PDA

View Full Version : AIDS Is Man Made Part 2?


LONDON!
08-03-2009, 02:07 PM
this is a crazy article from www.conspiracyplanet.com from an ex CIA agent

check these other threads too, onced you have the time
http://www.philaflava.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=82540&highlight=
http://www.philaflava.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=84440&highlight=





Biowar Conspiracy: CIA-Pentagon Labs Made HIV (1)
by SUE ARRIGO, M.D.

What I Remember about the HIV Virus from the CIA Documents

Having looked briefly at some of the internet material today, that I had never looked into before, I realized that several physicians figured out that AIDS was a Bio-warfare disease. I want to write down what I know from inside the CIA, as that is the best use of my time. Clearly, if I had more time to research it carefully, I could get rid of the more in the errors of the details that I give. But as I don't have confidence that I will live long after writing this letter to you, I will write quickly about things, knowing that the gist of it will be correct.

is black depression after being held in a CIA prison cell in the basement more than 2 months and tortured repeatedly..

I did go down and speak to him over the course of 3 meetings, each of 2-4 hours long. The CIA wanted me to convince him to be a good mind control slave, now that they had tortured him so very badly. They hoped that I, as a "successfully mentally adjusted" slave, could talk some sense into him. They valued his work and wanted him to help make yet another killer virus for them. The man was part black, unbeknownst to his captors, as he had passed for Caucasian. He was an eighth or a fourth black. He had a complete psychological block against selling Blacks down the river of death, which torture had not erased. He never told the torturers that he was part black and they never asked. I did not want the man to give up his conscience and respected his right to let the CIA kill him, rather that give in. My own case was not analogous; I was age 3 or 4 years old when the brainwashing and fracturing of my mind began. I survived by dissociating. He did not have that dubious but highly useful skill.

In any case, I listened to him as a courtesy, a last request of a natural born US citizen about to be executed by his government for his refusal to continue acting like a good Nazi. Much of his angst was over leaving behind a wife and children who would never know the truth.

The CIA was going to smear him as a homosexual when they reported his suicide of having drowned himself in the Potomac. This was not so long after the gay-AIDS scare broke into the US media. The CIA wanted to convince ordinary gay men that being HIV positive was such a certain and horrible death that a quick suicide was every sane persons immediate response. That was because AIDS was slow to kill people and the Cabal wanted people to die sooner of it. I had been shown the news article the CIA intended to give to the press. They had shown it to him to terrorize him into compliance and it was in his file. The CIA did not put his body in the Potomac, they saved themselves the effort of recovering it. One of their pathologists wrote up the falsified autopsy.

As I listened to the researcher's tale of grief, I inadvertently learned a lot about the development of the virus. At the time, I had no plans for that information; my report was on the attempts I made to get him to return to work. I had to document that I had made such attempts in order not to be tortured myself. As it was, I got tortured anyway for failing to get him back to work. So, in essence, I was tortured at that time for refusing to make the Bio-warfare based Final Solution go forward. It would not be the first time, nor the last.

What he told me was that he had spent 4 years of his life making the HIV virus into a Bio-warfare germ. He did not go much into the details of that research, and I did not ask. It was his particular expertise in making the virus virulent that had kept him alive for the 2 months. The Lab had no one to replace him yet. They had set up a partial lab in the CIA's basement and required him to keep doing further work, between torture sessions. He was not working with live viruses. His work involved making new genetic sequences to insert into viruses. Those genes were needed to make the virus spread better. It was this that tore at his soul later, knowing that he had made the HIV virus spread about 3 times as well by a gene he modified. It was not a simple modification, it required making a sequence of about 7 nucleotides and adding it to the specific gene in question at the right location. The CIA and the Lab wanted him to make a gene that could be added to any virus to do what he had done for the HIV virus. This was what they hoped to force him to do, be it in the CIA's basement under torture, or at the Lab "voluntarily". He never did make it for them. He was tortured to death for dragging his heels.


A Second CIA Report I Wrote Touching on HIV Development

This assignment also came to me because the CIA had few mind controlled physicians. They hoped that my mind control would secure the secrecy of what they asked me to do. It did secure it for decades, and it is only as I write that I find out what was stored as memory from decades past. This assignment was to falsify an autopsy. The adult male corpse was HIV positive and the CIA pathology dept. refused to do the autopsy. I was given the job, one that I had to do or be tortured. It was then that I developed a sudden interest in the HIV virus and how it was transmitted.

Before I went down to do the autopsy well enough to falsify it, I reviewed what was known about the virus from a CIA's file on it. That included information on how much it had cost to make, when it had first become "operational", what Operations it had been used in, and a review of their successes in % of targets killed and time until death. That was the information that the DDO and others needed to plan ops.

