Medical Industry Holding Back Cures for Major Diseases

Why are your sources ok, but those of others are not ok? Do you, or do you not, think the credibility of a source is a valid concern?

I never said my sources were okay and others' sources were not. Again you choose to put words in my mouth. I have enjoyed both sides of the argument. I have said to ZZZ and I'll say it to you: Take what you want from my posts and leave the rest. I have an opinion based on my research. A lot of the "credible" sources that are being posted are turning out not to be so credible and also these "credible" sources could quite possibly have hidden agendas which cause them to dispute my opinion.

In my educated opinion, AIDS was man-made. You don't have to believe that. You can just realize that it is my opinion based on my research. If you dislike my research, than so be it.

and ZZZ.....Call it whatever you want. In my heart, I know it's a fact. If you don't like that...well, I'm not on here to make you like me. *blows a big kiss at ZZZ*......

"I'm your huckleberry......" *wink wink*

Originally posted by XanaX
I never said my sources were okay and others' sources were not. Again you choose to put words in my mouth.

She paraphrased and stated so. You said:
I used sources that weren't afraid to speak the truth.

This is the "truth" according to you, so in essence she was right since you seem to be deciding what sources are correct and what are not.

In my educated opinion, AIDS was man-made. You don't have to believe that. You can just realize that it is my opinion based on my research. If you dislike my research, than so be it.

Like a house of cards...now it is an "opinion." I thought you said it was a fact.
Prove that statement? Alright.

"There are White House documents and memos to prove it. They can be found on the internet quite easily!! "
"It is well known that AIDS was developed in the above mentioned lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland."
"There's quite obviously massive evidence of a conspiracy......"
"AIDS was quite obviously man-made."
"I did plenty of research. I have before. I will again. I know the truth."

And the most recent...

"In my heart, I know it's a fact."


Oh and as for the David Carr smoke screen defense that you want to toss out (using no research at all) other than to parrot other posters with a "yeah, what he said."

Originally posted by XanaX

They also give strong reason to suspect a case of scientific fraud.

Gosh ZZZ, it looks like the 1959 case of AIDS you describe or that your wife described may have been made up to distract people from the truth. Which is so unusual in our wonderful world. Like Lee Harvey Oswald was used to take our minds off the truth of the JFK assassination. Such things are so unusual in such a free and wonderful country as ours.....

Nice to see someone else is Open-Minded not Close-Minded......and willing to DENY IGNORANCE!

Actually wrong.

Dr. David Ho of the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center reported in the distinguished journal "Nature" that research identified HIV in a blood sample from 1959. This is believed to be oldest-known example of the virus some researches think it's history extends before World War II.

The sample was taken from a Bantu man (not David Carr) who lived in the Congo region and was part of a blood study taken over a 13 year period.

The study also took extra precautions so the sample would not become contaminated, as a previous 1959 sample from a British sailor (David Carr) which Ho had put forward ultimately proved to be.

As you can read in my posts, I never spoke about the David Carr case in which the outcome is questionable. Glad we have people that can claim to have "easy to find conclusive proof" and "White House" memos and then come up with nothing more than a few cut-and-pastes and claim to have denied ignorance.

Don't worry. This "cowboy" will stay on the matter and my challenge to show us this "easy to find" absolute proof remains.


What you find "antagonistic" is only the fact that you claimed to be able to show conclusive proof easily found on the internet, which you have not done, therefore anyone to challenge you is just being a bully. Quite clearly that is not the case. I simply put forward a counter-argument and even when challenged to show "proof" of my statements...I did.


I never claimed to be the complete authority or put up a notion such as "I know the truth." I am neither a scientist or a biologist and have never actually worked with AIDs/HIV strains and the like. It seems you have...or at least bought into one side of the story rather completely.

And Sofi, I appreciate the reading but I was not getting to the microbiological relations of AIDs/HIV within the body. It was pointed out as "clear evidence" that AIDs was manufatured and by way of "proof" a 1969 DOD paper was put forward as "easily found evidence". I pointed out that a case of HIV was found before that DOD paper by 10 years (not counting the 5-10 year future statement in the document) and even when confronted by a counter that David Carr's case was invalid...still showed that was a smoke screen defense.

Personally there are theories on both sides...honestly, neither side is proven. IMO the natural progression side has more proof, but that is simply personal opinion.

