| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Food for thought this Christmas |
| 2004-12-12 |
| The number of starving in the world has increased by nearly 20 million since the mid 1990s While hundreds of billions of dollars are spent on weapons, war, killing and destruction and countless more billions are spent on Christmas, the number of people starving in the world is increasing, instead of decreasing. However boring those people are who spread gloom and doom stories at Christmas time trying to make the rest of us feel guilty as we tuck into our stuffed turkeys and push yet another glass of wine into our already bloated bellies, the latest report from the FAO deserves mention this Christmas. "Bloated bellies." Is anyone else's self-loathing meter begining to jump? "The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2004" is the name of the report released yesterday, December 8th, by the UNO's Food and Agriculture Organization. To ignore this report is a sin. Says who? While certain nations spend billions, not tens of billions but hundreds of billions of dollars on the destruction of the State of Iraq (and tens of thousands of its citizens, including innocent women and children), the number of starving in the world has increased by nearly 20 million since the mid 1990s, according to the report. "[H]undreds of billions of dollars on the destruction of the State of Iraq ..." Horseshit detectors on overload! Saddam was destroying the state of Iraq and killing its people, not America. Furthermore, between 2000 and 2002, the number of starving rose to 852 million people, nearly one billion. At the beginning of the third millennium, what are we doing? I'd say that killing off the terrorists who are currently diverting much of our world's wealth towards fighting their psychotic minions is a sterling way of ensuring that we all get back to ending starvation. In the meanwhile, isn't it important to identify the fanatics who prevent such expenditures as the true culprits instead of trying to blame those who are interdicting them? At this rate, the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), which intended to halve the number of starving by 2015, will never be reached and what a pitiful comment on humankind that some of us spend so much on illegal wars, slaughtering children with cluster bombs in a quixotic quest for Weapons of Mass Destruction which continue to go AWOL, while at the same time more and more people find themselves without enough money to put a meal on the table. Funny, no mention of how the Iranian mullahs are so busy crippling Iran's economic future and committing human rights violations by the score. The mullahs (and several thousand Iranians) are about to find out just how "Quixotic" their nuclear weapons quest really is. This shameful comment on the development of humankind is compounded by the statement from the General Director of the FAO, Hartwig de Haen, who declared that "Enough is known about how to end hunger and now is the time to capture the momentum towards that goal," adding that it is a question of "political will and prioritization." It certainly is. And fighting terrorism rates a lot higher than bailing out corrupt third world dictatorships that are busily starving their populations. So, we see very clearly the political will and the list of priorities drawn up by the clique of sycophants who backed George Bush's act of butchery in Iraq. First, crawl around the legs of the elitist regime in Washington, hoping for contracts to be doled out, second try to stimulate the arms industry, selling more and more equipment to slaughter fellow human beings and to hell with the rest of humankind. Well, that bit of spewing makes quite clear the author's political agenda. History always judges in hindsight and en masse and it will be interesting to see how the history book will describe mankind at the beginning of the Third Millennium, when we will be seen as collectively spending more on killing each other and destroying our cities than defending and saving members of our own species in need. Boy howdy, this is sure to keep me awake during the long winter nights. In the forefront of the fight to set things right is Brazil's President Lula da Silva, who together with the UNO, Chile, France and Spain has formed the Quintet against Hunger, a movement which stimulates partnerships such as self-financing farming schools, which teach farmers how to make the most of their local conditions. Yeah, that'll put an end to world hunger in a hurry. The United Kingdom has also launched an idea to provide an international fund, based on the sale of government bonds, to provide 50 billion USD per year to address the problems of the world's poorest nations by 2015. Yes, we should feel guilty this year as we carve our stuffed turkeys and stuff them down our gullets because at the beginning of the Third Millennium, mankind was supposed to have risen to a higher and nobler state of development. And a little something known as Islamist terrorism is impeding our attempts at reaching such a goal. Exactly why are we supposed to feel guilty about this? We all know who we have to blame for this but the history book will blame all of us, not only Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Powell, Rice et alia. It is time mankind said a collective NO! to war and