that's a lot of information. I just read the first post. I am sure her husband profited financially from his wife's power. who the hell wouldn't take advantage of any source to make money. I sure as hell would. But I also think she did try to help her country. Now it's upto Musharraf to keep world war 3 from happening.
Bhutto refresher
- Thread starter TheStudent
- Start date
world war 3?
on what basis? Iran has gotten a clean chit, iraq is limping towards peace..........Pak will remain as it has been. Where else is the problem, hope Pak leaders come to senses and go the democratic yet strong hand way. Would not mind Musharef in power if he can keep fanatic elements in control.
on what basis? Iran has gotten a clean chit, iraq is limping towards peace..........Pak will remain as it has been. Where else is the problem, hope Pak leaders come to senses and go the democratic yet strong hand way. Would not mind Musharef in power if he can keep fanatic elements in control.
things are not stable in those fucked up muslim countries. You think the terrorists are just sitting there with their hands folded. I don't see why they would not try to get nuclear weapons.
It would be funny though if after getting them, they would not know how to use it. Or they accidently sent one in the wrong direction.
It would be funny though if after getting them, they would not know how to use it. Or they accidently sent one in the wrong direction.
It is hardly surprising that the power elite in Pakistan (esp. the Bhutto's) are involved in graft and bribery. The circumstances are similar in India
Business as usual, the politicians make a living at every level of government from corruption.
To people who do business in south Asia, this kind of news doesn't lift an eyebrow.
Business as usual, the politicians make a living at every level of government from corruption.
To people who do business in south Asia, this kind of news doesn't lift an eyebrow.
Ahahahaha!
Oh please. Charities are total BULLSH*T! Especially when you are someone highly intelligent like Buffet, Gates & Hilton. All those charities serve a hidden purpose. For example, Gates used to give free Windows software & PCs to school districts only to leave those school districts to be forced to upgrade for decades to come and end up enriching Microsoft.
If Buffett or Gates or any greedy pig actually cared, they would create jobs in improvished areas (no lack of those in US). Do like Stephan Marbury (aka Crackbury) did. As much as I laugh at his antics, you gotta give the man credit for putting up that sneaker factory in inner cities, creating jobs and an affordable product for the communities.
Let's see Gates or Buffett every do that, create a non-profit manufacturing facility and actually bring some jobs back to this nation.
Besides that, is it even a surprise she got killed? It's pretty obvious she caters to Western interests, hence the mourning for her by the US media.
'It's pretty obvious she caters to Western interests, hence the mourning for her by the US media.'
West is on the wrong footing here.........there is world of difference between chaotic democracy and autocratic order. If US wants Pak to go democratic but also chaotic then it will be a really messy scenario. Pak is better under Musharef until situation calms down and some decisive ground is gained agianst AQ and others in the region.
AQ and others getting hold of nukes and wmd goodies are all overblown fears. Pak government and army knows the consequences of such slip up as they will be held twice as responsible for letting those items fall into hostile elements.
It is also pretty idiotic on US part to not do something substaintial when they know that it was Pak's hand under glove in making and cultivating Taliban and AQ and helping them commit all sorts of terrorist activities all around the world. However after Iraq, US is not going to invade any country without any big big big reason.
Or let me correct, not invade any Islamic country. Other nations like India, Russia, China etc. are meek dogs......i.e. men are not strong or strong willed enough
West is on the wrong footing here.........there is world of difference between chaotic democracy and autocratic order. If US wants Pak to go democratic but also chaotic then it will be a really messy scenario. Pak is better under Musharef until situation calms down and some decisive ground is gained agianst AQ and others in the region.
AQ and others getting hold of nukes and wmd goodies are all overblown fears. Pak government and army knows the consequences of such slip up as they will be held twice as responsible for letting those items fall into hostile elements.
It is also pretty idiotic on US part to not do something substaintial when they know that it was Pak's hand under glove in making and cultivating Taliban and AQ and helping them commit all sorts of terrorist activities all around the world. However after Iraq, US is not going to invade any country without any big big big reason.
Or let me correct, not invade any Islamic country. Other nations like India, Russia, China etc. are meek dogs......i.e. men are not strong or strong willed enough
As much as I hate Bill Gates, the Gates Foundation does invest in MANY ways without a MS Windows based hidden purpose. Any charity can follow its own mission and bias,
I would direct you to the foundation itself, here are a few examples and this is only in the global health section in 1999
Dec 7, 1999 The GAVI Fund
$750,000,000 over 5 years to support the immunization of children in 74 countries through the purchase of new vaccines
Dec 7, 1999 International Vaccine Institute
$37,771,645 over 5 years to develop, evaluate, and introduce vaccines against diseases of the most impoverished including cholera, shigellosis, and typhoid
Nov 22, 1999 China Foundation, Inc.