I spent about 15 minutes reading that file at that time, and several hours reading and taking notes on it about 2 years later. I want to write down separately what I recall from those two times as my understanding of AIDS and the context of HIV development changed drastically between the two readings.

The second time was after I had been out to the US's Army's Biological and Chemical Warfare Division to collect documents and before I wrote my report to Webster recommending its closure. At this time I was specifically looking for information on my risk on doing an autopsy on an HIV positive body. But as I was reading the file, I did notice some of the material. Here is what my "take was on it" at the time.

First, I was shocked that the CIA had put this virus into operations without apparently having a vaccine for it. Second, I was shocked that it was being used not to assassinate a particular person as a target, but with the intention to kill widely. For example, the CIA file detailed several operations in which HIV infected prostitutes were supplied to African black troops of the "opposition" and even to their own native black troops.

That certainly made it clear that they were not in Angola/Africa "to win a war", but to kill blacks. Furthermore, the operations were considered to be largely unsuccessful because the transmission rates of the HIV virus through heterosexual activity were low. The immediate death rate due to the operations was essentially nil; one black man got killed in a fight over a prostitute. The CIA did not do HIV testing of those they had tried to infect in those operations, so it gave me no clue as to the infectivity of the virus.

Another operation, again in Angola, I believe, was the use of the threat of the virus—no actually virus was used. A black opposition leader was told by the (covert CIA) physician that he had HIV virus, that it had made him sterile and was causing him to get testicular cancer. He was told to have an immediate bilateral removal of his testicles as his only hope of survival. [Note: testicular cancer affects mostly young males and the treatment is testicular removal of the affected gonad(s).] The CIA planned to use his stay at the hospital to mind control him by removing the testicles by crushing them first in place without anaesthesia. The Nazi death camps had also sterilized people without anaesthesia as a form of torture-mind control. It was one of the CIA's standard operation procedures. The man did not show up at the hospital later for the surgery, for whatever reason. The CIA tried that a few more times with about a 50% success rate on a dozen black men in that region, before the scam was too exposed and no longer worked. Another operation in the file at that time was one involving a black woman, the wife of a leader in Africa. The CIA had managed to infect her with the HIV virus and was waiting for her to transmit it to her husband; that had not happened yet and after over a year of waiting the CIA was losing hope. That was all the information on transmission of the virus that I could get out of that file—it was virtually useless to me.

I was saddened that the information I needed which was the number of physicians getting it from doing a single autopsy was not in the file. I made a note to the DDO recommending that further data on the risk to physicians be acquired from the Lab, and how to protect them from it. I also suggested that it not been used in operations, if the CIA's regular pathologists were unwilling to due the autopsy up to falsification standards. The reason I cited for that was that I was not always in DC when an autopsy was needed. A moral argument never worked at the CIA, so one always had to give some other plausible reason not to go along with what was blatantly immoral. By that time I had already done about 2-dozen autopsy falsifications at the White House under Reagan-Bush. Some of the autopsies I ended up doing were on CIA officers killed to prevent them from testifying to Congress in the Iran Contra Scandal. That is, they were interviewed first by the Bush, Sr. loyal CIA people and even by Bush, Sr. himself at the White House and quickly "dispatched" before they could testify. In most cases, it was not necessary to kill them directly as the White House and their bodies could be run through the CIA or the Pentagon or the Walter Reed Hospital morgues. Most people do not even know about the White House morgue. It is called a Meat Locker and some of the time it had sides of beef hanging in it while I worked. In that case, it was officially a "cold room". It was always kept pretty cold anyway. [See Al Martin's The Conspirators. He said that 400 CIA officers that he knew of died under clouded circumstances right before they were due to give testimony at the Iran-Contra Hearings.]

That CIA file on AIDS in the DDO's "Special Operational Tools" Library was not something that CIA analysts had access to, except by special authorization. So, I was surprised to frequently find one CIA analyst's name in the log in the front of it of those who had read it. I paid him a visit after not finding what I wanted in the file, in the hopes that he knew the information that I wanted. I spent almost two hours talking to him before I went down to the morgue.

