babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » national news   » Mr Lewis is on the ropes

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Mr Lewis is on the ropes
the grey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3604

posted 22 October 2005 06:34 PM      Profile for the grey     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Mr Lewis is on the ropes

quote:
If the bureaucratic establishments of the UN and the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and the U.S. State Department could see this scene -- this man many of them would love to see ousted from his job, being idolized -- it would, as Mr. Lewis might say with his trademark flawless diction, "upset them immensely."


Indeed, there is growing speculation that Mr. Lewis -- African AIDS envoy since 2001 and, before that, deputy executive director of Unicef, Canada's ambassador to the UN and leader of the Ontario NDP -- has upset too many important people immensely, and is on the edge of being sacked.


The world's response to this issue is nothing less than outrageously and completely unacceptable.


From: London, Ontario | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Papal Bull
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7050

posted 22 October 2005 06:53 PM      Profile for Papal Bull   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The truth getting out shines the right light on the wrong-doers.

Mr. Lewis is the conduit through which that truth flows. He is aiming the light. And he knows who is in the wrong.


From: Vatican's best darned ranch | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hawkins
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3306

posted 22 October 2005 07:38 PM      Profile for Hawkins     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Another Canadian emotionally ruined in Africa by the lack of inaction is too sad (not for their emotional destruction, which is horrible but not the more serious tragedy). And the government is doing what?

It may be true that Canada has a devent reputation internationally - but it is because of people like Stephen Lewis who destroy themselves trying to do an ounce of good.


From: Burlington Ont | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
champagne socialist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10702

posted 22 October 2005 11:34 PM      Profile for champagne socialist   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Lewis should be feted both internationally and at home for his efforts. If he's sacked it will be a crime.
From: left coast | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Ron Webb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2256

posted 23 October 2005 12:01 AM      Profile for Ron Webb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I attended his Massey Lecture in Winnipeg last night. At the end of his reply to the final audience question, he made some acerbic comment, I forget exactly what, to which he added jokingly (or so we all assumed) that he expected to hear from some important people about that the next day.

Then he paused briefly and said in a completely deadpan manner: "... And believe me -- I will." It was a puzzling shift of mood at the time, but now I guess I know what it was about.

Was anyone else there? Does anyone remember what the comment was?


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
mary123
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6125

posted 23 October 2005 12:29 AM      Profile for mary123     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Does Oprah know about this? Stephen Lewis has been on the Oprah show and clearly Oprah respects Stephen Lewis and all he does to help in the Aids fight.

Nobody and I mean nobody wants to incur the wrath of Oprah.

I think I'll bring it to Oprah's attention via her website and make sure she knows what's going on here. Stephen Lewis could use some back-up in Oprah.


From: ~~Canada - still God's greatest creation on the face of the earth~~ | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
champagne socialist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10702

posted 23 October 2005 01:45 AM      Profile for champagne socialist   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Heyyy. Lots of people mock Oprah as a talk-show host, but instead of having people fight about who the baby daddy is or indulge in extreme creepiness and empty "sage" advice a la Dr. Phil, she delivers results. It may be a sad reflection on today's society, but how many people have rediscovered great literature thanks to Oprah's book club (which remains a tremendous force in publishing)? And look at the immediate results of her drive to catch the top 10 pedophiles in the United States or whatever that was recently. She may be a bit ridiculous at times, but I have nothing but respect for the general activism of her show, mass media and celebrity-driven though it may be.
From: left coast | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
FabFabian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7496

posted 23 October 2005 02:01 AM      Profile for FabFabian        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oprah has a lot to answer for and Dr. Phil is just one of the many examples.
From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Ron Webb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2256

posted 23 October 2005 02:11 AM      Profile for Ron Webb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Maybe I missed it, but I can't find anything in the actual article substantiating the headline that Lewis is "on the ropes" -- at least, if that's supposed to mean that his job is in danger. All the quotes say that the UN wouldn't dare get rid of him. It's possible that the title is just a bit of attention-getting hyperbole.
From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hawkins
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3306

posted 23 October 2005 12:30 PM      Profile for Hawkins     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I would say he is more on the ropes because he may be at an emotional breaking point. He can't go to Africa and tell people meaning full change is underway, there is nothing hopeful in what is being done, and all along the way he is losing people he cares about but is in someway responsible.