I never stated that I had undeniable proof or that I know the absolute truth. THAT would be ignorance.


ps) And Xanex, the huckleberry quote certainly applied when I had a Tombstone avatar, however this one is from Deadwood. Since you do seem to know Tombstone though, then I counter with:

"Say when..."

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander

And Sofi, I appreciate the reading but I was not getting to the microbiological relations of AIDs/HIV within the body. It was pointed out as "clear evidence" that AIDs was manufatured and by way of "proof" a 1969 DOD paper was put forward as "easily found evidence". I pointed out that a case of HIV was found before that DOD paper by 10 years (not counting the 5-10 year future statement in the document) and even when confronted by a counter that David Carr's case was invalid...still showed that was a smoke screen defense.

Cool.

I am merely trying to direct attention towards the role of prions. IMO, that's the real cover-up in the AIDS/HIV story. ...Prions work in 2 main ways with AIDS - by hijacking the immune system, and causing mutations, and also, by infecting microbes, and creating "new" diseases via mutation, which work as cofactors under certain circumstances to create AIDS.

ASMA's impacts on the immune system were identified early - ie., Pauling wrote his paper on the immune system in 1940, and by 1960, all manner of emerging autoimmunities, and immune deficiencies and disorders were well recognized. As the process involves ongoing mutation, which primarily impacts proteins, it is not surprising that the Carr tests were inconclusive and/or contradictory.

Personally there are theories on both sides...honestly, neither side is proven. IMO the natural progression side has more proof, but that is simply personal opinion.

True. ...I also used to think that that the natural progression theory was more valid, but am changing my mind. I now think that there has been a fair amount of tinkering going on - I suspect that initially, efforts to develop a vaccine actually created new mutations, and spread the disease. Then, once the boys figured out what they'd done, they started trying to manipulate the process and target specific populations. These suspicions result from speculation on my part though, and I have little evidence to support the contention.


However - I DO know that most "diseases of aging" result from ASMA infecting the stem cells for connective tissue and smooth muscle - and policy decrees that ONLY later-stage symptoms be diagnosed and treated. The policy apparently is based on the contention that ASMA and other prion-related diseases are very slowly progressive, and they are therefore "mostly benign." Which is of course, pure crap - and explains why the so-called "aging population" now is bankrupting almost every nation on the planet. ...So at the core, I do support the hypothesis presented by this thread's author - but not his presentation or demeanor.


.

So this guy is the only doctor in the world who is speaking up on this matter. Simply amazing...

What you find "antagonistic" is only the fact that you claimed to be able to show conclusive proof easily found on the internet, which you have not done,

I have found excellent proof and 2 memos as I said I would. I was also working a the time. I will find more evidence today and post it. I will make sure ZZZ that is as "credible" as possible. My point here is there is PLENTY of evidence that points to a probable conspiracy (more probable than no conspiracy). If I have used the word FACT improperly in your mind, well I mean that in my mind it IS a fact!! What do you want me to do, write a thesis on it?? That would be tough with a job, family, home I'm rennovating, golf, etc. etc.....

But, again, I will use my free time today to find more memos. I found many more on this topic before, but for some reason am having a little more difficulty this time. But I did find two so far....

"You're no daisy..no daisy at all. You were just too high strung."

She paraphrased and stated so. You said:

If she's going to paraphrase:
1. She shouldn't put it in quotes
2. She didn't paraphrase, she said something totally different from what I did. That is not a paraphrase.....

So at the core, I do support the hypothesis presented by this thread's author

Thank you soficrow....

Interesting quote from Kissinger:

"Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries."

Henry Kissinger

The development of AIDS is one of those methods of depopulation developed by Haig, Kissinger, Nixon and his administration and others. I'm currently working on finding more actually documents from that time period,

