I have issues with this article. I HIGHLY doubt that our old American computers are being shipped over to Nigeria to be dumped. That stuff is recycled here, either that, or they make their way to American dumps and get buried here. It's just another article bashing Americans.

I think there's some truth to it, but SPIEGEL sometimes has a way of passing information quite selectively to its readers. It's often a peculiar blend of information and interpretation despite calling itself a "news magazine." I'm a regular reader, but I often disagree (and I can see why others do as well).

To quote just the headline:

How Europe's discarded computer are poisoning Africa'S kids.

The article then mentions existing laws and regulations being avoided/broken becasue they create solutions more than twice as expensive than just shipping the waste illegally to africa.

much of what it is about is due to violations of laws - european ones, and american ones. That is different to Indias ship wrecking industry, that also founds modern slave labour: but nevertheless it is perfectly legal, and that means exploiting the weakness of those poor dogs is legal, too.

there are so many examples. Poisonous waste, for example, being dumped in some third world country. Yes, we have laws forbidding that. and still they get violated. Then, dumping nuclear waste. Relabelling no longer valid/fresh medical drugs, and selling them in the third world with forged expirations dates although they could do more good than bad now. And pefectly legal western industries still produce and sell chemical agents to the third world that to use in the EU or the US already is forbidden by law, due to their toxicity.

Are you two like siamese twins or something? Do you share the same brain?

You said

Giving them two (2) options, either to starve to death or to engage in some hazardous or slavery type work. Now as is known from real life, this is often the case with US corporations, they don't care much about human rights or the health of the workers. US also supports things such as trafficking in humans and child prostitution in the Far-East.

And as far as napalm, it has has also been used by the US against children in the third world and is still used in some form today. Plenty of pics around, I hope I don't need to post those here.

But I don't mind going to the brig to bring attention to a worthy cause. :up:

August said something. You misunderstood and went on the attack. I tried to clear up the misunderstanding. I got it right and he thanked me. So now you are insulting and attacking again. I haven't called you any names, and I haven't insulted or questioned your intelligence. Can you please show the same respect?

And most of us don't disagree.

You didn't go to the brig because you brought up anything. You went to the brig because you insisted on making a personal attack. You can make your points with intelligence, or you can throw mud at people you disagree with. As the saying goes, you catch a lot more flies with honey than with vinegar.

I would add that its not purely US corporations which engage in all this bad stuff, plenty of blame to go around to the rest of the world.

...then there's China:o (or, I'll throw in the semi-conductor industry located in Asia).

They are "safety-challenged.":o

Actually, the semi-conductor industry has gone through great strides to elliminate the dangerous chemicals from the manufactering process (Pb).

You seem to defend August's point about giving kids two choises, to starve or to engage in some slavery type work. Now these are not the only two choices anywhere but it seems that some individuals seem to like to promote a world view according to which they are and indeed should be the only two choises available for children in the third world.

Yes I understand the other side of the argument, which is "avoid death with horrible slavery type work" but I don't agree with this. This argument serves to promote the building of a world where those two actually are the only choices available, especially when related to the trade and foreign politics of the US.

Now that's about as wordy as I'm going to get, I'm not SB and don't wish to be.

I don't defend August's point. You questioned whether he wanted to go there and starve kids, and I pointed out that that wasn't what he said or meant. And I answered your comment that we wanted to drop napalm on children. And that's all I did.

I think you might be overreacting to what I took as an off-the-cuff answer from August to the way Skybird looks at things. In my comment I said "if those were the only choices". But I could also be wrong, and I'm not really up-to-date on this whole argument, so I can't say much more.

:roll:

Few people in this thread do, and instead of following your red cousin, you should get at them instead ...
Why not simply call it a day and accept August's and Steve's explanations as a gesture of your good will?

Do you live in this thread? Does this thread make up the universe you live in? If so then I suggest you broaden your horizons a little and converse with other people, you know, outside this thread.

First question:
Yes, I can leave you my address if you wish (send me a PM).
Second question:
No, and yes I actually do sometimes.

Let me tell you that as far as the article this thread is about, I guess I agree with you to about 85% (I've read it a week or so in the paper edition of Spiegel while I was on the train, and it was the first article that got my attention). And post #19 was about the single most blatant piece of ignorance I've seen on GT for a long time (now I got it off my chest), but I simply didn't see much of a point in putting a lot of reasoning into a reply to a mindless post. It's simply giving it undue credit.

Listen, I'm not here to make August's or Steve's point. I just say that unlike them, your way of putting things sometimes make it hard to agree with you.
When you don't get carried away by ranting, I actually enjoy reading most of your posts.

Well I did go the brig, unlike the writers of the myriad of messages here in SS radioroom that border on racism or are blatantly racist. But hey, since Neal & co. think that's cool then who am I to say otherwise in this particular community.

The red 'card' at the lower right corner of the message signals that that particular message has recieved an infraction, I got one for two messages, the napalm one and the other one.

Nah, the mods are the epitome of awesomeness.

(working on my anti-brig insurance here)


But really, you do have a point here :yep:

I've only once ever reported what I thought was a bad post, and it was quite some time ago. I'd like to know, though - who is it you think gets away with being blatantly racist? I've seen Neal and the moderators come down pretty hard on people who went over the line, and it didn't matter who they were (or who they thought they were).

And I've seen them cut quite a bit of slack when they were being accused of favoritism. If you think somebody is over the line, report it. If you think it's me, say so. I think I've apologised for things I've said more than anybody else here.

How in the hell did a thread about enviromental impact of discarded computers degrade into a he said she said diatribe on race and 'acceptable' posting content.

No seriously, is it really that hard to stick to the subject at hand? So easly lead down the path. :doh:

Because the kids in third world countries have two choices according to the US, either to starve to death or work in dangerous conditions.

Yes, because we control all the kids in the third world and their fates.

Actually, you're not far off the truth there.