He can only take so much.


From: Burlington Ont | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
maestro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7842

posted 23 October 2005 10:56 PM      Profile for maestro     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Webb:
Maybe I missed it, but I can't find anything in the actual article substantiating the headline that Lewis is "on the ropes" -- at least, if that's supposed to mean that his job is in danger. All the quotes say that the UN wouldn't dare get rid of him. It's possible that the title is just a bit of attention-getting hyperbole.

I must say I agree with you. There are a few dark hints in the article that Lewis 'has upset too many important people immensely', but not much substance.

In any case, it's hard to tell how Stephen Lewis could upset anyone, cause he sure didn't upset anyone while he was leader of the Ontario NDP. Nor did upset anyone when Brian Mulroney appointed him Canadian ambassador to the UN.

In fact the only people he's ever managed to upset were the NDP waffle when he engineered the purge against the radical element in 1972.

I would say Stephen Lewis was sort of the Bono of Canadian politics, ever ready to stand in front of the camera, and never ready to actually accomplish anything.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299

posted 23 October 2005 11:06 PM      Profile for Scott Piatkowski   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by maestro:
I would say Stephen Lewis was sort of the Bono of Canadian politics, ever ready to stand in front of the camera, and never ready to actually accomplish anything.

And you would be completely wrong.


From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
jrootham
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 838

posted 23 October 2005 11:11 PM      Profile for jrootham     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Scott you are FAR too polite.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290

posted 23 October 2005 11:36 PM      Profile for Jimmy Brogan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I can't find it in my heart to forgive Lewis for purging me and many other activists from the ONDP, or for giving aid and comfort to the hated Mulroney government. Every time a see him I feel a little bile rise from the pit of my stomach.

However, I'm not willing to belittle his later accomplishments which I think are both significant and altruistic.

Life is complicated.


From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
maestro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7842

posted 24 October 2005 05:07 AM      Profile for maestro     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
He achieved his position as Canadian ambassador to the UN because he was acceptable to Brian Mulroney.

The only possible way that could happen is if Mulroney felt Lewis was 'safe'.

And he has been.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 24 October 2005 02:47 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Mr. Lewis is on ‘the ropes’ because it has been reported that a letter from the leadership of Uganda sent to Kofi Annan asked the U.N. to fire him. Uganda has had success fighting AIDS using its multi-pronged ABC (Abstinence, Be Faithful to your partner, Condoms) programme. Mr. Lewis, coming late to the AIDS prevention scene in Uganda, directly challenged that successful programme and kinda told the Ugandans they didn’t know what they were doing, and that condoms were the way to go. Ugandans didn’t like that given statistics showing how relying on condom promotion alone didn’t change infection rates over a similar period of time in countries like Zimbabwe and Malawi. Understandably Ugandans are puzzled by the preoccupation with condoms over ABC since it is widely known condoms, as a preventative measure, aren’t the end-all-be-all for fighting AIDS.
From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 24 October 2005 03:05 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm sorry, but that sounds like total busllshit, Caoimhin. And since it's coming from you (an apologist for neo-cons), I'd like you to back up what strikes me as complete disinformation.
From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 October 2005 03:15 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It is bullshit. We have a whole thread on the situation in Uganda: that country DID have its AIDS problem under control, mainly through a condoms program, UNTIL the U.S. brought pressure (threats of removing funding) on the government to emphasize abstinence programs. That is all very recent, as is Lewis's protest -- about a month ago.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 24 October 2005 03:25 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, I'm not going to do a lot of work to debunk what appear to me to be egregious lies. Caoimhin, I'm waiting...

