Neat. I hope posting comments using just the initials would be acceptable.

2.8 million people died from AIDS last year making AIDS far and away the most critical humanitarian crisis on earth. The numbers equal a Holocaust every three years and account for something like 19.1 percent of all fatalities in Africa. Racism is the only possible explanation for our indifference.

Certainly, the world has the money, roughly $20 billion has been requested and the US and other donor nations have so far refused to commit. Five million people will die from AIDS in the next 24 months.

Should the experts even bother to reply, I fully expect them to point to a body of data that will be served up as 'evidence' of concern. Nonsense. The only number that counts is the death toll: 2.8 million dead, mostly women and children this year and next.

The damning picture gets worse when we perform a basic CBA on the numbers. For the cost of condoms, AIDS prevention programs and un-fettered distribution of transmission suppressors we could dramatically reduce the number of new infections among the 37 million currently infected. We won't spend the money and we don't even bother to pretend otherwise.

Our indifference is an inexcusable disgrace far worse than Rwanda or the Holocaust because we know, we have the funds and we do simply fail to bring our more than adequate resources to bear. And I'll be extremely curious to see what kind of gravitus and urgency this exalted panel displays towards this crisis until this crisis is resolved.

My guess is that one or two will chime in over the coming year and then turn to sexier topics like car-bombings and de-capitations.

Excellent idea, and I've certainly enjoyed the mix of perspectives on your first issue re Iran.

You're going to need some work on your navigation, however. Right now, new GlobalPost blogger posts push old posts off the front page of an issue and there's no way to navigate to the old posts on that issue.

Good idea. Now if you only could maybe add a voice from the radical perspective? Oh well, with the Post we probably have to be thankful we get some neoliberals in addition to the outright imperialists. That is called "ideological diversity" I guess - kind of like having "both, country and Western".

I hope the experiment succeeds.

Gee i hope something works, since the Post has found fit to put nothing about the new violence in Iraq on WP Online.

This oportunity for dialogue is a wonderful idea and I hope it takes hold. I strongly hope that comments will not be posted by only the angry and the critical but also by those who are hopeful and can contribute some positive commentary as food for thought related to the issues that are discussed.

Hopefully, Ignatius's postings will be better researched and investigated than his newspaper columns have been.

Who thought the article on the Daily Show was ready to see the light of day?

Gotta be Brady.

Sigh. Still employed. Still no news judgment. No critical thinking faculty whatsoever.

Re: Richard Morin's rant on John Stewart and the Daily Show. Yeah, it's *all* the Daily Shows fault that people are cynical about politics. Say, when is the Washington Post going to explain their pre-war WMD coverage. I think until the Post takes credit for their role in the WMD "lie" (sorry if that's cynical for you) no one at the Post should be able to write other media being a poison to democracy.

Morin: it's called credibility. Maybe you should focus your writing on why the Post doesn't have any.

Yeah -- the cynicism couldn't possibly be attributable to the fact that the Post seems incapable of reporting a story without including the GOP spin on it.

Couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the editorial page editor seems indifferent to the facts as reported on the news side.

Couldn't have anything to do with the ignominious D-o-m-e-n-e-c-h could it?