Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JohnRgt

Gates' Latest Backwards Step

18 posts in this topic

"Malaria is spread by mosquitoes," Gates said while opening a jar onstage at a gathering known to attract technology kings, politicians, and Hollywood stars.

"I brought some. Here I'll let them roam around. There is no reason only poor people should be infected."

Yahoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at both why malaria is still an issue and the mess of "ideas" behind this stunt, all I can say is, WHAT A BRAT! Imagine if he had finished Harvard!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His comments are nothing new, "making people care...," but they still are amazingly stupid. Hey Bill, how about each person "caring" for themselves and left alone to make their own value choices? Even with all the great things Bill Gates has done in the past, overall he is a huge disappointment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it amazing how guilt about one's abilities and achievements can make a man so small. At least I can find one comfort if there is another depression: Gates will lose a lot more than me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a particular problem with his advocating on behalf of malaria victims, but this berating tactic of "how dare you be selfish while there's suffering in the world" is beyond the pale. The existence of innocent suffering is not a claim on my or anyone else's happiness. There is no intrinsic value in giving money to fight malaria vs. enriching your own life (even with baldness drugs), and he has no business browbeating those who would do the latter. And while I consider his release of mosquitoes to be juvenile (I didn't seriously believe he would bring malaria-carrying specimens), his implication that infecting the wealthy would be justice shows just how low this man has fallen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And while I consider his release of mosquitoes to be juvenile (I didn't seriously believe he would bring malaria-carrying specimens), his implication that infecting the wealthy would be justice shows just how low this man has fallen.

Gates conveniently skips the main point: The whole idea that we need tens of billions of dollars and strong government/UN "leadership" to find a weapon against this disease is a massive lie. Malaria was contained by DDT, a chemical that could again save millions of lives a year for pennies per life saved if only our policies would value human beings over the thickness of the eggshells of a particular subspecies of eagle (I don't mean to imply that the connection between DDT and eggshell thickness was ever established.)

Gates should be spending his energies and fortune on clearing the way for DDT by going after the Greens and their patsy regulators, not by trying to bully people into action despite the fact that malaria continues to claim millions of lives per year in the name of...what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just say that there were people in the audience infected with blood bourn diseases (like HIV, or Hepatitis C), and that mosquitoes bit one of them, then went and landed on another person, bit them and passed on the infection. In the case of HIV, that would be murder. I think there should be a law against this action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's just say that there were people in the audience infected with blood bourn diseases (like HIV, or Hepatitis C), and that mosquitoes bit one of them, then went and landed on another person, bit them and passed on the infection. In the case of HIV, that would be murder. I think there should be a law against this action.

What Gates did was actionable: malicious nuisance, breach of the peace and battery. Since Gates is Rich and Famous no action will be brought against him.

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
------------

And while I consider his release of mosquitoes to be juvenile (I didn't seriously believe he would bring malaria-carrying specimens), his implication that infecting the wealthy would be justice shows just how low this man has fallen.

Which is why the release of the mosquitoes was a lot more than just juvenile. The release represent Gates' egalitarian values that he supports and advocates for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't exactly the first time Bill Gates has released a bunch of bugs into the general populace ... :lol:

However, there is a huge difference in the blue screen of death and the transmission of blood-born illness for a publicity stunt. Now to don my skeptic's hat and ask how we know it isn't just another stage trick? You can't actually see mosquitoes on stage from the audience. So are we to go on word alone? It seems to be a total lack of common sense to release disease carriers into an audience - not impossible, I'm just a bit hard to believe this rather sensationalist news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This isn't exactly the first time Bill Gates has released a bunch of bugs into the general populace ... :lol:

However, there is a huge difference in the blue screen of death and the transmission of blood-born illness for a publicity stunt. Now to don my skeptic's hat and ask how we know it isn't just another stage trick? You can't actually see mosquitoes on stage from the audience. So are we to go on word alone? It seems to be a total lack of common sense to release disease carriers into an audience - not impossible, I'm just a bit hard to believe this rather sensationalist news.

I understand, how could one know? That's why if I was in the audience, I'd get up and leave! I don't want to wait for a diseased mosquito to confirm whether he really released them or not. It's a bit like shouting fire in a crowded theater. I'm not going to wait until I'm burned before I rush out the door! I'm leaning toward Ruveyn's side, oddly enough. I'm not certain of the legal jargon, etc. but I'm fairly certain that even pretending to release diseased mosquitoes into a crowded hall should be criminal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What Gates did was actionable: malicious nuisance, breach of the peace and battery. Since Gates is Rich and Famous no action will be brought against him.

ruveyn

But prosecutors pursued him with vigor in the past, when he was rich and famous, based on the existence of non-objective (anti-trust) law. His wealth and renown at the time, legitimately earned by his virtues of genius and productiveness, were no protection then.