[ 24 October 2005: Message edited by: Hinterland ]


From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 24 October 2005 03:42 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
That he be fired - not bullshit.
On abstinence - 1/15 of the US taxpayer money is for abstinence only. 1/15 does not make it 'Abstinence only' - see grade3 math for reference. What the US taxpayer money is going to.
quote:
1. 55% for the treatment of individuals with HIV/AIDS
(and in FYs 2006 through 2008, 75% of this is to be spent on the purchase and distribution of antiretroviral drugs)
2. 15% for the palliative care of individuals with HIV/AIDS
3. 20% for HIV/AIDS prevention
(of which at least 33% is to be spent on abstinence until marriage programs)
4. 10% for helping orphans and vulnerable children
(and in FYs 2006 through 2008, at least 50% (of the 10%) is to be provided through non-profit, non-governmental organisations, including faith-based organisations, that implement programs at the community level).


Mr. Lewis said the president's wife's programme was 'misinformation' - a challenge to the leadership of Uganda and a successful program.
And you are wrong skdadl, Ugandas program was not only condoms but a successful multipronged approach (more than one)
quote:
KAMPALA, Uganda, September 7, 2005, (LifeSiteNews.com) - The ongoing campaign by condom advocate Stephen Lewis, the U.N. secretary general's special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, has resulted in an open letter to Kofi Annan demanding that Lewis be immediately fired and removed from UNAIDS.

The letter, written by Pastor Martin Ssempa, Director of The Global Center for Uganda's ABC Strategy, is very direct. “Mr. Lewis”, Ssempa writes, “is using the entire body of the UN for his personal agenda of condomizing the developing nations. Why he has the audacity to fight the only nation which has demonstrated success in reducing HIV/AIDS is utterly beyond me. … Steve seems to have a problem with Bush administration and is fabricating lies to further attack Uganda's ABC strategy.”



From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 24 October 2005 03:43 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Ssempa demands that “Mr. Koffi Annan should ask for the resignation of Steven Lewis who is further sinking the credibility of UN in the Great Lakes region. Mr. Lewis is the type that reminds us of the UN staff who did nothing to stop the genocide in Rwanda where close to a million Africans were butchered under the close supervision of the UN.”

From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 24 October 2005 03:44 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Pr. Ssempa demands to know “why isn’t Lewis talking about Botswana, South Africa and other nations which have taken UNAIDS advise of more condoms but now have the highest rates of HIV in the world? Why is he picking on Uganda which has been a shining example of behaviour change since 1988?” Uganda has the most successful program in Africa in the fight against AIDS since it promotes abstinence first. The BBC reports that Uganda “is often held up as a model of how to fight HIV/Aids, with infection rates falling from 15 to 5%.”

From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Ranngyn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10736

posted 24 October 2005 03:46 PM      Profile for Ranngyn        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
In comments he made in a teleconference last month from Johannesburg Lewis complained about the lack of condoms stating, "There is no question in my mind that the condom crisis in Uganda is being driven and exacerbated by PEPFAR (the U.S. Administration's AIDS assistance program) and by the extreme policies that the administration in the U.S. is now pursuing in the emphasis on abstinence, … That distortion of the preventive apparatus ... is resulting in great damage and undoubtedly will cause significant numbers of infections which should never have occurred." Lewis made his remarks in spite of the fact that the U.N. itself has warned about the inadequacy of condoms to prevent the spread of the disease.

Ugandan Anti-AIDS Activist Demands UN Fire Lewis For Pushing Condoms


Between the late 1980s and mid-1990s, at a time when HIV/AIDS was well on its way toward ravaging Sub-Saharan Africa, Uganda achieved an extraordinary feat: It stopped the spread of HIV/AIDS in its tracks and saw the nation's rate of infection plummet. As word of the "Uganda miracle" spread, journalists, researchers, policy-makers and advocates all descended to try to ascertain how it was accomplished.

Is this what he's talking about?

Surely any method that reduces rates of HIV infection should be promoted.