destruction of families and homes and YES! to developing the countries which have been held down for so long, by using subsidies and tariffs, while at the same time the "developed" world claims that it practises a policy of free trade. "[T]he countries which have been held down for so long" by their kleptocrats and religious loons, more like. The fact that hunger and famine is rising, reaching almost a billion, at the beginning of the century, is a telling comment on the deplorable political leadership demonstrated by those who deride the UNO as a League of Nations and then proceed with a shocking act of mass murder, spending hundreds of billions of dollars in the process. The only thing that is shocking is this jerkoff's massively misplaced priorities. It's pathetic to see such idiotic drivel being passed of as journalism. Anyone got some background on this wanker? Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey |
| Posted by:Zenster |
| #23 Excuse me,but I do not much care for turkey.We will be having ham,glased with pinapple and brown sugar.With chocolate and pumpkin pie for dessert.I would be more than glad to share this fine meal with anyone who is hungry and in need of a meal.Now just who are you going to be giving your food to sir? |
| Posted by: raptor 2004-12-12 5:38:58 PM |
| #22 Article belongs in the crock of shit category. |
| Posted by: John Q. Citizen 2004-12-12 4:31:00 PM |
| #21 Contrary to the author's premise, the world can feed itself, and hunger is almost entirely the result of states inability to address their own internal problems. It should be obvious that further progress on reducing hunger can only be by removing governments. This is absolutely correct. The world currently produces enough food to feed itself completely. It is the distribution (read: control) of existing foodstocks that cause famine. Does anyone remember how Gorbachev's Russia had one of its best ever harvests and still had to import wheat from Canada and America because domestic trainloads of it rotted away on railway sidings while aparatchiks held out for their usual bribes? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-12-12 4:25:31 PM |
| #20 Perhaps Zhang Fei can give us a figure-- I've heard it's as high as 200 million-- for the number of Chinese lives that were saved by the introduction of high-yielding, hugely efficient ie low-cost GM crops during the 1980s and 1990s. This report is yet another UN exercise in scoring bureaucratic funding for projects that are flawed by design and whose only practical consequence will be to provide employment to UN hacks and Kojo-style hangers-on for a year or two. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-12 3:44:34 PM |
| #19 Not much left to say after badanov's rant. One of the most profound developments of my lifetime is the world's steadily increasing capacity to feed itself despite an increasing population. The situation is now so good that traditional breadbasket food exporters are no longer needed to fill the gap (where nations cannot feed themselves). I have a better grasp of what is going on than most and even I was surprised when a fews weeks ago, the US dept of Agriculture announced the USA would cease to be a net food exporter next year (2005). Contrary to the author's premise, the world can feed itself, and hunger is almost entirely the result of states inability to address their own internal problems. It should be obvious that further progress on reducing hunger can only be by removing governments. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2004-12-12 3:42:07 PM |
| #18 F**wit. You want to reduce hunger? Then make GM seeds available across Africa, Asia and Latin America. And eliminate western trade barriers to third world cash crops so that millions of farmers will expand food production in those nations. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-12-12 3:23:32 PM |
| #17 there's a world wide foot surplus? Boy, howdy, I'm musta been asleep... There sure is, Frank G. Not enough boots are being put up the @ss of corrupt governments. Thus, all these underemployed feet. No Halliburton reference. Dunno about that: First, crawl around the legs of the elitist regime in Washington, hoping for contracts to be doled out ... Seems to come pretty close. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-12-12 3:18:18 PM |
| #16 Yes Frank, with the pioneering hog farms of the SE have some a huge foot surplus. AB keeps a huge jar of pickled ones in the O club. Pickled pig foots are nourishing, tasty and drive liverals crazy. What more do you want? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-12-12 2:01:34 PM |
| #15 Did the author of this bit of piffling drivel miss even one cliche'? No Halliburton reference. |
| Posted by: Raj 2004-12-12 1:21:10 PM |
| #14 the number of people starving in the world is increasing, instead of decreasing. Tell 'em to quit f*cking on an empty stomach. |
| Posted by: BH 2004-12-12 12:50:06 PM |
| #13 Get this maroon a style guide, quick! "The number of starving in the world has increased..."?? Starving what? Humans? Rats? Tree frogs? |
| Posted by: mojo 2004-12-12 12:16:56 PM |
