VOTE OR WE'LL KILL YOUR DOG

I wrote this again in response to someone on either the Citizens for Legitimate Government list or Speak-Your-Peace.

CLG is at http://legitgov.org/
SYP is a Yahoo group, at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Speak-Your-Peace/?yguid=186198871


Whether it's because of Kerry or the Democrats policies on Iraq or their
lack of seriously controlling corporate influence, or for any reason,
many people on the left feel in good conscience that they cannot vote
for Kerry. They may or may not vote for Nader, but are sympathetic to
his call that both parties are essentially in bed with corporate
America, and that Kerry's plans for Iraq are not that different from
Bush's.

Because this list is about Peace, many invoke the fact that neither
candidate can be called anti-war. Bush obviously so, and Kerry because
he won't support US total withdrawal from Iraq immediately or in any
case sooner than we want. And that he has supported actually increasing
troop levels there.

Ya got us there.

But one of the reasons, obviously, for being anti-war, as of course we
all are, is to prevent needless human suffering and death.

In that regard, Iraq is a minor player, as I'll illustrate.

So I must ask you which candidate, outside of Iraq, contribute to and
increase human suffering and death, and which will not only not increase
it, but work to reduce it. And also to consider that, again outside of
Iraq, the actual number of deaths--actual and clearly to come-- directly
linked to this administration's policies, vs those that would be linked
to a Democratic presidency..

The other Bush policies that result in increased death and suffering are
well known to readers of this list, but are worth repeating. They mostly
involve sexual and reproductive freedom, and amount to an unprecedented
attack on women. A war, in fact.

I mentioned previously that Bush's reinstatement of the abortion gag
rule for international health and reproductive care agencies in
developing countries has resulted in the deaths of 300,000 women.
Estimates are of 10,000 civilian and military Iraqi deaths, and 1000
Americans. 5000 Americans are seriously wounded, and I don't know the
count of Iraqi wounded, but it surely is in the thousands.

We all consider those to be needless, but so are those of 300,000
women. That's vs 11,000 known dead in Iraq.

The World Aids Conference this week highlights the other front in the
Bush wars, and there are three main factors.
1. Obstructing making anti-viral drugs affordable: We know of Bush's
interests in protecting Big Pharma via the Medicare bill, which is a
megabillion dollar windfall for that industry. The US's pressuring of
poor countries to relinquish rights to make the generic drugs in return
for free trade agreements is consistent with this policy.
2: Promoting abstinence instead of condom use: The administration's
policy is ABC--Abstinence, Being Faithful, and Condoms, in that order of
priority. They believe that condom use promotes promiscuity. (That
policy applied in the US has resulted in increased rates of teenage
pregnancy and STD's.) The US does not make much effort to counter absurd
claims that condoms are ineffective, nor does it want to challenge it's
main ally in this death march, Uganda, which has adopted the Bush ABC
approach.
3. Funding: It's still apparently little known that of the
already-insufficient $15B Bush has promised over the next few years to
fight AIDS in Africa (vs the $200B Bush will ultimately use to fight
Iraqis in Iraq), 1/3 of that money must be devoted solely to abstinence
programs.

I've copies two articles, below, that go into more detail on these
factors, But the end result is millions of unnecessary cases of AIDS in
the developing world, and millions of unnecessary deaths, both of which
not only bring about major suffering but economic devastation as well,
as family breadwinners die off and nations' workforces are decimated.

So let's compare:
Deaths from the Iraq debacle: 11,000 so far
Deaths from Bush's other policies: Millions

All of the policies that contribute to Bush's war on women, sexual and
reproductive freedom will be dismantled or reversed under a Democratic
administration.

So it seems clear and irrefutable that to be truly anti-war, one must do
all one can to defeat Bush. And that means voting for Kerry. The person
who does not vote out of protest over the Democrat's positions on two
war fronts (Iraq and the battle for control of our democracy) thereby
accedes the third front (the war on women and reproductive freedom and
AIDS) to the reactionaries, and rather than preventing needless death
and suffering, actually contributes to them.

Surely that is not the intent of the non-voter, but it is the result.

Please reconsider. The struggle to eliminate armed conflict as anything
but a last resort will continue no matter what, and for the foreseeable
future, regardless of who wins this November. But the number of deaths
from other "wars" will continue in the millions if Bush wins. If
conscience and principle are the guiding forces, how in good conscience
can one contribute to these millions of deaths on the grounds of
protesting thousands of deaths. It may be unseemly to reduce this to a
numbers game, but it surely is one. The greater good needs the
non-voters hearts to listen to these pleas, bite the bullet yet again,
and vote.

Here are the two articles:

*AIDS is "Terrorism'' Richard Gere Tells World AIDS Conference
by Vijay Joshi
The Associated Press/

(Bangkok) France accused the United States of ``blackmail'' tactics to
pressure poor countries into ceding rights to make cheap generic HIV
drugs, while the AIDS conference issued a stirring call Tuesday to get
more medicine to millions of needy in the developing world.

``A vicious terrorist is out there. It is not Osama bin Laden, it is
AIDS,'' Hollywood actor Richard Gere told the conference. ``The biggest
threat to our livelihood, our happiness is AIDS.''

A U.S. official denied the French allegation as ``nonsense,'' while
conference delegates lamented World Health Organization figures that
show only about seven per cent of the six million people in poor
countries who need anti-retroviral treatment are getting it.

``All of us with the power and responsibility to make a difference, can
only hang our heads in shame,'' said Jim Kim, WHO's AIDS director. ``We
know what we need to do. We know prevention and treatment must be
accelerated together.''

Since the last AIDS conference in Barcelona in 2002 generated optimism
about the availability of new anti-retroviral drugs, six million people
have died of AIDS and 10 million have become newly infected.

``By these measures of human life _ the ones that really matter _ we
have failed. And we have failed miserably to do enough in the precious
time that has passed since Barcelona,'' Kim said.

The number of people on treatment has doubled in the developing world to
440,000. UN officials hope to treat three million people there by 2005.

Cost of the drugs is a key issue. European and U.S. pharmaceutical
giants make most of them, protected by patents and costing as much as
$5,000 US ($6,600 Cdn) per person per year.

Some developing countries such as Thailand, India and Brazil are making
cheap generic drugs but not enough to reach everybody. Some 38 million
people are infected with HIV, mostly in poor countries: 25 million in
sub-Saharan Africa and 7.2 million in Asia.

French officials accused the United States of pressuring poor countries
to relinquish rights to make the generic drugs in return for free trade
agreements. In a written statement to the conference, President Jacques
Chirac called that tactic ``tantamount to blackmail.''

France's global ambassador on AIDS, Mireille Guigaz, said Chirac's
comments were not aimed at creating new tensions with the United States
but were ``a question between the United States and developing countries.''

``The United States wants to put pressure on developing countries who
try to stand up for their own industries,'' Guigaz said. ``This is a
problem.''

World Trade Organization rules give developing countries the flexibility
to ignore foreign patents and produce copies of expensive drugs in times
of health crises. All WTO members including the United States have
signed an agreement to respect that clause.

But there is nothing to prevent a country from imposing patent
restrictions in a bilateral trade agreement, such as the one Washington
is negotiating with Thailand.

A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, called the French
allegations ``nonsense,'' and insisted the trade agreements will be
consistent with WTO rules that will allow poor countries to make generic
drugs.

``There really is no issue,'' he said.

Chirac also called on rich nations to raise donations to the 2{-year-old
UN Global Fund aimed primarily at fighting AIDS by $3 billion ($4
billion) per year. Wealthy countries have committed only a fifth of the
$3.5 billion ($4.6 billion) the fund needs for next year, UN officials said.