Confronting The 21st Century's Hidden Crisis:
Reducing Human Numbers by 80%

by J. Kenneth Smail

May 1995
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Kenneth Smail is a Professor of Anthropology Department of Anthropology/Sociology
at Kenyon College, Gambier, Ohio
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My position is simply stated. Within the next half-century, it will be essential for the human species to have fully operational a flexibly designed, broadly equitable and internationally coordinated set of initiatives focussed on reducing the then-current world population by at least 80%. Given that even with the best of intentions it will take considerable time and exceptional diplomatic skill to develop and implement such an undertaking, perhaps on the order of 25 to 50 years, it is important that the process of consensus building - local, national and global - begin now. The mathematical inevitability that human numbers will continue their dramatic increase over the next two generations, to perhaps 10 billion by the year 2040, and the high probability that this numerical increase will exacerbate still further the systemic problems that already plague humanity (economic, political, environmental, social, moral, etc.), only reinforces this sense of urgency. There are, however, hopeful signs. In recent years, we have finally begun to come to terms with the fact that the consequences of the 20th century's rapid and seemingly uncontrolled population growth will soon place us - if it hasn't already done so - in the midst of the greatest crisis our species has yet encountered.

Some Realities: www.npg.org...

Depoluation of the world is a serious issue and is being worked on by many. The development of AIDS is just one of many ways the powers that be are working to make it happen.

Population is a political problem. The extreme secrecy surrounding the takeover of nuclear weapons, NASA and the space program and the development of numerous bio-weapons labs is a threat to civil society, especially in the hands of the military and corporations.

The fascist application of all three of these programs can be used to achieve established U.S. government depopulation policy goals, which may eliminate 2 billion of the world’s existing population – through war, famine, disease and any other methods necessary.

Population control started by the Nixon administration, continued by the Carter administration and probably beyond has been working on eliminating 2 billion of the world's population. Anyone who believes AIDS is not part of that plan is in denial.

The quote from above comes from this source:
www.sfbayview.com...

TARGETING THE IMMUNE SYSTEM In 1960, one million people were injected with cancer viruses under the auspices of the polio vaccines for which the Clinton administration later had to publicly apologize. This is actually controlled genocide. In 1975, at Langley, laboratory creations called Herpes I, II and III established a precedent. Herpes I, II and III were introduced in the collegiate circuit by the government to lower reproduction. Suddenly in 1976, we had Ebola in Africa, which caused you literally to bleed to death in seven days. Ebola did not come from the rain forest. It came from research laboratories. Then AIDS was created with the marriage of the sheep virus and the cattle bovine virus. In 1978, we injected 2,000 homosexuals in San Francisco with the Hepatitis B vaccine laced with HIV viruses, killed all 2,000 of them and spread it to South Africa. After this event, the Haig-Kissinger depopulation policy was made known through the Executive Intelligence Review magazine (March, 1981). You can order a copy. In it, officials admitted that the Vietnam War was really a population control experiment that went terribly awry. The active ingredient of Agent Orange, malathion, created a lot of problems in the vets. Studies in Japan in the late 1950s and early '60s concluded that malathion caused sterility. They wanted to decrease the world population by at least one billion people by the year 2000. With AIDS they have done a little better than that. These agents all target the immune system. More recently, we created "Medflies" which are black helicopters that spray the American public in major American cities on a nightly basis, and this went on for five years until a public protest went up. Dr. Horowitz talks about all this in his book, Emerging Viruses. However, I was already aware of this when he was first writing his book because I was involved in the government research connected with these viruses.

This article which is found here: www.consumerhealth.org...

I have to direct this to ZZZ.....this appears to be what you and others would call a "credible" source. It's a Consumer Health non-profit organization......

It continues to elaborate on this country's and others depopulation policies. Also as stated above: "the Haig-Kissinger depopulation policy was made known through the Executive Intelligence Review magazine (March, 1981). You can order a copy." So, the Depopulation policy which I provided a large memo on earlier in this post can be verified in this "credible" magazine, Executive Intelligence Review.

The above article also corroborates my belief that AIDS was man-made for this same purpose....to depopulate the planet!

One last short article from that "credible" non-profit publice health orgaization:

DESIGNER VIRUSES DNA likes to reproduce itself. If you don't poison it, you don't age so quickly, but when you start getting radiation and other poisons, DNA starts to malfunction and becomes open to invaders like RNA viruses. Unfortunately, because of genetic research in viruses, the ultimate virus is about to be created. We are just a step away from that in these annually launched viruses. Now, do you think a planet that has garbage collection, sanitation, and irradiated foods, is going to have viruses which are getting worse every year? The plan is to create a plasmic virus that separates the blood cells from the plasma in your blood so that you drown in the fluid in your own lungs, and they are very close to it. Viruses are deadly now, and they're getting worse.

again found at: www.consumerhealth.org...