| #12 While hundreds of billions of dollars are spent on weapons, war, killing and destruction and countless more billions are spent on Christmas, the number of people starving in the world is increasing, instead of decreasing. Tell them to convert to Christianity then they too can spend 'countless billions' on Christmas. However boring those people are who spread gloom and doom stories at Christmas time trying to make the rest of us feel guilty as we tuck into our stuffed turkeys and push yet another glass of wine into our already bloated bellies, the latest report from the FAO deserves mention this Christmas. I promise when I down my next glass of wine I won't feel guity, and thanks for reminding me to order a turkey for Christmas. "The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2004" is the name of the report released yesterday, December 8th, by the UNO's Food and Agriculture Organization. To ignore this report is a sin. Somehow I don't think you're going to give us a fire-and-brimestone sermon about the Saving Grace of Jesus Christ... Call it a hunch. While certain nations spend billions, not tens of billions but hundreds of billions of dollars on the destruction of the State of Iraq (and tens of thousands of its citizens, including innocent women and children), the number of starving in the world has increased by nearly 20 million since the mid 1990s, according to the report. Notice the pejorative term 'certain nations'. And we did notice that a lot more people are starving then in Clintonesque 90s. Has nothing to do with the Liberation of Iraq. Furthermore, between 2000 and 2002, the number of starving rose to 852 million people, nearly one billion. At the beginning of the third millennium, what are we doing? Let me answer this. We were approving the flying of aircraft into buildings and murdering Americans. And s852 billion is not anywhere near 'nearly a billion' and given the way NGOs and the left play with statistics I have serious doubts about the methods used and the numbers you wind up with. At this rate, the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), which intended to halve the number of starving by 2015, will never be reached and what a pitiful comment on humankind that some of us spend so much on illegal wars, slaughtering children with cluster bombs in a quixotic quest for Weapons of Mass Destruction which continue to go AWOL, while at the same time more and more people find themselves without enough money to put a meal on the table. Check the sked of the UN. The war is legal, and I thought this missive was about food. And that people can't put food on the table certainly isn't the west's fault. This shameful comment on the development of humankind is compounded by the statement from the General Director of the FAO, Hartwig de Haen, who declared that "Enough is known about how to end hunger and now is the time to capture the momentum towards that goal," adding that it is a question of "political will and prioritization." Man said a mouthful. Oopsie. Wrong term, eh? All the world gotta dop is put down that bottle of 90 proof Marxism and start drinking from that nice platic bottle of market based economy and democracy. So, we see very clearly the political will and the list of priorities drawn up by the clique of sycophants who backed George Bush's act of butchery in Iraq. First, crawl around the legs of the elitist regime in Washington, hoping for contracts to be doled out, second try to stimulate the arms industry, selling more and more equipment to slaughter fellow human beings and to hell with the rest of humankind. Bush's 'act of butchery' costed fewer lives than even the UN is willing to admit they thought would happen. And you are still failing to tell me how the War in Iraq in 2003 has impacted events in in the 90s. And actually, if you look, you are reading from Mugabe's playbook. History always judges in hindsight and en masse and it will be interesting to see how the history book will describe mankind at the beginning of the Third Millennium, when we will be seen as collectively spending more on killing each other and destroying our cities than defending and saving members of our own species in need. Your grasp of history is as tenuous as your grasp of politics. The USA will survive and history will be far kinder to it than to 'sycophants' such as yourself. In the forefront of the fight to set things right is Brazil's President Lula da Silva, who together with the UNO, Chile, France and Spain has formed the Quintet against Hunger, a movement which stimulates partnerships such as self-financing farming schools, which teach farmers how to make the most of their local conditions. We call those county extension offices. Every county in the US has one, by law, and we have had that since the middle 1800s. I can see how that would be an innovation to the likes of Brzil and France. And I would bet this Quintet holds regular meetings with pate de fois gras and steak. Bitch about how evil the USA is then stick us with the bill. The United Kingdom has also launched an idea to provide an international fund, based on the sale of government bonds, to provide 50 billion USD per year to address the problems of the world's poorest nations by 2015. I got a better idea. No free markets and democracy, no food aid in times of crisis. Yes, we should feel guilty this year as we carve our stuffed turkeys and stuff them down our gullets because at the beginning of the Third Millennium, mankind was supposed to have risen to a higher and nobler state of