From: A lee shore | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
thwap
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5062

posted 24 October 2005 03:58 PM      Profile for thwap        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
another link
From: Hamilton | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 24 October 2005 04:02 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
In 2000, researchers at USAID began to question why HIV infection rates had fallen only in Uganda and not in other African countries such as Zimbabwe and Malawi, where the epidemic had been raging for almost as long. The difference, they concluded, was that most countries relied too heavily on condom promotion alone, whereas Uganda had a range of programs that encouraged abstinence and faithfulness as well as condoms—a strategy that came to be known as ABC—for Abstain, Be Faithful, or Use Condoms.

From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Being
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7768

posted 24 October 2005 04:08 PM      Profile for Being   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Looks like Mr. Lewis is being sacrificed on the altar of the Project for a New American Century.
From: Toronto | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 24 October 2005 04:08 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think we're just going to end up playing dueling links...LifeSite vs. more credible media. Since Caoimhin is an indefatiguable propagandist, I'll just say...byeee. No more time for that.
From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 October 2005 04:14 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Does anyone know how to copy from a pdf?

If not, I hope that people will read thwap's link carefully. I believe that our original links came from the Guardian and the BBC -- to my amazement, the Canadian media never carried this story, or not that I could see.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
thwap
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5062

posted 24 October 2005 04:17 PM      Profile for thwap        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Does anyone know how to copy from a pdf?

If not, I hope that people will read thwap's link carefully. I believe that our original links came from the Guardian and the BBC -- to my amazement, the Canadian media never carried this story, or not that I could see.


skdadl,

I just clicked and selected:

quote:
• Religious fundamentalists, some financially supported by the U.S. government and the Office of
the First Lady Janet Museveni, have become prominent in attacking condoms and those who
distribute them. First Lady Museveni, an extremely conservative evangelical Christian, has
openly disparaged condoms, spread misinformation about condom effectiveness rates, and
attacked those who procure supplies of and distribute condoms to people at risk of HIV infection.
The Office of the First Lady receives funding from the United States government under PEPFAR,
though how much funding has been made available to her office has not been disclosed. In
addition, under PEPFAR, the United States has funded organizations that have spread
disinformation about condom safety and efficacy.

You can also go to the "text select" option and outline what you want and "control c" as well.

("Text select" is the T with the dotted-outline box in the bottom left of the toolbar.)


From: Hamilton | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
thwap
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5062

posted 24 October 2005 04:19 PM      Profile for thwap        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sorry,

For the record, you can also go to the UN site and after a bit of searching find all sorts of stuff about AIDs and anti-AIDs initiatives all over the world. Tons of stuff, but I'm tired, and I'm neglecting work, and i seem to have been uselessly sparring with trolls all day.

I'd been getting good at ignoring them too.


From: Hamilton | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 October 2005 04:41 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
From the Guardian:

29 August 2005

quote:
The phenomenal success of Uganda's fight against Aids is largely credited to its president, Yoweri Museveni, who took the bold decision to speak out publicly about what was considered a shameful disease and tell people how to combat it. Prevention strategies, including the promotion of condoms, were central.

But in the last couple of years, the Ugandan and US governments have shown increasing interest in promoting abstinence and fidelity in marriage, with condoms given out only to those who cannot manage either.



30 August 2005

quote:
The condom shortage has developed because both the Ugandan government and the US, which is the main donor for HIV/Aids prevention, have allowed supplies to dwindle, according to an American pressure group, the Centre for Health and Gender Equity (Change).

In 2003, President Bush declared he would spend $15bn on his emergency plan for Aids relief, but receiving aid under the programme has moral strings attached.

Recipient countries have to emphasise abstinence over condoms, and - under a congressional amendment - they must condemn prostitution.

Brazil announced last month that it would refuse to accept $40m (£22m) in American aid rather than stigmatise prostitutes who Brazilian health workers said were essential to their anti-Aids strategy. Senegal was also cut off from US aid because prostitution is legal there.


Note also: I thought that those quotes from the lifesite link were discrediting themselves with a suspect chronology, and this story would seem to demonstrate that that is true. No one, anywhere in the world, was having great success combatting AIDS in the eighties, when people were still struggling to grasp the reality of the epidemic. Here, from the Guardian, are the Uganda stats, with the true dates:

quote:
Uganda has had extraordinary success in reducing adult infection rates from 30% in the early 1990s to below 6% last year. This success is largely credited to its president, Yoweri Museveni, who spoke out about what was considered a shameful disease and told people how to combat it.