He was a CIA analyst devoted specifically to making sure that the CIA was using the HIV virus most efficiently to kill people of color in its black ops. He was a racist of the John Bircher type and he called blacks "niggers", though I asked him politely not to in my presence. His motivation in doing his work was abundantly clear—to kill as many blacks as possible, as quickly as possible. He did know a lot about HIV and the risk of killing black people with it. He had written a layperson's pamphlet on the dangers of killing black people infected by HIV. It was officially supposed to be a guide for CIA officers in Africa. But when I looked at it the type of language in it made me think it had been written to disseminate to the Ku Klux Klan. When I asked him about that, he didn't deny that. He quickly amended his bragging to include that the manual had been officially declassified by the CIA prior to his passing it out at the White Supremicist Meetings he said he went to. When I asked him what meetings he meant, he said the Council on Foreign Relations. I said that I didn't see why they needed to know the hands on details of the best way to kill blacks, such as to wear goggles, gloves, and a meat cutters plastic apron underneath a white shower curtain outer robe covering the face. He said that they did need it, because they had a special "After Hours Club" for terrorizing the black neighbourhoods in DC. I suggested that it was hardly likely given that this was in the 1980's that the KKK was still operating. He assured me that I was dead wrong and invited me to join them at their once a month "Get a Man" fundraiser. This was an invitation that I definitely wanted to miss without being very obvious about it. I said that I was not a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and so couldn't go. He allowed as how there was a special exemption for CIA officers. That gave me an excuse, since I wasn't a CIA officer on the books, to ask whether there were other exemptions. He pulled out a rule-book written by the Council on Foreign Relations and looked at it. There were other exemptions listed, FBI and local DC police. They were allowed to participate in the monthly man-hunt, if they agreed to also get paid for it on their regular salary time. He said that enough security always came out for the event; that no private security needed to be hired for it. I asked him if people still wore the white KKK pointed top robes. He said that they were most often going out in the Black Robes. He showed me a picture of them. They had a white cross on the forehead and a Skull and Bones underneath that or on the chest, or over the gonads. I said, "Gee, that looks like no one would want to be so blatant. He assured me that most men went out in the gonad sign post display of "I want to rape you" outfit. He pulled a picture out of the file to prove it. It showed about 18 black peak hooded figures, all but two of them with the Skull and Bones emblem on the gonads, one with it large in the chest, and one elsewhere, I think on the forehead. He said the one with it on the chest was the leader of the group, but that was not always the case as not all leaders wanted to take the greatest risk of being shot at. In the gonad covering position, it was possible to gather the emblem into a fold of the robe and hide it. That was not the case in the chest and forehead versions.



I then said something along the lines of "those guys must be the real losers on the Council on Foreign Relations". He frowned and then he started telling me who was in the photo from reading off the back of it where they had signed their "get well messages" to him. The photo had been a card taken to him in the hospital when he missed one of the monthly meetings. I asked him if he always went. He said no that one was allowed to go on more than one a year unless one was a really bigwig. How big? I asked him. "Like the President", he said. "President of a company, the Council on Foreign Relations, or the country?", I asked him. "President of the country, probably," he said. I asked him if he knew of any cases where a sitting President had done it more than one. He said that he knew of the President taking 3 turns in one year, in the recent years. I asked him what it was like to hunt a human to get him to talk more. He said it was more fun than a "duck hunt".



I then enquired about their methodology of hunting a man in a city the size on DC. He said that they picked a black person by name, and used satellites and sophisticated equipment to track him through the city as he left work. Then after their meeting they went out to a bar and got loaded. Then they went out and "painted the town red". I objected and said that he had said one man. He said that one got more points if one killed that man, but that one could get points for killing any black person, less for a Hispanic, or Oriental. He pulled out the scoring sheet. It gave more points for killing with a knife, and more points for biting into the heart. I asked him about the risk of his turning HIV from that. He said the virus was safe for a "blow job" and for "big cherry picking" (the euphemism for cutting the heart out of the chest to perform the ritual cannibalism that supposedly allowed you to gain the personal power of the victim). He quoted me a 2% risk of getting AIDS over a lifetime of doing this. I asked him how that figure was arrived at. He pulled out of his files the scientific looking paper out of Ft. Detrick on it. I asked him if he had read it. Then he pulled at a layperson's manual on the Skull and Bones ritual and how to do it. Not much of it was on the medical risks; they seemed to be downplaying that part. There the risk was listed as 2% if it was the person's "regular sexual outlet". I took that to mean about a 3 times a week habit. But the medical style of report from the Biological Warfare Lab figured the 2% risk from a once a year cannibalism of a person with known HIV positive status. I wondered how they had arrived at that figure, but didn't want to call them up and ask.



Later, after reading that material in my office, I returned and asked him about that discrepancy. He said that he had written the manual based on a talk that he heard. He figured that since the members of the Council on Foreign Relations could usually only go on one DC Man hunt a year that it was fair to list it that way. I pointed out that they might have "extracurricular" habits. He then launched into a series of stories of DC VIPs "going it alone" and how hard that made in on the DC police and the FBI. It was hard on them because they often forgot to call in their hunting ground area in advance to have all the police in the area the right ones. He said some of them were in the habit of getting drunk and then starting their hunting in an impromptu fashion, sometimes before even leaving the bar.