God bless us all!!

an awesome source for many articles on Genocide & Depopulation:

www.whale.to...

There's a lot more going on with depopulation than just AIDS!!

NEWS RELEASE

Release: No.33-DIA/12
Date Mailed: July 8, 2001
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Rudy—208/265-2575; 800/336-9266

New Book Links HIV/AIDS to African American Genocide:
Compelling National Security Documents Target Black Groups

found at: www.tetrahedron.org...

This source, as stated above, includes National Security Documents......

Originally posted by XanaX
If she's going to paraphrase:
1. She shouldn't put it in quotes
2. She didn't paraphrase, she said something totally different from what I did. That is not a paraphrase.....

I would quote it too, so it stood apart from my writing. She also stated she was paraphrasing.

Paraphrase:
1. A restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning.

Again, you said: "I used sources that weren't afraid to speak the truth."

Do you absolutely not get the point that YOU alone seem to be deciding what is "truth" for this topic and what is not? Certainly I can see the point in your theories and I agree they have merit of further investigation by science...they are NOT "massive evidence" of what you want to percieve as "truth."

I could say that there are pink elephants living in New York and probably find 20 websites that state so. It doesn't make it true.

Now, you once criticized someone for having a poor intellect in discussion. I have seen your "massive proof' and have countered that it is speculation and conjecture. I have provided the other side of the coin with actual science, nothing of which you could refute...although you tried.

Providing critical thought and personal research to defend cut-and-pastes "opinions" from various sources is just taking this discussion round-and-round. Inserting your own critical thinking and research would certainly be a boon to the discussion.

As I said...I see the point and understand the theory but it is only that. A theory. Not "massive" evidence so I'll leave you to it.

Oh, that final link you posted is a fluff piece for "Healthy World Distributing, LLC" who's goal is to push their books, biospiritual healing philosophies and products such as coral calcium and colloidal silver. That alone makes me suspect about their "proof."



"Maybe poker's just not your game. I know! Let's have a spelling contest!"

...and colloidal silver.

??? Are you talking about regular silver? Because Johnson & Johnson has Silver Nanoparticle Bandaids which doesn't need polysporin or any other disinfectant, the Silver does it all by it'self. It's regularly used in Burn Victems. Sorry for the OT remark just wanna get a clarification.

Probably the best article I have found so far on AIDS being man-made, Written by a gentleman who was killed in 2001....

A.I.D.S. is Man-made
by William Cooper
DATE/TIME: 07/27/90 21:02

text of article here: www.thewatcherfiles.com...

just an excerpt:

"During my talks in Las Vegas last weekend I revealed a few things about
aids that I have been keeping close to my chest. I have already
revealed that I saw that AIDS was man made to eleminate the undesirable
elements of society while I was attached to Naval Security and
Intelligence. I stated this fact in my paper "The Secret Government."
Now for the rest of the story."

The rest of the story is at the link above....



And for ZZZ:

Doc: Why ZZZ...you look like someone just walked over your grave.
ZZZ: Fight's not with you Doc.
Doc: Oh I beg to differ. We started a game we didn't get to finish.
ZZZ: I was just foolin' about.
Doc: I wasn't.

I have provided the other side of the coin with actual science, nothing of which you could refute...although you tried.

ZZZ...actual science? As opposed to what other kind of science? Non-actual science? I refuted some of your information as did soficow who appears to be quite knowledgable in this area. She also U2U'd me to tell me to keep at it because it's an important topic. Maybe in your words an "actual topic."

There's plenty of science behind many of my posts, you just choose not to see it. There's also plenty of common sense or as you would say "actual common sense." Do you have common sense? With all the information I've posted, doesn't it make you feel that something isn't right about the "actual science" that you say overwhelms my "non-actual science?"

Now concentrate...open your mind. Allow yourself to learn. Don't be ripe, because as I quoted Einstein earlier, then your dead. If your green, then you're growing. Are you ripe ZZZ?

Paraphrase:
1. A restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning.

ZZZ....honestly....save your english lesson for someone else. It's unnecessary to let your arrogance impede your ability to open your obviously quite closed mind.

Impede: To retard or obstruct the progress of.

I wasn't sure if you knew what impede meant. And, I'm not trying to say you're retarded. I didn't want you to get the wrong idea.

[edit on 16-9-2005 by XanaX]