It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

House bill 15090 showing that the US Government asked for the aids virus to be made!

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 04:40 AM
link   
reply to post by squiz
 


Since the discussion has now diverged from the OP's contention of an intentional development of HIV by the US Government and reached the inevitable conclusion of a battle of sources allow me to present a source (though it is technically off topic) regarding the OPV-HIV theory. This article refutes the claim that that the CHAT vaccine was made from the kidneys of SIV infected chimpanzees.

A book published in 1999 hypothesized that the scientists who worked with the CHAT type 1 attenuated poliomyelitis strain, tested in the former Belgian Congo in the late 1950s, had covertly prepared the vaccine in chimpanzee kidney cells contaminated with a simian immunodeficiency virus, which evolved into human immunodeficiency virus type 1 group M. This article summarizes the results of the investigation conducted by the author to determine the legitimacy of the accusation. Testimony by eyewitnesses, historical documents of the time, epidemiological analysis, and analysis of ancillary phylogenetic, virological, and polymerase chain reaction data all indicate that this hypothesis is false.
www.uow.edu.au...

The claim that evidence of the existence of HIV long before the CHAT vaccine is "highly questionable" comes primarily from Edward Hooper (who has a stake in defending his 1999 book). The results of the independent work of Korber and Worobey (after the publishing of Hooper's book) has been accepted by a broad spectrum of genetic researchers.


Monkeys were and are a common source of food in Africa.

NY woman accused of importing, eating monkey meat

blogs.kansascity.com...

[edit on 1/18/2009 by Phage]




posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Yeah dude, that paper is found at the the link I posted earlier.
Here it is again www.uow.edu.au.... Take a look at the where it's linked from.


You do know that the author of that particular paper was directly involved in the testing and production of the original vaccine in the 50's? Man O' man, this just get's better and better. Talk about bias.
Yet another coincidence.
In fact it appears that the bias of the more vocal opponents of the theory that have featured in your links, comes into question.
Yes two can play at that game.

Here's my new point of view. The government would of known of this in the beginning when the original vaccine was replaced with Sabin's over the concern of contamination and this was the exact reason why it was replaced. As Hilleman said, very primitive science in those days. There was a cover up to protect the reputation of vaccination science. Then some years later it was knowingly administered in the HB vaccines. The cover up continues.


Monkeys were and are a common source of food in Africa.

Yes indeed.
The Bush meat theory fails to explain why AIDS is a new virus, when monkeys have been eaten for hundreds of years and most probably thousands of years.

[edit on 18-1-2009 by squiz]



posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
This article refutes the claim that that the CHAT vaccine was made from the kidneys of SIV infected chimpanzees.


This video proves this as an outright lie. Kaprowski, on film claims that chimps weren't used. Archive footage and testimony from the native assistants show the exact opposite.

I was just watching this at the moment and it comes to the same conclusion I've made, thanks to your prompting Phage. I thank you for that, My eyes are a little wider open today. AIDS is indeed an act of man.

Not only was it spread through the vaccinations. But SV40 the cancer virus was also spread, that has the ability to be passed on through to the next generation.

My god, it's a frightening concept but it appears to be true. Aids and Cancer killers number one. And of course Heart disease and numerous other toxins induced by this crappy civilization lead by people consciousness deficient.

The evidence is far beyond my expectations, Hooper is a hero IMO.

Google Video Link


[edit on 18-1-2009 by squiz]



posted on Jan, 18 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by squiz
AIDS is indeed an act of man.

Not only was it spread through the vaccinations. But SV40 the cancer virus was also spread, that has the ability to be passed on through to the next generation.

This knowledge helps make sense of the fact that American aid to Africa was tied to teaching abstinence, and teaching about condom use was verboten, despite it being known that abstinence teaching didn't work.

It even makes sense of Bush congratulating that guy who was running FEMA, for "a job well done," after FEMA hindering all efforts to bring help to people after hurricane Katrina, and doing nothing to help the victims.

The spreading of fatal diseases is only part of the big picture, an effort to utilise every technique possible to quietly murder humans until most are exterminated.

There is someone, or some group, on this Earth who wants to recreate Eden with itself as God.



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
how do you build a virus when you don't even know what the human genome is?


that's a plot hole as big as the sun.



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   
community-2.webtv.net...

Use the above link for the house bill from congress



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
how do you build a virus when you don't even know what the human genome is?
that's a plot hole as big as the sun.

No, you're just showing that you don't understand the process.

The human genome is irrelevant, unless you're building a human. A characteristic of viruses is that the ability to recombine. This can happen spontaneously, or it can be encouraged by growing more than one virus together.