He told me one cover-up horror story in which the VIP was not wearing a mask and because of his position in the White House was recognized by about 20 people as he shot a boy and then sodomized him as he was dying on the street under a street light! He said it took the CIA and FBI a couple of months to kill all the witnesses and most of them were not even black. The VIP was coming out of a DC Party on an estate in a nice section of town. The fallout was truly massive. A lot of DC socialites got listed as committing suicide in short order. It was remembered in the CIA as the Summer of Blonde Suicides. He said it wasn't all bad; a handful of men got "new wives". I did look into it a bit later, mainly by asking others in the hallway to tell me. To lead into the conversation, I asked them about how hard all that overtime was for them back then. Some of the men in the Dept of Ops (renamed Plans) said that is was "a blast". Others of them said it was a PR nightmare for the CIA. I asked why. They said because the VIP was known to be associated with the CIA and that a lot of the blame flowed down hill. I asked him what he meant by that. He said that hits were put out against the CIA officers who didn't cover up their hits on the socialites "up to standards". He complained that was unfair given that that White House VIP had dropped his drawers and sodomized the 9-year old kid right outside to front gate of the estate. I asked him if there was a "ritual" going on that night. He said yes, but a smart man in the intelligence business should know the difference between inside a gate behind the house, and outside the gate on the street. I later found out that the excuse the VIP gave was that he had let the kid go after terrifying him in order to have the fun of the chase. Then the kid had gotten away for him and gotten to the street before he had caught up with him. I did look at the cover-up file, the file on the incident that lists all the loose ends in order to cover them up. The VIP's blood alcohol level was safe to drive on; it could not be used as an excuse for the murder. Whether he was on CIA designer drugs was not mentioned. I later heard that they pulled one drug from the bag of drugs that they used at those parties. Whether he had taken such an agent voluntarily or at all was not in the file. Given his position in the power structure, it was unlikely that he was man-handled to force a drug into him. But drugs were often added to the food and punch as well.



The HIV positive man that I did the autopsy on was a homosexual CIA officer who doubled as a Vice Squad cop on the DC streets. His file showed that he was a pedophile who was stealing kids from bathrooms, if they were good at giving him a blow-job with his pistol cocked to their temple. He had "accidentally pulled the trigger once too often" and caused the CIA's clean up teams to come out to public bathrooms. The man was into his next kid and still getting a blow job when Clean Up came. One of the clean-up team members had perhaps taken things in hand and shot him with the intention to kill him. But the shot had been poorly aimed. The man shooting him wounded him in the thigh and killed the kid behind the thigh. It is possible that the Clean Up man thought that it was unfair for the Vice Squad man to have a witness in the bathroom that might be able to identify the Clean Up people. In any case, the wounded CIA officer was taken by the Clean Up crew back to the CIA's infirmary. There he underwent surgery. But with an entrance and an exit wound, he was not released for fear his girlfriend would know he was involved in a shoot out and report him to police not under CIA control. He was put in a prison cell in the CIA's basement, while his fate was decided. In the end, he was tortured, though the reason for that was unclear from the record. Meanwhile, his HIV test came back positive. He "died from suicide" officially, but the torture record extended over several pages. I did not read the transcript of the interrogation, as I had no "need to know".



He did have a large hole in his chest made by a knife and the heart was missing. That meant that I tried to track done who had likely bitten into it, to warn them that that 2% risk might be per incident, not per lifetime. It was a bit awkward, because it was not a single person but a group of about 7 men in the CIA that had eaten that heart raw as a "bonding" ceremony. They were the men that had tortured him. They were not all torturers officially at the CIA. One man had come down from the VIP's section on the 7th floor, and one from the DDO's office. I managed to get them to request the information I wanted from the Bio-warfare lab on the risk of "contact" with HIV infected "meat". That information did not come until some weeks later. I did not see it for about 3 months, until I returned to the CIA and my HIV result had come back negative. So, I felt fairly safe by the time I read it. Their report was largely made up nonsense. They really didn't know the risk but were afraid to admit it. That 2% had no scientific basis. I wrote a memo to the DDO and the CIA infirmary, asking for the Bio-warfare Lab to "tighten up their reporting". That did not make me popular with them. They were not in the habit of having any peer review of their reports.



