Closing USAID
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
News Flash: America voted AGAINST Democrats spending OUR tax dollars on their trans propaganda around the world. |
Anonymous
Exactly. Stop stealing our cash for international Sesame Street. It’s RACIST. “Which one is different?” “Which one doesn’t belong?” |
Anonymous
Whatever your personal experience is in your country of origin, it does not accurately reflect the situation in Mozambique. Prior to scaling up a Voluntary Male Medical Circumcision (VMMC) program, studies were done to establish the MMC rate by country. PRIOR to VMMC programs, Mozambique had a circumcision rate of 48.4%. The vast majority of Muslims in Mozambique practice circumcision as well as some non-Muslim ethnicities. Circumcision is a traditional practice in Mozambique, not something imposed by Westerners. The VMMC programs are entirely voluntary and merely seek to offer medical circumcision which is slightly different from the traditional circumcision and thus is more effective at limiting HIV spread. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100775#:~:text=Circumcision%20is%20also%20frequently%20practiced,are%20presented%20in%20Table%20S2. There is a discussion to be had about how to spend US Foreign Assistance, but it should be done on the basis of fact not uninformed fear-mongering. BTW, you do not seem at all interested in "honest" conversation about USID programs and even less interested in information about "why" we are doing USAID programs. |
Anonymous
TBH, from the point of view of effective treatment, we have learned that stigmatizing these groups does not actually stop transmission, it makes transmission harder to stop. In general, non-stigmatizing access to treatment and education and prevention assistance is more effective than shame and stigma in reducing HIV rates. . Globally, anti-LGBT laws continue to hinder the HIV response - in Africa as well. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanhiv/article/PIIS2352-3018(22)00265-X/fulltext#:~:text=In%202019%2C%20the%20risk%20of,and%207%25%20vs%2022%25). |
Anonymous
Anonymous
Mike Benz has researched this more than anyone else I know of. Democrats hate getting exposed. |
Anonymous
That’s only the TIP of the ICEBERG. Unless you were benefiting from this unbelievably massive corruption scheme, probably only a few people knew what was going on. Kudos to Mike Benz for his relentless investigations. |
Anonymous
The men engaging in male on male sex would never consider themselves LGB and would not think “anti-LGB” laws affect them. When I was in Afghanistan we were not allowed to even discuss this happening (along with the child rape) as to not offend the Afghans who see male on male sex as religiously acceptable to avoid dirty women. Forced tolerance. So why don’t we offer free circumcisions to all Americans if it is so necessary for public health? |
Anonymous
Circumcisions are necessary for certain religions. That’s how automatic circumcisions became so common throughout the US. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
Because we essentially do - infant circumcision is generally covered by health insurance. But, we also are not as concerned about circumcision because people in the US have consistent access to condoms, pre exposure medication and treatment. This is not the case in Mozambique. Thanks for your inapposite anecdote about Afghanistan. My point was about Mozambique. In Afghanistan, the main at risk subgroups are prostitutes, prisoners and IV drug users - not MSM - so circumcision is not an effective way to prevent spread. |
Anonymous
I hope Mike Benz gets sued for defamation like Giuliani, Fox News and Alex Jones. He is spreading lies and conspiracy theories. |
Anonymous
Because there is nothing indicating fraud or corruption in what you state. It’s an organization that’s trained thousands of journalists and worked with thousands of media outlets. The CEO’s salary is pretty reasonable given the organization’s size. I am not sure why people have come to believe the CIA uses journalists or aid workers - it is prohibited - “ Prior to the mid-1970s, reportedly it had been a practice of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to use journalists for intelligence collection purposes. However, following the investigations into past U.S. intelligence activities by two congressional select committees (chaired by Senator Frank Church and Representative Otis Pike), it has seemingly been the policy of the intelligence community not to use journalists, clergy, or aid workers for intelligence purposes, other than in “exceptional circumstances.” A declassified CIA regulation from 1987, for example, states that the agency would not use accredited U.S. or foreign journalists, clergy, or Peace Corps workers for intelligence purposes. Open, acknowledged relationships with the clergy and journalists for conducting translation or training services, or (for clergy) religious services, were allowed. (AR 2-2, Law and Policy Governing the Conduct of Intelligence Activities, December 23, 1987, pp. 27-30, at https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0006235713.pdf) The exception to this policy was described in July 1996 testimony for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence by John Deutch, then-Director of Central Intelligence (DCI). Deutch expressed his reluctance to ever use journalists. Nevertheless, he defended maintaining an exception in “extremely rare...highly improbable circumstances” that could result in intelligence enabling disruption of an “extreme threat to the Nation.” [A]s the Director of Central Intelligence, I must be in a position to assure the President and the members of the National Security Council and this country, that there will never come a time when the United States cannot ask a witting citizen, knowledgeable citizen, to assist in combating an extreme threat to the Nation. So I, like all of my predecessors for the last 19 years, have arrived at the conclusion that the Agency should not be prohibited from considering the use of American journalists or clergy in exceptional circumstances. (S. Hrg. 104-593, pp. 6-7) Legislation Shortly after Director Deutch’s testimony, in October 1996, Congress included language in the FY1997 Intelligence Authorization Act (P.L. 104-293 §309, codified as 50 U.S.C. §3324) concerning use of journalists in intelligence activities. The provision is captioned “Prohibition on using journalists as agents or assets,” and states that it is the “policy of the United States that an element of the Intelligence Community may not use as an agent or asset for the purposes of collecting intelligence.” The prohibition covers these individuals in the United States or abroad. This provision covers any individual with press credentials of a U.S. media organization or who may be recognized by a foreign government as a representative of a U.S. media organization.” Cite: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12154/2 Honestly, believing USAID or any subcontractor or grantee is “doing spook bidding” is a level of looney toons equivalent to Comet Pizza binging the center of a pedophile ring. |
Anonymous
We do. Where are you joining us from, comrade? |
Anonymous