development. That phrase, which was supposed to disgust me enough to spring into action, has in fact made me hungry. We all know who we have to blame for this but the history book will blame all of us, not only Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Powell, Rice et alia. Actually, history will show Bush to be a prince and the rest of his Marxist critics to be gutteral sound producing frog felchers by comparison. It is time mankind said a collective NO! to war and destruction of families and homes and YES! to developing the countries which have been held down for so long, by using subsidies and tariffs, while at the same time the "developed" world claims that it practises a policy of free trade. Yes, take it up with the EU and all its subsidies, Make everything free market. The fact that hunger and famine is rising, reaching almost a billion, at the beginning of the century, is a telling comment on the deplorable political leadership demonstrated by those who deride the UNO as a League of Nations and then proceed with a shocking act of mass murder, spending hundreds of billions of dollars in the process. He means me, doesn't he? |
| Posted by: badanov 2004-12-12 12:11:00 PM |
| #11 First of all, there are worse things than hunger. Ask the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs and the Iranians and the Kuwaitis about Saddam. Thank us for funding his removal. Second, I'm tired of this "developing countries held down" crap. Some countries have unsustainable populations given their inherently poor agricultural conditions. People in these areas have always starved when the weather turned against them or the locusts came through. If you want to help them, move them out and don't allow them back. Third, get you f'ing hand off my wallet. I'm sick of being preached to by U.N. commissions, consultants, and lobbyists who eat extradordinarily well while being paid to preach. Finally (quitting now before I blow a gasket), click on the writer's name at the end of the article and read his bio. I love the part about "providing people with information, to not let them fall into the quagmire of carrot-and-stick control by the invisible barons who control the business and the mass media corporations". This f'ing idiot is working for Pravda for God's sake. LOL |
| Posted by: Tom 2004-12-12 11:59:22 AM |
| #10 there's a world wide foot surplus? Boy, howdy, I'm musta been asleep... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-12-12 11:44:18 AM |
| #9 The drought in the Sahel region might qualify, but even that was man made to an extent. I can't think of a single preventable (world wide foot surplus) famine since? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-12-12 11:38:33 AM |
| #8 ...Maybe one of our folks with access to more info can confirm this, but I was once told that there has not been a major famine due solely to natural causes in more than a century now - all of them have been due primarily to political or military confict in the affected regions even if weather/crop failure and/or disease was a factor. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2004-12-12 11:28:05 AM |
| #7 Lets not forget the European buearucrats who threaten to refuse to purchase African crops, thus undermining the economic viability of the state, if the county dared to feed its hungry with 'genetically engineered' American grain. Nothing scientific, just pure self-serving power politics to enhance starvation someplace in the world. |
| Posted by: Don 2004-12-12 10:16:48 AM |
| #6 Take your complaints up with the Persians,&Arabs |
| Posted by: raptor 2004-12-12 7:55:35 AM |
| #5 "[T]he countries which have been held down for so long" by their kleptocrats and religious loons, more like. He's right that trade barriers don't help either ..... we have some, but the EU is the big offender on that count. Funny he doesn't mention that. |
| Posted by: too true 2004-12-12 6:50:04 AM |
| #4 Did the author of this bit of piffling drivel miss even one cliche'? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2004-12-12 6:43:42 AM |
| #3 This (expletives deleted) is published in Pravada. Nothing wrong with that except most of us know Pravada actually means bullshit not truth. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-12-12 4:46:56 AM |
| #2 One other glaring conclusion from Transparency International's survey of world corruption is it hurts the poor far more. Combine this with corruption being most serious in Brazil and normally by government employeess, and there is a great deal Lulu can do help the poor in his current position. But of course you are not a real socialist unless you blame the evil capitalists and imperialists for all your problems. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2004-12-12 4:34:48 AM |
| #1 Wow. Never heard of him before... Since he thinks Lulu is a peach, the rest fits the mold of Socialist Fool. Hell, he's even got a calendar which sez we're behind schedule on his Global Nobility Progress Chart. Lol! He's just another wanker who'd like to be in charge, methinks. Why, if he were King of the World, there'd be World Hugs and Blue Skies Forever - after he looted the treasuries of those pesky little country-thingys with their trivial local concerns. Think Globally, Act Stupid. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-12-12 3:18:43 AM |