There was one other minor report that I wrote bearing on the CIA's use of HIV virus in an African war zone. This was another prisoner case in the CIA's basement. The man was not known to be HIV positive but his result had not come back yet. He was considered by the CIA to be at "high risk" of being HIV positive because he was a black from Angola that had been one of "their own", a CIA agent. He had fallen from grace at the CIA due to taking a $2 bribe from a KGB officer. No mention was made in his file of the tens of thousands of dollars he had taken in bribes from the CIA. He was most nearly in the "puppet leader" category in the CIA. He had been something like the Minister of Defense in his country, again, I think that he was from Angola. The CIA wanted to kill him quickly to fly his body back to that country to plant it for the suicide report. They were holding off killing him because they were waiting for his HIV report. They were worried about eating his heart based on my previous warnings that it was unlikely to be as safe of the Lab made out. They wanted me to write up the autopsy findings before he was dead! I pointed out that his risk of being HIV positive should be known to them because they had done the experiments in that area. They said, no that was not the case because the file in the DDO's Special Operational Tools Library was only the tip of the iceberg. They said that the CIA had released the HIV virus into the war in so many dozens of ways, that no one anymore had a clue as to which groups were the targets. Some people had been targeted more than once, and even more than three times, e.g. they were labour union leaders, and members of a particular political party, and had turned out for a demonstration, etc.. I ended up writing up an autopsy on a live man, and they ended up sending him back to his country to use some more. One of the CIA officers had given him a copy of the autopsy, perhaps to frighten him. He got drunk one night and passed it around a local bar. The CIA killed him for that. The fact that prior to that he had killed innocent people by the village full, raped women, and sodomized young boys was irrelevant to the CIA, because that was what they wanted him to do.



Two years later when I read the same file in the Operational Tools library, that HIV file was much fatter, it was in 3 volumes. Knowing this time that it was the tip of the iceberg on the CIA's use of HIV, I asked the main file room to send me up their HIV related files. That came up on 3 trolleys—chalk full of files. The DDO accused me of trying to get out of useful work by reading. I had already spent a couple of hours on the 3 volumes, I spent about another 4 on the trolleys. By then I realized that I might someday need the information in them in my mind. So while reading them I took notes. Often that helps me recall things again later. The operational files now said in the front of them in an official overview of HIV as an operational tool. That said HIV was of little use in operations except those directed towards long-term population reduction. By then it had been tried in a wide variety of location including on the Eskimos, American Indians on reservations, and even on South Sea Islanders. It had also been used on US citizens in David Koresh like settings. Children had been used to try to infect black leaders in the US with it, and even their own physicians had sometimes been recruited for that purpose. In one notable case, an important black man, along the lines of a famous sports hero had been rammed by a car, and given the virus on the ER to discredit him as a hero for black children to look up to. He himself would be unlikely to ever know how he had gotten it. It was a move to demoralize the Black community and deprive them of moral heroes. There was another scam as well that I want to mention in passing because it was along the same lines of "damn lies" for propaganda purposes. In this case, the CIA had infected a number of black and Hispanic Miss America contestants with HIV, to make it appear that they could not be virgins. In the end analysis, the CIA was not able to get the media to print the story because the corporate sponsors didn't want the Miss America pageant sullied. But, per the CIA's file, about 20 girls had been infected in that year out of about 100 when one included replacement girls. Others have reported on the fact that the CIA took a large interest in the Miss America contests. [Aside: In some cases, the CIA tried to mind control some of them as sex slaves and as breeders for them. VIP's sometimes got a night with such a young woman at the time that she and her husband were trying to conceive a child. The CIA's amnesia induction methods were used to prevent the woman from knowing that the pregnancy was not due to her husband. The VIP wanted to have beautiful children. Those could then be stolen back, usually after age 3 and raised as Presidential Model slaves or White House male slaves.]



I want to mention a "concentration camp" that the CIA had in Africa in Rhodesia, if I remember correctly. It was a camp to study HIV transmission. It was a terminal experiment and it had ended a couple of months before I read the files. Not all of the autopsies of the victims were in the file yet. That was not true of the Jonestown experiment—that record was complete by the time I was reading these files. Jonestown files made up most of one trolley full of files. I did not have time to read it all, I read a review by an analyst whom I trusted to be fairly objective. He said in that review of the Jonestown experiment that much of the utility of the experiment was lost due to the experiment being terminated two weeks too early, due to "necessity". That appeared to be the arrival of Congressman Ryan. The CIA had planned to kill him but their hand had been forced into it prematurely. Instead of an arranged accident, the murder was "blatant and unprofessional". Congressman Ryan had returned to his plane before there had been time to rig it to explode after take-off. It was a technical problem and a CIA officer was expelled from his job "with extreme prejudice" for that snafu.



The point of the CIA experiments at Jonestown were not really what Meier's suspected. He wrote in his book that the experiments were mind control and to develop AIDS as a Bio-warfare weapon. The Lab had already done studies in Africa along those lines. Not that they were well-controlled. They were done on villages where people were free to migrate in and out of them and did so. The studies that required the high barbed wire enclosed concentration camp settings involved torture and sexual perversions perpetrated on people against their will with foreign objects inserted in their orifices. The foreign objects were modifications of cheap common household items. They were designed to be used in place of French ticklers—but instead of increasing pleasure they caused bleeding and pain. In some cases, they ruptured bladder, rectum, or vagina. It was a dumb idea of some pervert and it hurt. It did increase the transmission rate of sexually transmitted diseases. It did not catch on as a fad in Jonestown, people did not want to have pain with intercourse.

That appeared to be a Bonesmen's fetish, not a black or indigenous person's fetish. The CIA ended up torturing people and mind controlling them brutally to try to get them to adopt this practice and propagate it as a way of spreading HIV. It didn't work.

There were a number of variations of this theme that were tried at Jonestown and in that concentration camp in Africa. None of them were useful nor worth repeating. It was a testimony to the perversity of US leaders that two such concentration camp loads of people were expended in terminal experiments of this kind.

ALCATRAZ
08-03-2009, 03:00 PM
is aids really man made

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 03:46 PM
yes it is fam

it started from the mainstream californian eugenics movement among the social, medical, ecomonic & the US goverment elite in the early 20th century which inspired hitler, then morphed into the population control movement amongst the social, ecomonic, US goverment and worldwide medical elite after world war 2, because of the heat eugenics got wit the whole hitler situation

the most recent paper trail of AIDS is first the CIA operation MK NAOMI which was the basis for the the US goverment, the CIA wit the National Instistute Of Health to start the US Special Cancer Virus Program(1962-1978) were they created a virus wit which human beings have no immunity for(as requested by the US military in 1969 in the US Department Of Defense Appropriations for 1970 document from tuesday, july 1st, 1969
called House Resolution 15090 Part 5, page 129, here's a link to it
http://www.geocities.com/kidhistory/edocs/aidstop.htm?200513%A0, i have this document in my possession too) by puting animal viruses into the human genome, its outlined in there 1971 logic flowchart(i have in my possession) and 15 progress reports that they released every year from the programs start in 1962 to its end in 1978. Then they would field test it, as outlined in there logic flowchart


they field tested it through the WHO smallpox & the US Center For Disease & Control hepatitis b vaccination programs in the late 70's, early 80s in Africa, the US, Haiti & Brazil

here's a photograph of the virus the US Special Cancer Virus Program was working on they called ESP-1 that looks identical to the AIDS virus
http://www.boydgraves.com/news/101102.html

Wu-Tang Forum Internet Poster
08-03-2009, 07:16 PM
No it isn't, and there is no evidence that suggests it is.

Mankind does not have the ability to create a virus.

Viruses are naturally occurring.

It has also been traced back to monkeys.

It started in African monkeys, and was passed on, probably a long time ago, to smaller tribes of people.

At first, nobody noticed because these tribes were isolated and did not have long life expectancies anyway.

LORD NOSE
08-03-2009, 07:51 PM
It started in African monkeys, and was passed on, probably a long time ago, to smaller tribes of people.

At first, nobody noticed because these tribes were isolated and did not have long life expectancies anyway.



No it isn't, and there is no evidence that suggests it is.




No it isn't, and there is no evidence that suggests it is.

Wu-Tang Forum Internet Poster
08-03-2009, 08:01 PM
Sunny, please don't be childish. "I know you are but what am I"...

THere has been extensive scientific research, including observation and DNA testing that virtually prove what I have said.

It has been genetically proven to originally be a simian virus that mutated to affect humans.

WHy does this bother you? Are you just being contrary for the sake of being contrary?

LORD NOSE
08-03-2009, 08:08 PM
No it isn't, and there is no evidence that suggests it is.

THere has been extensive scientific research, including observation and DNA testing that virtually prove what I have said.

It has been genetically proven to originally be a simian virus that mutated to affect humans.


No it isn't, and there is no evidence that suggests it is.


No it isn't, and there is no evidence that suggests it is.

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 08:13 PM
yes it is man made

if you know anything basic about retro-viruses, the way they mutate(like the common cold), if it was man made it would have wiped out the human race a long time ago, people in africa in the villages have been living amongst monkeys for centuries, since the beggining of time, since the bible days, its just basic common sense that a virus like AIDS would have wiped out the planet
a very long time ago

the first mass outbreak of cases started in the cities in the states, like new york, the cities of africa, haiti and brazil at the same time, do the research

there had to be a mass seeding process, thats seeding process was the WHO(World health org)who's smallpox & the US goverment center of disease and control's hepatitis b vaccination program which occured in these area's around the same time

explain the US goverment documents i've linked up top which i also have in my possession(if anyone wants a copy, pm me wit your details)

also explain why theirs a man made nazi icelandic sheep disease called visna in the AIDS dna?

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 08:14 PM
I believe that AIDS is not man-made.

I do not know all the facts, nor does anyone, but I am putting my faith into the belieft that it is NOT man made.