If he's left alone now, it will be because of an absence of objective law, or an absence of the enforcement of objective law. And if objective laws exist that could be enforced against him, yet are not, I would lay the cause at the door of the acceptance of guilt by those who are rich and free of malaria, so long as there are still poor people with malaria on earth.

The irony of this cannot be overstated -- because it is the wrong morality, most appallingly manifest in the evil and dishonesty of Rachael Carson and Dan Ruckelshaus, which is largely responsible for the fact that malaria is still a widespread killer. And it is people like that -- and those who accept the false guilt instilled in them by such monsters -- who are most responsible for the death of millions by malaria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What Gates did was actionable: malicious nuisance, breach of the peace and battery. Since Gates is Rich and Famous no action will be brought against him.

ruveyn

But prosecutors pursued him with vigor in the past, when he was rich and famous, based on the existence of non-objective (anti-trust) law. His wealth and renown at the time, legitimately earned by his virtues of genius and productiveness, were no protection then.

If he's left alone now, it will be because of an absence of objective law, or an absence of the enforcement of objective law. And if objective laws exist that could be enforced against him, yet are not, I would lay the cause at the door of the acceptance of guilt by those who are rich and free of malaria, so long as there are still poor people with malaria on earth.

The irony of this cannot be overstated -- because it is the wrong morality, most appallingly manifest in the evil and dishonesty of Rachael Carson and Dan Ruckelshaus, which is largely responsible for the fact that malaria is still a widespread killer. And it is people like that -- and those who accept the false guilt instilled in them by such monsters -- who are most responsible for the death of millions by malaria.

Sorry, William, not Dan Ruckelshaus. Where on earth did I get Dan? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What Gates did was actionable: malicious nuisance, breach of the peace and battery. Since Gates is Rich and Famous no action will be brought against him.

ruveyn

But prosecutors pursued him with vigor in the past, when he was rich and famous, based on the existence of non-objective (anti-trust) law. His wealth and renown at the time, legitimately earned by his virtues of genius and productiveness, were no protection then.

If he's left alone now, it will be because of an absence of objective law, or an absence of the enforcement of objective law. And if objective laws exist that could be enforced against him, yet are not, I would lay the cause at the door of the acceptance of guilt by those who are rich and free of malaria, so long as there are still poor people with malaria on earth.

The irony of this cannot be overstated -- because it is the wrong morality, most appallingly manifest in the evil and dishonesty of Rachael Carson and Dan Ruckelshaus, which is largely responsible for the fact that malaria is still a widespread killer. And it is people like that -- and those who accept the false guilt instilled in them by such monsters -- who are most responsible for the death of millions by malaria.

Sorry, William, not Dan Ruckelshaus. Where on earth did I get Dan? :lol:

Rather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, William, not Dan Ruckelshaus. Where on earth did I get Dan? :lol:

Rather.

:D

Actually, I have this sneaking feeling that it has to do with the name sounding like Don Rickles, remember him? It's the only thing I can think of. Anyway, the enormous difference is that Don Rickles is innocent, unlike William Ruckelshaus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, William, not Dan Ruckelshaus. Where on earth did I get Dan? :lol:

Rather.

:D

Actually, I have this sneaking feeling that it has to do with the name sounding like Don Rickles, remember him? It's the only thing I can think of. Anyway, the enormous difference is that Don Rickles is innocent, unlike William Ruckelshaus.

"innocent"? Maybe in comparison, but what are you a hockey puck?

Don Rickles: "Hey we have some Canadians in the audience. All of you Americans, pick on these Canadians."

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, William, not Dan Ruckelshaus. Where on earth did I get Dan? :lol:

Rather.

:D

Actually, I have this sneaking feeling that it has to do with the name sounding like Don Rickles, remember him? It's the only thing I can think of. Anyway, the enormous difference is that Don Rickles is innocent, unlike William Ruckelshaus.

"innocent"? Maybe in comparison, but what are you a hockey puck?

Don Rickles: "Hey we have some Canadians in the audience. All of you Americans, pick on these Canadians."

:D

This brings up something that I've seen a few times in the past year or so. It seems that there is an unspoken rivalry between the former English colonies of US, Canada, and Australia. India is increasingly moving into that territory as well since they seem to be moving forward again. Has anyone else noticed this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This brings up something that I've seen a few times in the past year or so. It seems that there is an unspoken rivalry between the former English colonies of US, Canada, and Australia. India is increasingly moving into that territory as well since they seem to be moving forward again. Has anyone else noticed this?

What do you mean by rivalry? In a certain sense, only when a country has been free enough for long enough that it can be productive enough to compete with e.g. the U.S. (or at least what it used to be) could there be "rivalry", which I take to mean business competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0