You dolts always find a way in any topic to bash Americans. Shame on You.

But of course: America must somehow - even indirectly - be responsible for Sars. This is a classic example of the irrational and ignorant anti-Western/ anti-American attitude that exists on IndyMedia.

But just for the sake of it, let's try and follow the logic:

Here are the first three pieces of 'evidence':

"Recent cover pages in international media":
The Economist: ”SARS- The Chernobyl of China?”
Time: ”The Truth about SARS”
Newsweek: “SARS- Can It Be Stopped?”

So we are presented with one British publication and two American publications with fairly innocent Sars headlines. Is the author trying to suggst that there are no other international publications that have featured Sars cover stories? A quick Google search will prove this to be highly misleading and inaccurate.

Here's the next big 'revelation':

"The difference (between Sars as opposed to Aids and Malaria). is that some rich people have caught SARS in planes flying around the world".

In other words, America cares more about Sars than Aids or Malaria because 'some rich people' have caught it in planes'.

First of all, I haven't seen any reports that specifically identify 'rich' people (whatever that means) catching Sars on airplanes. Secondly, the argument seems to suggest that Americans view Aids as a 'poor people's' disease (thus less important), which is hardly the case if we look at such high-profile victims as Rock Hudson, Herb Ritts, Magic Johnson, etc...) In fact, Aids Organisations are often critisized for receiving a disproportionate amount of charitable donations in the States.

Next we're supposed to be horrified because 43% of Americans are 'worried' about Sars. Is the author suggesting that if pollsters were to ask Norwegians or Syrians or Bolivians or Palestinians whether they were 'worried' about a mysterious and incurable virus that was infecting and killing people from China to Canada that they would say 'no'. What's so wrong with 43% of Americans being 'worried' about a global epidemic?

Would the author be happier if only , say, 23% of Americans were 'worried' about Sars?

Does the author bother to compare the 43% American rate to any other country?

If the Americans said 'We don't care about Sars because it's only in the Far East and Canada' would the author be happier?

The insanity continues:

"Poor people dying somewhere far away don’t sell but SARS and other shit does!"

This is a particularly idiotic remark because for the majority of Americans Sars is precisely what the author claims it isn't: "Poor people dying somewhere far away".

Usually Americans are accused of ignoring the problems of the international community; now they're being accused of 'worrying about them'. Which way to you want it?

Lastly, the now hysterical author suggests that Bush might bomb Chinese farms as a 'pre-empetive measure' against the spread of Sars.

God, this is pathetic.....

When will people accept that bad things happen - and that not all bad things are man-made...or American made?

Stop trying to blame an indifferent, or non-existent God on capitalism.

No one ever said the universe was supposed to be fair.

Live with it.

What's up with all yer humourless pro-imperialist Blairites?

i agree with a few of the things buzby has said, like how the poll proves nothing, and how it isn't a bad thing that they are worryed about sars, but it is also true that they have a bloody lot more to worry about than that. As for "the universe is unfair, live with it", now thats a fucking idiotic remark, why dont you "live" with the original comment rather than replying then you pesamist. Id say the majority of the people using and contributing to indymedia are people trying to make a positive difference, and we wont "live with it", we'll change it.

Also im sure the original post was not really suggesting that Bush was thinking about bombing China, instead just showing that Bush will bomb a country for practically anything (except ones that are a threat like North Korea or China etc. unlike most of the middle east that is in poverty (except for mini-america Isreal)). You say stop blaming america and the west for things - but it is just so easy to blame them, not necassarily the people, but the leaders. they just fuck everything up, Bush is an apsolute moran - dont defend this nazi, bush needs to be kidnapped and tortured for as long as they can keep him alive in misery, then once he is dead, his brain (if he haves one) needs to be examined to find out what went wrong.

Im also sure that SARS is somehow related to the illegal american bio labs funded by nazi bush. we'll have to see...

Dolts?

Thou scurvy knave, thou tool of the colonial scum, thou foolish turd upon our shoes.

America *is* bad - get that into your thick skull and thicker bones.

All that America stands for ('free' trade, the victory of capitalism, the right of the mighty to act as they please without the usual checks and balances) is inimical to the interests of ordinary people throughout the world. If trade were truly free, there would be very few farmers in America, there would be little industry, amd all that America would be is a banking house for oil money that they have stolen from the oil producers. America is morally and rationally bankrupt - all the present charades do is to hide that fact from the ordinary people so that the elite can carry on stealing from their fellow man.

The SARS thing is likely an accident, but any attacks on America are in my opinion justified, since America is the largest force for evil in the world today.

Fact of the matter is that 400 people dying, out of a global +6billion, over a period of five months, does not make a global epidemic. A 10% death rate among infected patients, does not make a terrifying killer disease.

What we're looking at is disproportionate media coverage of an ordinary bug, aimed at keeping people anxious and scared. Saddam Hussein didn't start world war three, terrorists haven't poisoned, bombed or gassed us, but now we have a 'killer disease' to worry about.

Anyone wondering about the value of keeping a population running scared should check out the excellent writings of Noam Chomsky. Try 'Neccesary illusions- Thought control in democratic societies.'

Chomsky?

Chomsky's a Zionist Jew. Since when do we trust or listen to Zionist Jews?

Yes, AIDS, malaria, hunger are all currently much bigger killers than SARS. We should be extremely worried about them all and doing much more to combat them.

But that doesn't mean that SARS is unimportant. Currently it hasn't killed many people, but that's because reletively few people have caught it. SARS is still spreading exponentially - i.e. we are not containing it. If that continues (I'm not saying it will, it probably won't, but it is a possibility) there will be 10million cases reported before the end of this year[1]. If 5% of those die, we will be looking at a disease which is comparable to malaria in the number of deaths caused.

There is a lot of media panic around SARS. In some ways, that's a good thing. If people are fearful they are more likely to comply with measures to control SARS, and therefore stop it spreading. In this case, media panic may well save a lot of lives.

Of course, as others will point out, it's also a bad thing because it detracts attention from other world events. But still, SARS is not to be dismissed.