A group of African protesters interrupted a French minister delivering
Chirac's message to demand more AIDS funding from developed G-8 countries.

``Shame! Shame!'' they chanted in harmony for nearly a minute. Activists
at the venue have also splashed red paint on posters of the G-8 leaders.

*Condoms vs Abstinence Divides World AIDS Conference
by Ian Mader
The Associated Press

Posted: July 12, 2004 11:02 am ET

(Bangkok) AIDS conference delegates were deeply split over the use of
condoms Monday, with Uganda's leader drawing criticism for insisting
they are less effective for HIV prevention than campaigns to promote
abstinence and loving relationships.

President Yoweri Museveni's comments on the second day of the
International AIDS Conference were in line with the policy of U.S.
President George W. Bush but at odds with a majority of researchers and
AIDS activists at the meeting.

Condoms have been promoted as a front line defense against AIDS by
countries such as Thailand where a campaign to get sex workers to insist
on condoms yielded a more-than-sevenfold reduction in HIV rates in 13 years.

An epidemiologist tracking Asia's emerging epidemics told conference
delegates that additional countries - including China and Bangladesh -
face HIV problems largely driven by prostitution, and that promoting
condoms is best to block further spread.

``I disagree with (Museveni) ... condoms are greatly shortchanged in
Africa as a prevention method,'' said Tim Brown, of the Hawaii-based
think-tank East West Center. ``If you increase condom use by 50 per
cent, I guarantee you that HIV will go down by 50 per cent.''

Uganda has waged a successful battle against the spread of HIV in a rare
success story for sub-Saharan Africa - though some experts say it's
unclear how that success has been achieved.

Museveni said loving relationships based on trust are crucial, and that
``the principle of condoms is not the ultimate solution.''

``In some cultures sexual intercourse is so elaborate that condoms are a
hindrance,'' he told a conference plenary session. ``Let the condom be
used by people who cannot abstain, cannot be faithful, or are estranged.''

Museveni, in a departure from many western proponents of abstinence
before wedlock, said marriage should be flexible, and that sticking with
someone when a relationship turns sour might mean that an unfaithful
partner brings home an infection.

``Ideological monogamy is also part of the problem,'' he said.

Uganda pioneered a strategy that later became known as ``ABC'' or
``Abstinence, Being faithful, and Condoms'' - in that order - a policy
backed by Bush. Critics have said promoting condoms should come first.

Uganda has brought its infection rate down from more than 30 per cent in
the early 1990s to about six per cent of the country's 25 million people
last year.

Many conference delegates criticized the Bush administration's AIDS
funding initiatives for requiring that one-third of the money allotted
for HIV prevention support abstinence-until-marriage programs.

``In an age where five million people are newly infected each year and
women and girls too often do not have the choice to abstain, an
abstinence-until-marriage program is not only irresponsible, it's really
inhumane,'' U.S. Congresswoman Barbara Lee said, presenting a report by
family planning group Population Action International.

Lee, a California Democrat, and other delegates urged more spending to
expand the availability of affordable condoms in the developing world.
Activists at a youth session punctuated those demands with a song to the
tune of Queen's We Will Rock You - with the lyrics, ``We want, we want
protection!''

Some 25 million of the 38 million infected with HIV worldwide are in
sub-Saharan Africa, but the virus is taking root increasingly in Asia,
where 7.6 million are infected.

In Asia, the sex trade has been the main engine behind infections in
countries such as Thailand and Cambodia, where epidemics exploded by the
late 1980s - sparking aggressive responses including campaigns to boost
condom use, said Brown.

Other Asian countries where the proportion of men who visit prostitutes
is lower will face the same problem but more slowly.

``The slowly evolving epidemics of Asia are very dangerous, because they
will grow steadily and silently,'' Brown said, and are less likely to
prompt aggressive government responses.

Brown said China and Bangladesh are potential hotspots because their
rate of condom use is only about 10 per cent.

©Associated Press 2004