable organization can always do it more independently and efficiently, with better public oversight than ANY government organization.  Also, if they are not doing a good job people will be free not to give them any more money! Not so with governments and the UN.

* Amnesty international could do human rights inspections
* Red cross can more efficiently deliver Food and Aid (only 15% overhead compared to the UN's 75%!)
* UN stopping wars---Ha ha

Shinobi, I don't doubt that some real progress has been made in Africa by such organizations. It's just that government-funded aid (aside from being technically unconstitutional, but that's never been a problem for the executive order) has a reputation of being horribly carried-out.

Take the tsuanmis for example. Reports have came out saying that most of the aid just ended going to the rich, and the least of it went to the poor that were affected by the disaster because of the systems that were in place before the disaster. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4621365.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/4623807.stm

Another example was some big world-wide aid donation to starving Ethiopians. The name of it exactly escapes me, but tons upon tons of food was sent to feed Ethiopians. It would've been plenty to last for a while, except there was no means to deliver to the people, and it ended up sitting on the ports in Ethiopia and rotting, infested with rodents.

The charity organizations, I don't doubt, are much more effective, seeing as how they actually go in with those people and care for them in person. It's the big, government-sponsored funds that are just send blindly towards the countries with no means of delivering aid that end up such failures.

Btw - Bush may have sent the most money to date, but I doubt much good will come of that money anyway, unless he put it into the private organizations and not the government-backed aid programs, which he probably did. To top it off, the money he donated most likely didn't even exist, and went straight into the national debt. We're careening head-on towards a massive depression with that debt, rising oil prices, and China and Japan switching to supporting the Euro. It's only a matter of time.

Excellent post!  you posted it before I posted mine, so I didn't see it before I responded.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is similar to small government Republicans who listened to their party parrot Libertarian ideas when Clinton was in power, but as soon as they got in power ALL HELL BREAKS LOSE! The government has Grown by leaps and bounds now that Bush is in power. Hell, he hasn't vetoed a SINGLE bill yet!  Rights are being extinguished, and spending bills never cease.  However, now that a Republican is doing the spending Rush Limbaugh couldn't be happier, or at least he will say "It is better than a Democrat being in power!"  NO ITS NOT! Not with a Republican Congress and Senate in power.  At least government would be stagnate instead of growing and mutating.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely,

Han

[Nick]

REGARDING G8 -

A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues can be found by clicking the link below:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/actions/2005/g8/

[no_leaf_clover]

Ahh... Indy Media. Hence my sig XD

If you go to their main site, it links to branches all over the world that you can visit for more local news. Combine it with BBC and you'll have good sources of news outside of all the court cases and movie reviews.

[Nick]

Yikes, no leaf, I hadn't noticed that link in your signature before!  

Thanks also for the tip on finding local news from their main site.

Nick

[Gandalf]

This is going to be interesting for me, as I live just up the road from where the G8 summit will be held.

Damn right I'll be on the march!

Doug

[Nick]

The Hotel where the G8 Summit is being held:

[attachment deleted by admin]

[taoita]

I'm not one for statistical information so if i tread badly, please put me right.  Right now, the 'reliable' UK press are full of ambiguous reports of the spreading aids virus.  The images are of basic looking African hospitals and the accounts describe weak young men who are lying desperate in need (apparently waiting for pharmaceutical drugs and hospital treatments).  

Intuitively, I know that this information is misleading.  So I am asking - how will the world leaders discuss the truth when no one can accurately categorise the aids virus?  If it weren't for manufacturing, noone would dare to suggest that pills were the easiest solution for such grave issues when sanitation, agriculture and the like would stem half the sickness.   I predict that the leaders will make aids (health, hospitals and treatments) top of the agenda and many of their 'parent' organisations will benefit from the aid to africa.

I will be doing my bit in the midlands - uk - to actively participate.