White House Conference Call: Obama Donating 10 Percent of H1N1 Vaccines to Poor Countries

[chrisbarrett]

Run time: 02:39 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DV6I9EHpv0   Posted on YouTube: September 24, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: September 24, 2009 By DU Member: chrisbarrett Views on DU: 619

 
Obama Administration is Donating 10 Percent of H1N1 Vaccines to poor countries as early as next month.

[and-justice-for-all]

1. So what about our poor? nt

[timeforpeace]

2. Why? PR stunt? Why not 15%? And do they need it just because they are poor? Do they have H1N1?If not

what the hell is the point?

[Piewhacket]

3. The point is... we should have enough for us, and impoverished nations...

basically won't have enough without our help, and the help of all others.

this is a medical emergency, a world pandemic of potentially grave severity,
the last pandemic was 1918 and this could be far worse. so far no need to
freek out, just pay attention, get the shots, practice good hygiene, and if
you are sick STAY HOME, moron.

while 10% vaccine donation (25 million doses) will not solve the problem
for the world, it demonstrates a significant amount of our production,
and shows leadership to the world, demonstrates how seriously we view this
pandemic, and provides an invitation for others to join us.

if the pandemic spins into a catastrophy, by mutation or combination,
think 100+ million dead, WE WILL manufacture and donate massively WHATEVER THE COST.
Any clueless cretin who thinks we shouldn't do that and obstructs it should be
shot summarily (without trial). And I'm not joking here, in such circumstances
it is marshal law with no regard for civil rights or dissent.

10% of our production? Of course we must do it! Quite right.
Once we have covered our own, maybe more, and if things go bad, we DAMN WELL MUST do more.
That's not even slightly controversial. Not even a little bit.

[silenttigersong]

4. Shot without trial

rather violent,of you,what about the uninformed?Where are the outreach programs eh?

[Piewhacket]

5. you are joking, right? you don't understand marshal law...

during national or local emergency?
rather clueless, not to mention dangerous for you, don't you think?
and you don't really want to be giving out that view to others, do you?

you mention the uninformed? explaining: ignorance is not generally
a defense against charges of obstruction of lawful authority
in the performance of their duty. normally there is an arrest,
but things can go further, right?

Under the ancient case of Tenn v Gardner the police may not shoot
at a fleeing felon... unless he poses a deadly danger.

But if he poses an imminent deadly danger to police or to others, and no
other means of protection is readily at hand, to stop you the police may
LAWFULLY shoot you dead ON THE SPOT. no "informational brochure" required
in advance, no outreach, no trial, just "STOP!", then "BAM!"

Now I'm no policeman, I assure you. I am actually a civil rights advocate.
But while I may question the facts of an incident, even I do not question
the legality or propriety of the above harsh action.
Do you understand?
Do you see the application of it during plague? hope so. really.

so I hope you were just "joking around", but if you were, you picked a very
serious topic and a very wrong-headed manner of humor, which obliged me to
answer you quite seriously.

hey. just my opinion, so no offense.

[silenttigersong]

6. Lighten up

your harshness is what prompted me to comment,I found myself offended by your use of Moron,as well as should be shot on sight.Certainly there would be mass hysteria,fear,in the case of a pandemic to the extent you described,so I guess the visual of people getting shot on sight disturbed me.:banghead: