http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0815-08.htm
Published on Tuesday, August 15, 2006 by the Guardian / UK
Gates Breaks Ranks with Attack on US AIDS Policy
· Billionaire says focus on abstinence has failed
· Call for more rights for women and sex workers
by Sarah Boseley
Bill and Melinda Gates came off the political fence yesterday and
backed key causes of Aids campaigners, criticising the abstinence policies
advocated by the US government and calling for more rights for women and
help for sex workers.
A woman lights a candle at a symbolic red ribbon in remembrance
of individuals lost to AIDS. All the money in the world will not be able to
defeat HIV/AIDS unless great strides are made in preventing new infections _
and that can only be achieved by giving women and other high-risk groups the
ability to protect themselves, Bill and Melinda Gates told the opening of
the International AIDS Conference on Sunday. (AFP/File/Andrej Isakovic)
Making the keynote speech of the opening session of the 16th
International Aids conference in Toronto, Canada, the Microsoft billionaire
and his wife spoke with passion and commitment about the social changes
necessary to stop the spread of HIV/Aids.
The so-called ABC programme - abstain, be faithful and use a condom -
has saved many lives, Mr Gates told the conference of more than 20,000
delegates. But he said that for many at the highest risk of infection, ABC
had its limits. "Abstinence is often not an option for poor women and girls
who have no choice but to marry at an early age. Being faithful will not
protect a woman whose partner is not faithful. And using condoms is not a
decision that a woman can make by herself; it depends on a man.
"We need to put the power to prevent HIV in the hands of women. This
is true whether the woman is a faithful married mother of small children or
a sex worker trying to scrape out a living in a slum. No matter where she
lives or what she does, a woman should never need her partner's permission
to save her own life."
The Gates Foundation is funding research into microbicides - gels or
barrier creams that a woman can use before sex and that could destroy the
virus.
Mrs Gates called for an end to the stigma that affects those with HIV.
"Stigma makes it easier for political leaders to stand in the way of saving
lives," she said, in an attack on some African leaders influenced by the
pro-abstinence agenda of the Bush government and the Christian
fundamentalist right in the US. "In some countries with widespread Aids
epidemics, leaders have declared the distribution of condoms immoral,
ineffective or both. Some have argued that condoms do not protect against
HIV, but in fact help spread it. This is a serious obstacle to ending Aids
... If you oppose the distribution of condoms, something is more important
to you than saving lives," she said.
The promotion of abstinence is a key policy of George Bush's $15bn
(£7.9bn) five-year President's Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (Pepfar). By
law, 33% of funding must be spent on policies that promote abstinence
outside of marriage.
The UN special envoy for HIV/Aids to Africa, Stephen Lewis, accused
the Bush government of neo-colonialism. He has given his backing to US
Congresswoman Barbara Lee, who has introduced legislation to get the
abstinence-first rule overturned. "No government in the western world has
the right to dictate policy to African governments around the way in which
they structure their response to the pandemic," he said.
Ms Lee, one of the chief authors of the Pepfar legislation, said she
had the backing of 80 members of Congress and 70 non-governmental Aids
organisations.
"For women, the abstinence-until-marriage policies make no sense when
they face gender discrimination, violence and rape and can't control their
own bodies," she said.
Jodi Jacobson, executive director of the Centre for Health and Gender
Equity in the US, said that in some African countries abstinence policies
were absorbing much more than 33% of Pepfar's prevention funding. "In
Nigeria nearly 70% went to abstinence-until-marriage policies. In Tanzania,
the newest grant is 95% on abstinence and be faithful programmes for youth
aged 15-24," she said.
On the agenda
· Preventing the spread of HIV tops the agenda now drug treatment is
being rolled out in developing countries
· Controversy is likely over a push towards universal testing for HIV
· Science is taking a back seat, partly because there are no imminent
breakthroughs
· The need to improve the lives and status of women is seen as crucial
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
***
The Christian Right and `Islamo-Facism`
Dan Jennejohn,
WWW.Globalresearch.ca August 14, 2006
Council for the National Interest
"Islamo-fascism," a term that Americans heard George Bush use at an August 7
press conference, is the new term being thrown around among factions of the
Christian right, from which he no doubt picked it up. It was much in use
last month when the new lobby group, Christians United for Israel (CUFI),
held their first "Washington-Israel Summit" at a Washington D.C. hotel.