Foe example, with bird flu, the last time we saw a very contagious version was in 1918. Since that died out there have still been forms of bird flu in the environment, but these have not infected many humans because they don't have what it takes to spread easily from human to human. However the latest form has continually mutated, and one way it can do this is by recombining with a normal flu virus if the one person is infected at once. This can speed up the process of change, and bring about a new epidemic.

Using eggs to culture flu virus antibodies for inoculations has been questioned on the grounds that, if any of these eggs are infected with bird flu, the two viruses could combine and be present in any inoculations given from that source.

A knowledge of genetics can be used to help mutate or recombine a virus, but the use of trial and error may achieve the results you are after with no scientific knowledge at all.



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   
I have to say, the first Video on the post by Squiz to me is a FAKE, I am asking other members to please watch it again, the lips do not match the words, not for a single second, when the male voice asks a question, the video always pauses, this makes it look like the Scientist is listening, when they burst into fits of laughter, the Scientist just does not react, not a whisper that someone is laughing, that is almost impossible to do, someone laughs 99 times out of 100 a smirk will appear if not infected laughing.

The second Scientist with the glasses, he looks like he in in disguise, look at his nose, It looks rubber, and the skin tone looks slightly whiter than the rest of his face, his hair, and his side burns, they don't go into the same haircut if that makes sense? it looks like his hair, side, burns were cut by three different people?

I'm sorry if I'm causing offence here, please someone else look? if it is we deserve better, not saying the OP is trying to pull the wool over our eyes, but the video is very strange to me in many ways.

I dunno, perhaps it's meant to be that way? if I am wrong I sincerely and deeply Apologise.



[edit on 19/1/2009 by azzllin]



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by azzllin
 


While the video has some odd editing (loop, etc.), the interview apparently did happen.

The interview is not relevant to the topic of discussion (intentional creation of HIV). Nor is it relevant to the discussion of HIV originating accidentally in oral polio vaccines administered in Africa. Hilleman is talking about SV40 infected animals imported to the US. The part in the interview about "importing" HIV was tongue in cheek and made in jest (thus the laughter).

There are conflicting study results about the alleged role of SV40 in causing cancer. Here is what Hilleman himself has to say about any real danger of SV40:

There has been no evidence to implicate SV40 virus of vaccine origin in long- or short-term consequences in human subjects. Of importance, SV40 virus provided a new model for basic studies of viral pathogenesis and for cell transformation and neoplasia.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

[edit on 1/19/2009 by Phage]

[edit on 1/19/2009 by Phage]



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by azzllin
 


What we have established is that AIDS was well under way before this bill, which coincides in both the timing and location of the polio vaccines administered 57 and 60. Along with evidence for a cover up and dismissal of this.

The Hilleman Video, reveals the obvious dangers in using monkey kidneys for a culture to the vaccines. It is a fact that SV40 was in the vaccines, Hilleman was the man who discovered this. He also reveals that Leukemia virus was in the Yellow fever vaccine.

What appears to be untrue is the connection between the African greens and AIDS, Hilleman said the wild monkeys were clean, and implied the diseases were being bred and spread in the holding pens of the monkeys used for the vaccines. This is the what is important.

While an admission, it seems to be misleading to the origins of AIDS in America. As he's standing in the firing line and taking responsibility for that by admitting bringing African greens into the U.S.!! that's what he's saying. but it was the chimps that caused the problem with AIDS. It may very well be truth and propaganda mixed. From the facts it would seems so.


[edit on 19-1-2009 by squiz]



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


no, because aids can only live for seconds out of the body. surely the eggheads who made it wiuld have wanted it to last for a long time for maximum exposure.

why no airborne variants? hydro-proof? temperature adaptation?

none of this. if it's just a little out of that of human body conditions, it dies.


kind of dumb for the government to leave out those little pieces.


and why have it lay dormant for so long? you can't capitalize on a virus that will activate when you're retired and no longer in power.



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Hilleman is talking about SV40 infected animals imported to the US. The part in the interview about "importing" HIV was tongue in cheek and made in jest (thus the laughter).


Watch it again, he says the wild monkeys were not infected. The infections were being passed on and mixed with the various other viruses in the holding pens.

A jest? that was some build up to the punch line. Dr Hilleman wasn't laughing. The reporters also laughed when he quite seriously relayed the potential for long term effects like "Cancer", yeah real funny.



There are conflicting study results about the alleged role of SV40 in causing cancer. Here is what Hilleman himself has to say about any real danger of SV40:

There has been no evidence to implicate SV40 virus of vaccine origin in long- or short-term consequences in human subjects. Of importance, SV40 virus provided a new model for basic studies of viral pathogenesis and for cell transformation and neoplasia.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


Still towing the official line heh? would you inject yourself with SV40? Do you believe in the peer review process that much that you'd put your life on the line? The SV40 issue is something beyond the scope of this thread. But it is similar in many ways in the denial and dismissal of the subject. Do we really need to go there? Can you not see the contradiction between this and what he actually says? I guess if it's in a published paper it must be true right?


I'm sorry to tell you Phage but the scientific institutions that you hold in such high regard are just as prone to the corruption and frailties of the human condition as any other.

[edit on 20-1-2009 by squiz]



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
So much back and forth, and it is all not even germane to the issue at hand.

The issue is: Did House Bill 15090 give funding to the Army to create a virus that has the same (or very similar) effects of the HIV virus (AIDS)?

That's a yes/no question, and so far, no one has given a definitive answer.



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by sir_chancealot
 


I think the answer is no, why would they? it already existed, created inadvertently (made the species jump) in crude conditions in the pioneering days of vaccination science. Likewise with SV40.
Athough there are different strains that again conform geographically.

It's possible the money was for something else related to the issue and not the development, perhaps production or the other strains.

Billions of dollars are at stake to make these new viruses and others appear natural. There in lies the conspiracy.

[edit on 20-1-2009 by squiz]



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 10:31 PM
link   
so then your point is idiotic.

How is the army responsible? It's not like they purposely put it into the population.



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
so then your point is idiotic.

How is the army responsible? It's not like they purposely put it into the population.



Would it be idiotic if you had received one of these contaminated vaccines, how about your parents or grandparents? you may have a dormant virus in you right now. What if you were going for a shot tomorrow? Would it be idiotic then? It doesn't sound like you read my answer properly, the money most likely went into the field. All I'm saying is they already knew how to do it.

My only point was the origin of AIDS. I'd say the truth is relevant.
And your question is still up for grabs, it's been done before. There's still the question of the HB trials and no doubt much more to the story.

Who supplied the simians?

Litton Bionetics, biological weapons contractors, all proceeding under the guise of cancer research, and then look at how Robert Gallo was involved with Litton Bionetics. There's your connection. Got to spell it out a couple of times for some I guess.

Phage presented the relevant mainstream arguments, as corrupt and tainted as they are, but not childish comments. We probably all learned something, I know I did. Add something substantial instead of inflammatory empty shots.

[edit on 20-1-2009 by squiz]



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by squiz
 


Note the female voice saying, "Yeah, right!" in a sarcastic tone rather than an affirming tone. The comment about cancer was also part of the joke as evidenced by Hilleman's published opinion about SV40. Yes, it was a joke, albeit a sick one, and it's probably the reason the segment was not aired. Many people would find it offensive and some would take it seriously.

I've read that Hilleman is talking about monkeys imported in the early '80's but I can't find any solid confirmation of this. If this is the case then obviously there can be no connection with AIDS in the US since it is known the infection was present in this country long before then.

Oh, you are correct that the segment does not refer to SV40. But I believe the context of the entire interview concerns the presence of the virus in earlier vaccines. This segment is about Hilleman's efforts to reduce infection of imported animals after the previous problems.

[edit on 1/20/2009 by Phage]



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   
So if the AIDS virus was deliberately developed as a weapon, should there not have been a cure at the same time the virus was developed?

I've read a lot of times that biological weapons are only viable as a weapon, if there is a way to prevent your own being infected?

I understand what is being said, that this was intended for planetary depopulation, how could they guarantee, they themselves who developed and released it were not in danger further down the time line of becoming infected themselves? or their families who they would not have direct control over their activities it's been shown time and time again, the only prevention is care and attention to what we do, IE safe sex, clean needles, and the now supposedly prevented blood transfusion.

I'm not to big on Logic, sometimes it can be misleading, I am swinging towards a possible depopulation plan, indeed I believe the current population does need to be reduced, but in a humane and well planned way, with permission and cooperation of the worlds population.

I just want and need someone to explain to me how and why these people who are alleged to be doing this, plan on surviving this?

Thanks for responding to my post.



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by azzllin
I just want and need someone to explain to me how and why these people who are alleged to be doing this, plan on surviving this?


I imagine their thoughts are: "Well, me and mine are safe, as we don't use second-hand needles or indulge in unsafe sex."

Something spread directly by fresh body fluids can be avoided without immunisation.

Or there may be a vaccine which is secretly made available to only certain families.

Or this might be the reason certain politicians were involved with a paedophile ring, to have partners guaranteed to be safe.

As for why they have done it, it was an experiment, a bit of fun. Someone probably thought it a great idea to wipe out half of the population of Africa with it. And some other twisted soul no doubt thought it a great joke to put HIV-1 in an immunisation being given to gays.

Not all people with power are sane or reasonable.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join