So the crisis in Uganda IS RECENT, and it has everything to do with a sudden failure in the supply of condoms, dictated by the U.S. government and a born-again president's wife.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
thwap
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5062

posted 24 October 2005 07:40 PM      Profile for thwap        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Excellent post skdadl. On an important issue that shouldn't be mired in duplicity and rationalization, ... actually, on an important issue that we should be working to solve, as opposed to once again, working to mitigate right-wing assaults on humanity.

That's incoherent but i'm tired and sad.


From: Hamilton | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Ron Webb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2256

posted 24 October 2005 10:41 PM      Profile for Ron Webb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This would be funny if it wasn't costing millions of lives:
quote:
Campaigners accuse Uganda's first lady, Janet Museveni, of being instrumental in the switch towards a policy of abstinence. Ugandan government officials say that her religious beliefs, stemming from being a born-again Christian, are central to her promotion of the message of abstinence. In one poster campaign, signed by the office of the first lady, the slogan alongside the picture of a smiling young woman says: "She's saving herself for marriage - how about you?"
Guardian Unlimited, Aug. 30, 2005
The "funny" part is that, as Lewis explained in his Thursday night lecture, married women are among those who are most at risk. They are regularly infected by their husbands, who either had the disease prior to marriage or use prostitutes. The power imbalance in conservative African societies means that the woman cannot refuse her husband, cannot insist that he use a condom, and cannot even question his fidelity.

From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 26 October 2005 03:53 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I took the chance to read what was provided and followed thwap’s advice to look more closely at the U.N. websites. Perhaps my point wasn’t clear.

Apparently, according to the information provided, you have between a 1 in 5 and a 1 in 10 chance of failure when using a condom properly. (Information found does not go into detail about the chances of failure when not used properly) Those aren’t good odds, especially with a fatal disease like AIDS, so I figured an analogy was necessary to better understand the situation. Would you trust with your life or have confidence in an elevato if you knew you had a 1 in 5 to 1 in 10 chance of being hurt or killed every time you used it? Probably not.

In this particular case, and around this time last year, free condoms (not the kind you have to or could buy yourself) provided by the government were thought to be defective. Chinese and German made condoms were sent to Sweden for testing where they found holes. Sometime later these condoms were found to be okay. Unfortunately, as with most consumer products under question, confidence in that particular brand plummeted and they were warehoused. Both the Ministry of Health as well as their procurement office have stated there is no condom crisis and newer and better condoms are on the way.
You, and CHANGE, believe this condom shortage crisis is because of a conspiracy. A Christian/evangelical/US government conspiracy, no less. Big Surprise.

I had a look at CHANGE. This is what I found
In there mission statement:
“….focused on the effects of U.S. international policies on the health and rights of women, girls, and other vulnerable populations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
Their rationale:
“HIV prevention has become increasingly politicized,……. due to the growing influence of the far right on U.S. domestic and international policy involving sex,…..
Their head researcher:
“….with a specific focus on US donor funding for HIV/AIDS.

Hmmm.
Their conclusion? Religious Christian fundamentalists in a conspiracy with a right wing USgovernment to deny people free condoms to create murderous results. Gee whiz, there’s a surprise. Whoda thunk?
CHANGE is a leftwing political organization whose purpose/mission is to anklebite the (right wing)US. And I’m supposed to believe they are so concerned with HIV/AIDS and those suffering from it. You have to be kidding.

Condoms are not a cure for HIV/AIDS. Condoms do not educate the vulnerable about AIDS. Condoms do not minimize the effects of AIDS on communities. Condoms do not walk into a hospital and provide care for those suffering from AIDS. Condoms alone will not EVER eliminate AIDS. Perhaps this is why you and Mr. Lewis are so gung-ho about them – the victims will just keep rolling in and so does the paycheque.
The president of Uganda is right to believe that a change in behavior is ultimately needed to rid the world of this disease and he was more successful at proving that than you give him credit for. I recognize this as a difficult truth – do you? What happens when, for whatever reason, condoms cannot be made available sometime in the future? What should we rely on?
I suspect this isn’t the first or the last diplo-gaffe Mr Lewis will make.


