Well, of course I do blame the Chinese Government more than Microsoft, but that is not the thrust of my argument. I am questioning whether it is acceptable for companies to profit from the suppression of freedom of speech and dissemination of information.

John's argument that refusing the service provided would in fact be yielding to the Chinese Government's desire to silence free speech may be true to some degree and is often trumpted by corporate interests, but past history has shown this does not work with the Chinese (otherwise they would have left Tibet years ago).

Unfortuately, the feeding frenzy going on in China by western companies and governments is purely short-term profiteering and the kickback from the strengthening Chinese economy will prove a real problem in years to come, when they will dominate the world markets. Remember - this country is run as a brutal dictorship the sort of which we all profess to hate - just look here if you need reminding. You can't help but wonder if the Third Reich had prospered many of our business and political leaders would be justifying working with them sixty years after the holocaust.

As for the idea that multinational pharmaceutical companies have an overwhelming desire to help the developing world cope with the disease pandemics that are killing millions every year, don't even go there. Examples of their altruism can be read here, and the appalling Nigerian episode is touched onhere in this article.

stigWeard