Amidst plenty of the celebratory song and dance usually associated with
evangelical meetings and a three-course meal was served to over 2,000
attendees, a series of prominent religious and political speakers got up to
promise unquestioning support for the state of Israel.
Although CUFI is a religious organization founded by minister John Hagee of
Texas, it was a political speaker, Senator Rick Santorum, whose comments
seemed to have a profound impact on the nights events. Santorum was the
first to use the term "Islamic-fascists" during the presentation. According
to Santorum the constant use of "The War on Terror" rhetoric is erroneous
because it is akin to "declaring war on a tactic." Santorum went on to say
that "The War on Terror" rhetoric was the product of a disinformation
campaign and exclaimed that "terror is not the enemy; the enemy are Islamic
fascists."
The term "Islamic fascists" appeared to have mass appeal and was used
regularly by the rest of the speakers throughout the evening. Before
Santorum's speech the Ambassador of Israel to the United States, Daniel
Ayalon, using the same rhetoric, saying, "Radical Islam is on the march."
Santorum felt it incumbent upon himself to explain to the audience exactly
what they were up against in their support of Israel. He said, "They [the
American public] don't understand the enemy because we don't explain it to
them." According to Santorum, "Islamic fascism is a mosaic. But the biggest
piece of the mosaic, the one that reaches out and touches all the others, is
Iran."
The vilification of Iran was the major thrust of the summit and the speakers
pulled no punches. On Iran Santorum said, "This is the enemy we face.
This is the enemy attacking us." While Ayalon echoed his prime minister's
declaration that "Iran must be stopped," Santorum took the matter even
further and severely criticized efforts to negotiate a solution with Iran.
"While we negotiate with Iran, they fund Hamas and Hezbollah to attack
Israel. While we negotiate, they continue in their pursuit of nuclear
weapons technology." Of course, Santorum used this opportunity to
encourage support for his bill that calls for increased sanctions against
Iran. The bill was defeated last month.
There was more than a fair amount of saber rattling at the CUFI summit.
Again, Santorum stood out among the speakers on this point when he
admonished the U.S. to "...go at the heart of the problem-Iran." The CUFI
speakers made it well known at the summit that they want to see less
diplomacy and more action.
Also on display was outspoken and undying support for Israel. Speakers
depicted Israel as a victim in the current crisis taking place in the
Palestinian Territories and Southern Lebanon. Gary Bauer mentioned the
sadness of seeing Israelis who are so used to terrorist bombings that they
seem virtually unaffected by their occurrence. Neither he nor any of the
other speakers referenced the daily deaths occurring in Gaza and the
West Bank. CUFI founder and National Chairman John Hagee demanded
that the U.S. let Israel defend itself, declaring that if rockets were
falling
on United States territory, Congress would be voting to go to war.
Whether or not CUFI's Washington D.C. summit is a success for the
organization remains to be seen. It is CUFI's intention to bring their
interpretation of the Bible and their mandate to support Israel at all costs
to the Hill in a massive lobbying effort. CUFI's followers know their
message well and, if they are anything like they were during the last
evening of their summit, they possess tremendous enthusiasm for their cause.
However, it may take more than enthusiasm to convince the nation's
policymakers that adopting CUFI's mission as their own would be in the
nation's or the world's best interest.
Dan Jennejohn writes for Council for the National Interest Foundation
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060814&articleId=2955
***
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 13:51:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [NYTr] UK "Terror Plot" - No Charges Yet
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NYTr List)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Channel 4 News - Snowmail (UK) - Aug 15, 2006
http://www.channel4.com
Terror plot - no charges yet
There is not much news on the arrests, although as I write, the police say
saying they have made a further arrest in the Thames Valley area. Whatever
is going on in those interrogation rooms is a well kept secret for now, but
five days in and there is no sign of anyone being charged.
Tomorrow police will have to reapply for more time to keep the 23 people
arrested last Thursday behind bars.
We've been speaking to the brother of one of those people. He tells us a
great deal about his brother's background and radical beliefs. But he
maintains his absolute innocence with regard to terror.
And regardless of where the investigation eventually goes, the interview
takes us to the heart of Britain's dilemma with many young Muslims today.
Is it possible to be a fiery radical, to hate British foreign policy, to
distrust the police and government and to largely agree with militant
struggles in the Middle East without being a threat to Britain? Can these
kinds of views be embraced by democracy?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