$2,000,000 over 2 years to support the China Basic Health Services Project
Nov 22, 1999 Family Planning Association of India
$1,629,282 over 2 years to provide continued support for the Small Family by Choice program
Nov 22, 1999 Centre for Development and Population Activities
$5,000,000 over 5 years to provide leadership skills and tools to women, provide state-of-the-art technical assistance to local NGOs, and build their capacity to address the needs of women, children, and communities in the developing world
Nov 22, 1999 University of Notre Dame
$5,211,800 over 5 years to eliminate lymphatic filariasis in Haiti while developing a model program for the global elimination of this infection
Nov 22, 1999 Help the Afghan Children, Inc.
$1,600,000 over 2 years to maintain the primary and maternal/child health care services in southwestern Afghanistan
Nov 22, 1999 University of California, Berkeley
$645,000 over 3 years to support the international family planning and reproductive health studies of the Bay Area International Group
Nov 22, 1999 Worldwide Documentaries
$1,000,000 over 1 year to produce and distribute the film "A Closer Walk," about the global AIDS crisis
Nov 22, 1999 International Tuberculosis Foundation, Inc.
$1,930,000 over 5 years to establish, sustain and reproduce a system to monitor, diagnose, and manage acute childhood respiratory diseases in Malawi
Nov 22, 1999 Seattle Biomedical Research Institute
$5,000,000 over 3 years to research malaria vaccine antigens that are necessary for an effective malaria vaccine
Nov 22, 1999 University of California
$1,021,304 over 67 months to develop iron and zinc- fortified wheat products to improve the health of Peruvian children
Nov 22, 1999 SUSTAIN
$1,793,000 over 67 months to support innovations in fortification technologies to combat iron deficiency anemia
Nov 22, 1999 DKT International, Inc.
$4,302,367 over 61 months to reduce infant mortality and HIV transmission among adolescents through the expansion of social marketing programs in Ethiopia
Nov 22, 1999 Public Health Institute
$2,998,669 over 3 years to support the International Family Planning Leadership Development Program
Nov 22, 1999 United Nations Foundation
$1,250,000 over 51 months to strengthen surveillance and control of vaccine-preventable and epidemic prone diseases
Sep 27, 1999 United States Fund for UNICEF
$26,000,000 over 4 years to support the global initiative to eliminate maternal and neonatal tetanus
Sep 27, 1999 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
$15,000,000 over 6 years to support the Global Network for Maternal and Child Health, Population and Human Development
Sep 23, 1999 The Regents of the University of Michigan
$5,000,000 over 5 years to develop a participatory on-site training and electronic communications network to improve the availability and quality of family planning services for poor populations in Latin America
Aug 19, 1999 Population Council
$4,000,000 over 2 years to develop, test, and distribute vaginal microbicides
good luck with that Hydro
Even at 75B value of Gates foundation at 10% annual returns and 3% further reduction for inflation, the roughly figure of $5B a year with principal intact does give lots of hopes of eradication, education and curing research on lots of health and medical challenges that face the humanity.
One thing that has to be pointed out is any aid given to third world nations is horribly misued, but that is government to government. Hoepfully private foundation based aid programs are more efficiently and privately operated.
Again, Gates, Buffet and Hilton for Nobel Prize each.
One thing that has to be pointed out is any aid given to third world nations is horribly misued, but that is government to government. Hoepfully private foundation based aid programs are more efficiently and privately operated.
Again, Gates, Buffet and Hilton for Nobel Prize each.
Really? So why is it that things only get worse in the third world, and the disparity between rich & poor only grows wider. Why is it that matters in problems third nations like most of Africa do not ever improve, only get worse.
So what are all these charities really doing? Could it be that they are riddled with bureaucracy and do a few good things for P.R. so that they can keep paying themselves salaries? Could it be that they function similiar to IMF & World Bank? Marinade on that one for a little while.
For all the charities in the U.S. aiming to help minorities and the poor, I have yet to see any real results. Cities that were affected by the offshoring of the industrial/manufacturing base are still dying, the prisons are growing, number of people living below poverty is still rising.
Oh, all those wonderful charities. With all that money pouring into them, I'm just scratching my head as to why matters only get worse.
Here is a clue. People like Buffett, Gates, Hilton, etc., have enough money to revitalize whole cities & nations. So if they really care, why don't they do so. The equation is VERY simple. Create jobs, decent paying jobs and stop milking everybody & everything for profit. Preach & practice sustainable business & self sustaining communities. I have yet to see anyone besides Marbury do anything of the sort. Let alone any charity.
P.S. Whenever a rich person donates to a University, they have input regarding their cirriculums & programs. Rockefeller used to do this a lot. Also, when the Gates donation gives free software to organizations, they quote it in dollar amounts based on retail price. He has been giving cash lately, I will give you that, but most of his "philanthropy" is nothing more than business.