You may put yourse into the contrary.

ALCATRAZ
08-03-2009, 08:14 PM
sunny what is your opinion

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 08:16 PM
yes it is man made

if you know anything basic about retro-viruses, the way they mutate(like the common cold), if it was man made it would have wiped out the human race a long time ago, people in africa in the villages have been living amongst monkeys for centuries, since the beggining of time, since the bible days, its just basic common sense that a virus like AIDS would have wiped out the planet
a very long time ago




How qualified are you to make such a statement. Please post your medical credentials so I can give this statement more credibility.

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 08:18 PM
i'm a AIDS researcher since 2002

Wu-Tang Forum Internet Poster
08-03-2009, 08:22 PM
yes it is man made

if you know anything basic about retro-viruses, the way they mutate(like the common cold), if it was man made it would have wiped out the human race a long time ago, people in africa in the villages have been living amongst monkeys for centuries, since the beggining of time, since the bible days, its just basic common sense that a virus like AIDS would have wiped out the planet
a very long time ago

the first mass outbreak of cases started in the cities in the states, like new york, the cities of africa, haiti and brazil at the same time, do the research

there had to be a mass seeding process, thats seeding process was the WHO(World health org)who's smallpox & the US goverment center of disease and control's hepatitis b vaccination program which occured in these area's around the same time

explain the US goverment documents i've linked up top which i also have in my possession(if anyone wants a copy, pm me wit your details)

also explain why theirs a man made nazi icelandic sheep disease called visna in the AIDS dna?


That does not make any sense. YOu can't just use specious reasoning and logical fallacies to link non-related events.

MAN CANNOT CREATE A VIRUS.

By definition, viruses are naturally occurring.

THere have been countless hours of independent scientific research done by scientists from all over the world, and they all lead to the same conclusion.

AIDS is not a mystery.

And not an attack on your character, but I do not believe that YOU have access to secret government documents.

No doubt the government is shady, but this is an instance where there is no logical link between the government and AIDS.

WHen bad things happen that people do not understand, a certain segment of the population chooses to blame the government because that is easier than doing actual knowledge.

Then, they create "Evidence"

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 08:24 PM
i'm a AIDS researcher since 2002

what the fuck does that mean?

I have taken an interest in AIDS too since 1993 when movies like ANd the Band PLayed On and Philadelphia came out.

So i guess i got more experience than you.

But I digress....its obvious neither of us are medical doctors specializing in the field of AIDS.

So for you to make such a statement is highly suspect, and I cannot just take it as truth without some kind of evidence backing it.

Wu-Tang Forum Internet Poster
08-03-2009, 08:26 PM
sunny what is your opinion

What is your opinion?

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 08:29 PM
@MasterDanMuhammad
explain these US goverment documents?

the US Department Of Defense Appropriations for 1970 document from tuesday, july 1st, 1969 called House Resolution 15090 Part 5, page 129, here's a link to it
http://www.geocities.com/kidhistory/edocs/aidstop.htm?200513%A0




here's a photograph of the virus the US Special Cancer Virus Program was working on they called ESP-1 that looks identical to the AIDS virus
http://www.boydgraves.com/news/101102.html

could you explain these

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 08:35 PM
I've seen them. I've seen wiht Boyd Graves thing before.

YOU explain them. IN detail.

YOUR the one making the claim.

The problem with KTL is that people make these outlandish claims and do not back them up with anything.


Im going to need more evidence that this. ITs not enough...One mans opinion about this.

I have looked at these...and with a very open mind, but Im afraid that it still solves nothing.

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 08:38 PM
Furthermore...are you a doctor who can analyze electron microscope findings??

Is Boyd Graves...said he was a lawyer and and AIDS patient. But not a doctor.

Look im not saying he is wrong, but this is not clear cut evidence.

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 08:42 PM
what the fuck does that mean?



it means during my research i have gotten extensive information from respected professors like professor Donald W Scott MA, MSC, Dr.Leonard G Horowitz DMD, MA, MPH and a lawyer who took the US goverment to court for the creation of the AIDS virus called Boyd Ed Graves

it means i've got 'documents' to back up my claims, not opions, but conclusions from these documents, if you say 1 + 1 = 4 just because the western mainstream establishment says it 4, but you have there own documents plus wit basic common sense dosen't make 1 + 1 =4, not matter how underground the answer is, its still 1 + 1=1

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 08:50 PM
IM not claiming anything. Your the one making claims.

All I said was that from what I've read from both sides, it is pretty inconclusive, so right now, im undecided but leaning toward it was not man made.

Documents are nice when they work in your favor, but how many documents have been fudged thruout the years??? Huh?

How many false reports written up?