From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Ron Webb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2256

posted 27 October 2005 12:15 AM      Profile for Ron Webb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
caoimhin, I read your post a couple of times and I still can't figure out what you're talking about. However, it contains a number of slanders and innuendos that I can't leave unchallenged.

Who exactly is claiming that condoms are a cure for AIDS? Certainly not Stephen Lewis, for anyone else I know of. Condoms are only one of many ways to reduce the spread (along with education, societal change, medical treatment, economic aid, etc.), but no one claims that condoms will alone eradicate the disease. I've never heard anyone claim that it is even possible to eradicate the disease, even if we use every means at our disposal.

Your insinuation that Lewis or any of the aid organizations are deliberately perpetuating the disease is unspeakably offensive. If you had heard Lewis himself on Thursday night describing the present condition and future prospects of his "beloved Africa", I think you would have been ashamed to make such an outrageous claim.

And where on earth did you hear that condoms have a failure rate of 10% or 20%?? I used them myself for years and I can recall only one failure. (Which, by the way, was our own fault; the condom was definitely not used properly. But we were also using spermicidal foam, and we were married anyway, so we could afford to be a bit careless. More info than you needed, perhaps...)

[ 27 October 2005: Message edited by: Ron Webb ]


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 27 October 2005 02:16 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thank you, Ron
quote:
..and I still can't figure out what you're talking about
If we flooded the entire globe a metre deep with condoms AIDS would still be with us. What does knowing this say about the promotion of condoms?
quote:
Condoms are only one of many ways to reduce the spread (along with education, societal change, medical treatment, economic aid, etc.),
Again, thank you. Can you think of others? I can.
quote:
Your insinuation that Lewis or any of the aid organizations are deliberately perpetuating the disease
No, not deliberately. Its just that a painful, challenging truth is rarely uttered? Why? That truth is, from my reading, never part of 'their' debate. Why?

From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 27 October 2005 02:59 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
If we flooded the entire globe a metre deep with condoms AIDS would still be with us.

If a few of those condoms floating around at waist level accidentally ended up on some penises, they would probably prevent more AIDS cases than the church lady's shrill moralising approach ever will.


From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 27 October 2005 03:04 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Re: caoimhin's "painful, challenging truth is never uttered. Why?"

Because it's not true.

[ 27 October 2005: Message edited by: Rufus Polson ]


From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 27 October 2005 03:14 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I suppose the mindless, utterly self-evident statement that not having sex at all will of course prevent a sexually transmitted disease needs to be repeated a million times...so, let's humour them and simply do that. Except progressive people don't usually think moralising scolds deserve to be humoured.

In any case, for people having sex, recommending abstinence is as useless for preventing disease as staying at home is for preventing car accidents.


From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
caoimhin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4768

posted 27 October 2005 03:21 PM      Profile for caoimhin        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Moralizing? Schmoralizing.
I guess a shoulder shrug is all that is needed?

From: Windsor | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 27 October 2005 03:30 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I shrug at things that are completely irrelevant. When I'm looking at a well-financed disinformation campaign backed by powerful people, a shrug would seem dishonest. But then, shrugging is an unconscious reflex for me.
From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Ron Webb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2256

posted 27 October 2005 09:01 PM      Profile for Ron Webb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by caoimhin:
Its just that a painful, challenging truth is rarely uttered?
I give up. What painful, challenging truth are you talking about? (And if you mean the fact that condoms alone will not stop the AIDS epidemic, who ever denied that? Neither will preaching abstinence alone, by the way.)

From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
marcella
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9772

posted 06 December 2005 04:42 PM      Profile for marcella     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
If we flooded the world a metre deep with abstinence, all the women on top would be pregnant.

Caoi... is a troll...

[ 06 December 2005: Message edited by: marcella ]


From: ottawa | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca