AIDS was obviously engineered (well, obvious is relative)

I wrote the article that follows, and compiled the conspectus from public websites. Bibliography follows all.

----------


The United States Government:
Fostering the Global AIDS Crisis?

Written by ******************** ME ********************
January 23, 2003


"Those who can make you believe absurdities
can make you commit atrocities" -- Voltaire

"It is easier for a king to have a lie believed than a beggar to spread the truth."
-- Robert Strecker, M.D.

The AIDS crisis is not only still growing, it is silently getting out of hand. Over the last few years, the attitudes toward HIV and AIDS have shifted dramatically. While, in previous years, HIV treatment programs, counseling and prevention may have made momentous headway in congressional legislation, public & private funding and research subsidies, with the influx of the Bush administration�s agenda have come some rapid and disappointing setbacks in the fight against HIV and AIDS.

Something ominous is happening. Not everyone can see what is going on, as we have been spoon-fed every minute Government-approved factoid since the early 1980�s about the causes, origins and treatments for HIV and AIDS. But in little articles published on the sidelines of newspapers that are seldom read, and on websites and papers compiled by foreign researchers and the UNAIDS program reports that get severely little public attention, the shift in attitudes has been dramatic and coming in waves and droves in the last two years. We can see the light if we look closely enough, and it is both searing to our skin and painful to our eyes.

On April 30th, 2000, The Washington Post published an article: AIDS Is Declared Threat to US National Security. The article sums up the reasons why the outgoing president (Bill Clinton) decided to put AIDS into a new and different category, one that puts the CIA in direct control of HIV & AIDS federal programs.

Why does the CIA need to control the various avenues of the AIDS crisis? What headway in the fight against HIV can we possibly achieve when the most powerful nation in the world has put a society based on guile, circumspection and murder in charge of distributing life-saving funds and information? How can we still expect the truth?

The answer to that is, perhaps, that we have never gotten the full truth. Due to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), a number of secret congressional session transcripts and state department documents from the last 50 years have come to light. One of the most notable of these transcripts, states, amongst other things that in 1969 the US Army asked for 10 million dollars to research:

"A new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organism. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease".

- Dept. of Defense Appropriations Hearings, 91st Congress, July 1, 1969, Washington DC regarding the Special Virus Cancer Program (SVCP). (www.apfn.org...)

Indeed, the description for this biological warfare agent to be developed sounds distressingly like what research has shown us the AIDS virus is and does. Coincidentally, the Human Rights Watch released an article in May of 2002 regarding the International Criminal Court, which was quoted as saying:

The International Criminal Court treaty has already received more than the requisite number of 60 ratifications, and its jurisdiction will commence after July 1, 2002, with or without the U.S. signature. The court will try people accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. All of Western Europe and virtually every major U.S. ally are strong supporters of the court. The only states still actively opposing the court are the United States and Libya.

Why has the US put itself �on the wrong side of history?� Could it be that perhaps there are US interests that may come under extreme scrutiny of the criminal court with regards to such things as genocide and crimes against humanity?

The answer is �probably,� and the theory behind that lay in the following quote from Henry Kissinger in a classified report issued by the National Security Council in 1974:

1. "Depopulation should be the highest priority of US foreign policy towards the Third World".
2. "Reduction of the rate of population in these states is a matter of vital US national security".
3. "The US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less-developed countries. That fact gives the US enhanced interests in the political, economic and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resources, supplies and the economic interest of the United States".

The National Security Council. NSSM 200 - "Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security & Overseas Interests", Washington DC, the White House, December 10, 1974. Declassified July 3, 1989. (www.africa2000.com...)

The information was declassified in concert with the FOIA, yet had remained classified through the most formidable years of the AIDS crisis.

It is quite apparent from doing just a little digging that not all things are happy and unquestionable in the land of AIDS funding and research. More and more scientists are taking these things into question. So called �AIDS dissidents� have seen increasing support in foreign countries where the AIDS rate is spiraling out of control, and in other western countries that are not under the direct control of the US State Department.

Many AIDS dissidents agree that while the HIV virus�s effects are still being researched, they have concluded that many drug cocktails are also very dangerous and may cause some of the classic so-called �AIDS/ARC� symptoms such as wasting and Kaposi�s sarcoma. For instance:

Meditel Productions, based in London, made several television documentaries that were critical of the orthodox AIDS paradigm. The most important are: "The AIDS Catch" (1990), "AZT: Cause For Concern" (1992), and "AIDS in Africa" (1993).

These were first broadcast to the UK over Channel Four Television, and were subsequently broadcast in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and several European countries. Although the documentaries have been viewed by tens of millions of people around the world, not one has ever been allowed to air in the US.

- VirusMyth.net (Website) (www.aliveandwell.org...)

Isn�t this the land of the free? How can materials like this be banned under our constitution? The matter of the fact is that these choices may be simple to the average person, but to the powerful of the world, these choices are both delicate and deliberate in intent and effective outcome.

Something has gone terribly wrong. Not only are we being cut off, systematically from the funding and the support groups that we need to fight the disease, both here and abroad, but they may have been killing patients, needlessly with spin-doctored advertisements for medications, where pharmaceutical companies such as Glaxo-Wellcome may have �doctored� statistics and incorrectly assessed risks just to push the drugs (such as the nucleoside analogue, AZT) onto the market.

(A Nucleoside Analogue is a chemical that disrupts the DNA of any and every living cell in one�s body, at random. Developed in the 1960�s, it was originally declared too toxic to ever be used as a medical treatment of any kind.)

Something needs to happen. The calamity of AIDS is still a latching-point for the bigotry of our nation towards gays and minorities in urban areas. The current administration has all but laughed at the whole world by isolating, cutting off funding to international programs and diverting domestic programming moneys into the hands of the CIA, and thus, the military. They have given our AIDS money to the war-machine, and this was done neither by accident, nor in the spirit of humanitarian needs. This was done in the spirit of an old and wisely hidden program, that now puts the USA on the line in the eyes of international justice.

--------

Conspectus of Excerpts (from all sources)

Compiled September 7th, 2002

In 1969 the US military asked for 10 million dollars from Congress to further its cancer studies by developing:

"A new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organism. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease".

Quoted from the Dept. of Defense Appropriations Hearings, 91st Congress, July 1, 1969, Washington DC regarding the Special Virus Cancer Program (SVCP).

The International Criminal Court treaty has already received more than the requisite number of 60 ratifications, and its jurisdiction will commence after July 1, 2002, with or without the U.S. signature. The court will try people accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. All of Western Europe and virtually every major U.S. ally are strong supporters of the court. The only states still actively opposing the court are the United States and Libya.

... What is left, for many of us, is the clear truth that after more than a decade of intensive research and billions of dollars spent, we have not moved the HIV/AIDS hypothesis from the realm of correlation to the realm of causality. At best, what we have is circumstantial evidence for a theory born under most unfavorable circumstances. We also have, as Peter Duesberg shows us, strong conflict between the HIV hypothesis and reality. The truth is that we really still do not know what causes the immunodeficiency behind AIDS. In view of this, Duesberg has proposed that recreational drugs and AZT cause AIDS. Although the HIV establishment gives him full credit for "the drugs hypothesis," the fact is that such a hypothesis is nothing new. It was, in fact, the first AIDS hypothesis formulated by the CDC. In the early days, many independent investigators called it the "lifestyle" hypothesis. If it were not for Peter Duesberg, and a few others, with the rush to judgment about HIV causality, even this much of the truth would be hidden from us. " - Infectious AIDS; Have we been misled?

Meditel Productions, based in London, made several television documentaries that were critical of the orthodox AIDS paradigm. The most important are: "The AIDS Catch" (1990), "AZT: Cause For Concern" (1992), and "AIDS in Africa" (1993).

These were first broadcast to the UK over Channel Four Television, and were subsequently broadcast in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and several European countries. Although the documentaries have been viewed by tens of millions of people around the world, not one has ever been allowed to air in the US.

In England there have only been about ten thousand "AIDS" deaths in the entire course of the epidemic, as opposed to over a third of a million in the US.

The main reason for this huge disparity may be that, thanks to the Meditel documentaries, far fewer gay men in England took AZT or other nucleoside analogue drugs. (Over 94% of all AIDS deaths in the US occurred after AZT was approved for marketing in 1987.)

The AIDS medical establishment unquestioningly accepts the notion that a black African heterosexual AIDS epidemic transformed itself into a young white male homosexual epidemic in Manhattan. How is this biologically possible? In truth, the transformation of a black heterosexual epidemic into an exclusively white American homosexual epidemic is not biologically possible. Nevertheless, the leading AIDS experts carefully avoid all discussion of this issue. The U.S. media have censored all serious discussion of AIDS as a man-made disease, and have dismissed the accusations as propaganda of the worst sort. On the contrary, it is they the media who are disseminating the government's official line propaganda! To blame green monkeys and a rain forest virus for AIDS may be politically correct, but it is also scientifically naive.

The disease in Africa began in the cities, and not in the jungles. And the most important point of the matter is that the genetic makeup of the AIDS virus does not exist in man or primates. So not only is it improbable that the virus came from monkeys, it's virtually impossible. To further demolish the theory that HIV had been present in Africa for centuries, Dr. Horowitz cites a gene-typing study by Dr. Gerald Myers of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Developing an HIV-tree based on archeoepidemiology, Myers concluded that "the preponderance of evidence still argues for an explosive event in the mid-1970s." Simply put, new viruses mutate rapidly while old viruses mutate slowly. HIV IS THE MOST RAPIDLY MUTATING VIRUS EVER KNOWN and Myer's genetic research pinpoints the origin of AIDS to the mid-1970s.

If you scoff at the notion that HIV was artificially created, you won't be so cocky once you see how much evidence exists! There is in fact a mass of circumstantial and scientific evidence that proves absolutely that American gays and black Africans were targeted for genocide via vaccine programs by America's military-medical-industrial complex and agents of the CIA. MR. A.H. PASSARELLA, DIRECTOR FOR THE DEPT. OF DEFENSE has recently CONFIRMED HIV IS A SYNTHETIC BIOLOGICAL AGENT. The evidence is overwhelming, the United States Government and the World Health Organization collaborated on the development, production and proliferation of a synthetic biological agent that subsequently became known as HIV and AIDS. It is a fact that people are unwittingly used as guinea pigs in covert medical experiments. The Army's '___' experiments, the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, Agent Orange, the exploding Persian Gulf War Syndrome, the human radiation experiments, as well as hundreds of documented biowarfare experiments conducted by the military on unsuspecting civilians. And the National Academy of Sciences is silent on its cooperative role with the military in the development of secret biological weapons for mass killing.

Fifty years ago, splitting the atom created the threat of global annihilation. Now scientists are splitting genes and creating new diseases, with equally alarming destructive potential. AIDS is not an isolated phenomenon. It may have been only the beginning. With the advent of genetic manipulation, - recombinant engineering, some most incredible and deadly viruses can now be manufactured with little difficulty. Dr. Horowitz notes that two of the worlds leading experts in monkey virology have declared that Ebola and Marburg were also artificially created. Horowitz documents a complex network of U.S. government officials and departments, drug companies, international agencies, and well-known scientists that in the last 50 years has vigorously pursued biological warfare as a defense alternative to nuclear war. The U.S. has the largest arsenal of chemical and biological weapons in the world.

Project Aids International (PAI) submitted evidence during this United Nations session that the United States Government and the manufacturer of AZT (Wellcome Foundation, Ltd. London) had sufficient knowledge as early as 1961 that AZT was a deadly toxin. PAI further attests that "both the U.S. Government and Wellcome Foundation are knowingly participating in criminal negligent homicide."


If this is so, thousands of people have needlessly died. Is the United States Government deliberately engineering the eradication of a large group of people? If the facts do reveal a deliberate act to destroy portions of a population, we are looking at genocide. Though most of us don't seriously consider such a hideous crime, there is, on the international level, a United Nations Treaty on Genocide. Genocide is defined as "committing, with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."3

The General Assembly Resolution, Article III, reads: "Persons committing genocide, or any of the other acts enumerated in Article III, shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals."

On September 23, 1948, United States Secretary of State Marshall stated, "Governments which systematically disregard the rights of their own people are not likely to respect the rights of other nations and other people, and are likely to seek their objectives by coercion and force in the international field."

In July 2002 the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) was disappointed to learn of the decision by President Bush not to grant it the $34 million dollars appropriated by Congress for 2002. At that time the Executive Director of UNFPA, Ms. Thoraya Obaid, said: "The denial of these funds will, unfortunately, significantly affect millions of women and children worldwide for whom the life-saving services provided by the UNFPA will have to be discontinued. Women and children will die because of this decision."

When we turn to the events surrounding the dissemination of information concerning the AIDS and HIV scenario, a pattern seems to emerge. If this is, in fact, genocide, it will take a large group of aware people to bring justice.

We are surprised when we seek information from professionals in the medical field. Dr. Harold Jaffee, Director for the Center of Disease Control for HIV/AIDS infectious diseases, qualifies all information on the AIDS hotline, and is quite clear about the AZT/HIV situation. He explains, "A number of mechanisms have been proposed to account for the dysfunction and depletion of CD4+ T-lymphocytes; which of these mechanisms is most important remains unknown."4

It is puzzling that a man in his position is armed with scientific rumors and has no facts that HIV causes AIDS. Nevertheless, despite his above admission, he instructs his hotline operators to continue to misinform the general public that HIV is absolutely the cause of AIDS and that early intervention with AZT will help delay its onset. Nationwide, his hotline advises, "If you receive an HIV-positive test result, you will eventually develop AIDS and die." this is such cheery news.

Isn't it odd that this goes on? Why is it that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not intervened? Research reveals that there has been manipulation of information by Burroughs- Wellcome, the pharmaceutical company who manufactures AZT. Unknown to the general public, the FDA relies on the "honor system" to determine drug approvals. One of the main criteria to "bringing the drug to the market" is its financial strength.



Quoted from Henry Kissinger:

4. "Depopulation should be the highest priority of US foreign policy towards the Third World".
5. "Reduction of the rate of population in these states is a matter of vital US national security".
6. "The US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less-developed countries. That fact gives the US enhanced interests in the political, economic and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resources, supplies and the economic interest of the United States".

The National Security Council. NSSM 200 - "Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security & Overseas Interests", Washington DC, the White House, December 10, 1974. Declassified July 3, 1989.

Henry Kissinger wrote the above report in 1974, ten years before the announcement of the discovery of the HIV virus.

The scientific community state that HIV entered the human population of Africa for the first time around 1975, just months after this top-secret agenda. Tests on blood and tissue samples collected in Central Africa from 1964 - 1975 showed no evidence of HIV infection. "Something dramatic happened in 1975", said leading AIDS scientist Dr. Jay Levy.

Head of UNAIDS Peter Piot says "Entire generations are being taken out. We are going into societies were there are more people in their 60's and 70's than in their 40's and 30's. This is unheard of." Although sexual activity and sexually transmitted diseases such as syphilis and gonorrhea are no greater or lesser than in other parts of the world, sexual transmission is blamed for the massively disproportionate spread of AIDS. And yet if initial infections occurred ten or more years previously, as is common with HIV/AIDS, these teens and children would have been too young to be involved in sexual behavior. Ignorance is also cited as a major factor, and yet the worst hit nations such as Zimbabwe, Botswana, and South Africa have the highest literacy rates - more than 90 percent. The only common factor amongst these age-groups is inoculation, which is widespread and implemented to most babies and children until their teens.

On April 30, 2000, the The Washington Post announced a National Security Agency (NSA) move to place AIDS science, and all public health agencies conducting it, under the command of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

This move, curiously, follows South African President's Thabo Mbeki's decision to include the testimonies of "dissident" scientists in his country's review of HIV/AIDS treatment practices and the epidemic's origin.

President Clinton, advised by the National Intelligence Council (NIC), to formally declare global AIDS a U.S. "national security threat," signed this policy into law. The action foreshadows the likely persecution, if not incarceration or assassination, of "dissident" AIDS scientists.

The CIA warned in their report to the president and press that, "The persistent infectious disease burden is likely to aggravate and, in some cases, may even provoke economic decay, social fragmentation, and political destabilization in the hardest hit countries. . . ."

The study defined "instability," as revolutionary wars, ethnic wars, genocides, and disruptive regime transitions. . . . Dramatic declines in life expectancy, the study said, are the strongest risk factor for "such threats to national security."

Killing two birds with one stone, promoting vaccination and medication, the propagandist report stated that such threats and "deterioration" might be followed by only "limited improvement . . . owing to better prevention and control efforts, new drugs, and vaccines." The report posted one statistic that reflected the evidence advanced in the book Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola -- Nature, Accident or Intentional? (Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 1998).

The "number of 15-year-olds per 10,000 of that age group who have lost their mothers or both parents to AIDS," in Uganda, the report said, was 1,100 compared to 10 in the United States.

Why so many orphaned children in Uganda? Because this was the principle site of the African hepatitis B vaccine trials in 1974-1975. Uganda was the home of the International Agency for Research in Cancer (IARC) that collaborated with Litton Bionetics, the U.S. Army's sixth top biological weapons contracting lab during the late 1960s and early 1970s. Bionetics was the organization that, at this time, developed numerous AIDS-like viruses under the direction of Dr. Robert Gallo of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), who more than a decade later received credit for "discovering" the AIDS virus HTLV-III (HIV-1).

1970 United States intensifies its development of "ethnic weapons" (Military Review, Nov., 1970), designed to selectively target and eliminate specific ethnic groups who are susceptible due to genetic differences and variations in DNA.

1975 The virus section of Fort Detrick's Center for Biological Warfare Research is renamed the Fredrick Cancer Research Facilities and placed under the supervision of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) . It is here that a special virus cancer program is initiated by the U.S. Navy, purportedly to develop cancer-causing viruses. It is also here that retrovirologists isolate a virus to which no immunity exists. It is later named HTLV (Human T-cell Leukemia Virus).

1977 Senate hearings on Health and Scientific Research confirm that 239 populated areas had been contaminated with biological agents between 1949 and 1969. Some of the areas included San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Key West, Panama City, Minneapolis, and St. Louis.

1978 Experimental Hepatitis B vaccine trials, conducted by the CDC, begin in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Ads for research subjects specifically ask for promiscuous homosexual men.

1981 First cases of AIDS are confirmed in homosexual men in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, triggering speculation that AIDS may have been introduced via the Hepatitis B vaccine

1985 According to the journal Science (227:173-177), HTLV and VISNA, a fatal sheep virus, are very similar, indicating a close taxonomic and evolutionary relationship.

1986 According to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (83:4007-4011), HIV and VISNA are highly similar and share all structural elements, except for a small segment which is nearly identical to HTLV. This leads to speculation that HTLV and VISNA may have been linked to produce a new retrovirus to which no natural immunity exists.

1994 With a technique called "gene tracking," Dr. Garth Nicolson at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX discovers that many returning Desert Storm veterans are infected with an altered strain of Mycoplasma incognitus, a microbe commonly used in the production of biological weapons. Incorporated into its molecular structure is 40 percent of the HIV protein coat, indicating that it had been man-made.

----------

Bibliography

Dr. Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos et. al., Dr. Val Turner: The Perth Group, Royal Perth Hospital, University of Western Australia

United Nations Population Fund (Website)

Press Release HR/3358, March 8, 1993 (afternoon) p. 13 "Children's Issues - Agenda item 24," United Nations.

Press Release HR/3360, March 9, 1993 (afternoon) P. 14 "Science and Technology - Agenda item 14, United Nations

.December 11, 1946, General Assembly of the United Nations, Article II.

PERCEPTIONS MAGAZINE Fall/Winter 1993 Issue, Article by Jeremy Selvey

Richard C. Strohman UC Berkeley May 1995 - Infectious AIDS; Have we been misled?

VirusMyth.net (Website)

Human Rights Watch (Website)

The US Human Experimentation Timeline - Health News Network (Website)

AIDS: QUIRK OF NATURE OR MASS MURDER?

[edit on 10/10/2004 by ironyWrit]

Originally posted by ironyWrit
"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed
by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing
about them." -- George Orwell

I hate very much to single out this one quote in your very long and obviously labor intensive post, but I have to say that this is utter nonsense. I have a lot of respect for Orwell's talent, but taking this out of context and, in someway trying to generalize it is offensive to those of us who are nationalists and who also have high moral and ethical standards.

Otherwise, I look forward to reading your post.

That quote is used in the same context in which it was seen... at VirusMyth.net.

I don't understand how it's out of context.... nationalists and patriots are two different types of people.

No matter... I've got to distill the front part of it down to one or two quotes, anyway because I've been cited for excessive quoting.

[edit on 10-10-2004 by ironyWrit]

Originally posted by ironyWrit
That quote is used in the same context in which it was seen... at VirusMyth.net.

I don't understand how it's out of context.... nationalists and patriots are two different types of people.

No matter... I've got to distill the front part of it down to one or two quotes, anyway because I've been cited for excessive quoting.

[edit on 10-10-2004 by ironyWrit]

Well, by nationalist, I mean that I am not quite ready for world government, although I believe that is an admirable ideal for some far distand future.

I thought you authored the post.

I did author the post. The quote that I'm quoting, in particular, was also quoted in one of the cited works on VirusMyth.net. That's where I got that quote, I decided to include it in my paper, as well.

The quote was quoted in the same context in which it was SEEN doesn't mean I didn't author the post.

All the quotes in the beginning are garnered from the sources that I used as references to write the article. I hope that clarifies everything. The whole of the article can't be published in its original form, anyways, on this board.

[edit on 10/10/2004 by ironyWrit]

I find it amazing that out of all the information presented, that your only reply was to complain about a nationalistic misquote.. shrug

Great post man, opened my eyes..

If the US is indeed behind the outbreak, it would take a rock solid witness/evidence to prove it .. and chances are, considering the AID/HIV is under CIA control, that person would be terminated ;p

Sucks..

Originally posted by QuietSoul
Great post man, opened my eyes..

If the US is indeed behind the outbreak, it would take a rock solid witness/evidence to prove it .. and chances are, considering the AID/HIV is under CIA control, that person would be terminated ;p

What? Is this some kind of conspiracy site? Oh wait, I guess it is.

Well if you want my take, I think that the AIDS was created by the US Post Office. See they are getting to the point that they are having problems every year amking a profit. But if they could get rid of the poor folk who just use stamps, and force the use of just overnight mail. They could finally be profitable.

NOTE: In case you buy that crap - its crap.


But to the original poster, interesting post nonetheless.

Could the US government be behind AIDS?

Yes.

Are they?

Probably not.

My reasoning is that if population control was the intended reason for introducing a virus into a population, AIDS would be a poor choice. AIDS takes a good amount of time to kill someone. It is much harder to spread then an airborn virus.

Honestly, if they wanted to reduce the population in a country, the introduction of a far more simple virus that already existed not only would do the job, but probably do it better.

A great post mate!
Funny enough, i am completing a report on a simular subject for my uni.
Another interesting site that people might care to look at is :

www.deepblacklies.co.uk...

thanks for all the positive comments about my post... to people who are in doubt: I have already been up and down this entire issue, I spent a lot of time putting together specific points to elaborate on the theory, and this view is shared by several others. This is not a one dimensional issue and I don't think that efficiency has anything to do with it; just like color coded terror alerts, which do little but help to spread fear, the US government is sending a solid message with AIDS... and I think I will leave this thread on that note.

I have quoted NSSM 200 in order to convince the flag wavers that the US is a genocidal war machine, but as that neat little orwellian quote says.. "they have that remarkable capacity for not even hearing
about them.".

I had also read about the 10 million to make a super bug... it all seems to point one way...

However.. IF the US did make AIDS it will be one of the hardest points to prove.
I think we will get the truth on EBL (extraterr. biological lifeforms) BEFORE they admit to this.
Just look at the bubble that will pop if something like this comes out. To accept the existance of ailien life is hard, but in time you'll get over it and it will blend in with your worldview.
A revelation like AIDS being man-made... well it shatters reality. The state that used to care for you and your family turns into a genocidal monster overnight, now thats hard to reconcile with your paradigm.
So I do think we will get the truth on EBLs before we get it on AIDS, thats IF there is anything to give away on either subject of course.

Who cares if AIDS is U.S. or even manmade.It only affects people who use needles,have sex with partners that they no nothing about,and to a small amout, people who get it from a bad blood transfusion(which all can be prevented,except for the last one which is usually from some sorta mistake).AIDS will never affect me, but MY tax money goes twords paying for it, which I do not like.Anyone who wants a cure should learn to be smart about thier life style, instead of find a cure for such an easily avoidable thing.

Anyone who wants a cure should learn to be smart about thier life style, instead of find a cure for such an easily avoidable thing.

Dude are you serious?!? Damn that's quite an arrogant thing to say. Let's play out this scenario shall we.

1. You were recently in an accident, and had to have stiches up your forearm. Walking to work, this is a driveby shooting. The person next to you who has AIDS gets blasted, your nice big wound on the arm gets sprayed with this persons blood. Bang, you (might) have aids.

How about a more likely scenario:

2. You take a nice walk in the park, oh damn, you just trod on a used needle lying hidden in the grass, quick trip to the docs, congrats, you've got hiv. A few weeks/months/years later, it progesses into aids...

Accidental infection could happen to anyone, anytime. To say "it will never affect me" is arrogant to say the least. You can be the fittest person in the world, eat healthy, live healthy, but if you get it, it will beat you. That's reality. That's a known fact.

For the drug abusers and rapists etc etc, I have no sympathy. BUT, how about the children who catch it off their mum while in the womb? Or the people who accidentally get it from sheer dumb luck?

Even if it's only one person per year, doesn't that warrant we develop a cure? Why let a few scumbags prevent the truely innocent from being cured and able to live a normal life once again?

I think you might want to do a bit more research in the scientific journals. There are samples of HIV/AIDs that are much older than the 1969 date. And you might want to look at the immunodeficiency viruses in the African primates and in particular the evidence showing strains of that virus going strong long before the Paleozoic.

And then you might find it interesting to read up on the history of disease; how it can nearly destroy and then weaken and how viruses mutate to jump between species and some of the conditions present that cause this.

And you might want to do some more reading on genetics and the many, many different types of cancers and what we know about them.

Originally posted by CorinthasHowever.. IF the US did make AIDS it will be one of the hardest points to prove.

Ahh... a little reading up on "Patient Zero" and his predecessors might enlighten you in this area.

Considering that the first recorded AIDS case was in the 1950's, the US Military and its $10million would have had to construct not only HIV, but also a time machine.

All of this has been looked at; and AIDS didn't poof into existence one day, no.

But it's definitely not normal, no other virus behaves this way, the mutation rate for HIV is deleriously higher than any other known disease causing agent... mutation rates in younger viruses are, almost without exception, higher.

... and the fact that the US government did want to research the exact same type of organism...

... but I agree, the implications are so profound that it would be silly to expect people to just jump on board. You'd have to study some culture. Speaking of those scientific journals... you know that there is politics abound in those works, doctors who have researched it for years come out left and right every year against the accepted paradigm about HIV, and not for no reason. They obviously see something they don't like.

I'd listen to a dozen doctors who have very little public visibility over 1, possibly 2 articles that deal with the exact same issue out of a popular medical magazine, because they are no different from the media. Everything that gets into the public via one of those outlets has got to match what the governments say, after all, they don't want to be viewed as seditious...

I'm fully convinced that they modified a virus, or spliced together 2 viruses, that already existed to their own ends. If something close to what they were looking for could be found in nature that would be the best place to start when attempting to design "a new infective micro-organism, one that could differ in several important aspects from any known disease causing organism, in that it might be refractory to the immunological and theraputic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease." If it was documented in 1950s, how is being refractory to the immune system an important difference from any known agent?

... and for an accident of nature, AIDS seems to be clearing away vast swaths of populations in third world countries to the benefit of the industrial world, seems that only the most looked down on cultures in this country seem to be affected. My, nature must have an agenda... nature must be taking sides. No, hogwash. It's very easy to debunk something, it's quite another thing to categorically disprove it...

[edit on 10/11/2004 by ironyWrit]

In the 1950's, neither the technology, or the technical know-how was available to create a virus. We could have developed bacterial agents at that time, but a virus is a different beast altogether. It is an order of magnitude more difficult to manipulate and observe than bacteria.

From reading the post I have heard
1 - There has been 3 documentaries on AIDS being a created virus and that Genocide is being commited by the USA.

2 - All of these documentaries are banned from being shown in the USA.

3 - This is the first time I have seen this evidence. example - Kissinger's quotes disturbed me deeply.

4 - Bush's refusal to sign the International Criminal Treaty makes this all the more curious.

considering that:

Does it matter if the USA made AIDS or not, if the rest of the world believes we did?

In other words... if the world believes we did, even if we didn't, this is a huge crisis for the USA. And a National Security threat!

It's no wonder to me why we have recently started acting so aggresive in the world.
Heck, if the world believes we created AIDS, then we are in danger... grave danger!! Even if we didn't do it!!

Does anyone understand what I am saying?







[edit on 12-10-2004 by kdx175]

It seems to me that if we had made it we would have released it in the middle east or possibly China or North Korea.

what would be the point in releasing it in Africa, a place we have shown LITTLE intrest in before?