Unless you have complete evidence it is just a claim and you do not have the be all end all evidence.

Nor does the other side.

It could possibly be somethign different from both...you cannnot say yes or no because nobody knows.


As of now....the search continues.


Elaborate on how you have gotten information from these two professor.....do you know them personally?
Your sources are very important to me.

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 08:55 PM
how is a US goverment document which was obtained from a US library fudge

you can get the US Department Of Defense Appropriations for 1970 document from tuesday, july 1st, 1969 called House Resolution 15090 Part 5, page 129, by requesting it from by the freedom of information act

its all above board

these documents were all obtained from US librarys, there kosher

i have two of the doctors numbers, boyd passed away two weeks ago

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 09:03 PM
U think documents haven't been fudged before??

Thats all im saying.

I've seen what your presenting already.


There is also a site where you can see the patent for the cure for AIDS and that Gallo bought the patent or something to that nature.

LORD NOSE
08-03-2009, 09:03 PM
sunny what is your opinion


i see it like this -

if they can put small pox in blankets to try and wipe out the native/original man in the past, they can manipulate a virus and spread it in africa -

but i don't know - i for sure don't believe the story of africans mating with monkeys -


the tuskegee incident also - where they targeted and poisoned black families with syphilis, suggest that it is not beneath them to pull off this whole aids thing

ALCATRAZ
08-03-2009, 09:05 PM
What is your opinion?
nigga i don't got one yet

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 09:06 PM
for you it may be about that.

Biological warfare has been done to eachother...whether it was catapulting dead plague infested bodies over castle walls or using mustard and chlorine gas on eachother in WW1.....its been done before.

Thats not the question.

The question is, is AIDS man made. Did they or can they actually do this.

LORD NOSE
08-03-2009, 09:11 PM
for you it may be about that.

Biological warfare has been done to eachother...whether it was catapulting dead plague infested bodies over castle walls or using mustard and chlorine gas on eachother in WW1.....its been done before.

Thats not the question.

The question is, is AIDS man made. Did they or can they actually do this.

calm down son - its a discussion about aids - that's all it is

food for thought
08-03-2009, 09:19 PM
Yxfl2-wDMzI




UK journalist Edward Hooper who read a (subsequently retracted) 1992 article in Rolling Stone magazine by freelance journalist Tom Curtis put forward the theory that AIDS was inadvertently caused in the late 1950's in the Belgian Congo by Hilary Koprowski's research into a polio vaccine. Hooper travelled to Africa for 7 years of research into the subject, before publishing a book, The River, in which he alleged that an experimental oral polio vaccine prepared in chimpanzee kidneys or blood was the route through which the SIV mutated into HIV, some time between 1957 to 1959. The supplemental evidence collected since the publication of The River culminated in the production of the film The Origin Of Aids [1].


BBC

'Scientists started Aids epidemic'

A polio vaccine using tissue from primates could have been behind the leap made by the human immunodeficiency virus - HIV - from apes and moneys to humans, a new book claims.

Newsnight
The idea is not novel - a version of the theory was published in the early 1990s and knocked down - but the new book sets out the facts in more detail.

Called The River, it offers evidence that scientists' good intentions may have led to the virus gaining a hold on the human population.

Samples of the vaccine under suspicion still exist, and the head of the World Health Organization's (WHO) polio eradication programme has called for it to be tested, if only to put the theory to rest once and for all.

The theory also alarms those who believe the future of medicine is likely to include xenotransplantation, where organs from one animal - such as a pig - are placed in a human.

Gaining strength

Professor Bill Hamilton, of Oxford University's department of zoology, said: "This theory, rather sadly, has gone from strength to strength. It's not proven by any means, but it's looking very strong."

Dr Hilary Koprowski, a doctor in Philadelphia produced the vaccine in the 1950s when the race was on to prevent a disease that was as feared in its time as cancer or Aids now.

Edward Hooper, author of The River, points to a correlation between the sites of mass inoculations using Dr Koprowski's vaccine in the late 1950s and the first recorded cases of Aids in the 1960s.

Three parts of the Democratic Republic of Congo - at the time the Belgian Congo and subsequently Zaire - were particularly affected.

These were Rouzizi Valley, Lubudi and Leopoldville - where the first case of the disease was detected in a blood sample from 1959.

Circumstantial evidence

Dr Harry Hull, head of the WHO's polio eradication programme, was sceptical.

"This theory requires first that the vaccine be contaminated, that the conditions be right for the propagation of the virus and that it then go into children and grow," he said.

"It also does not make sense in that there were other children who received this vaccine who didn't contract it - so the question is why would it just be the children in the Congo and not elsewhere?"

He called for remaining samples of the vaccine to be examined to settle the question.

Mr Hooper stood by his theory, although he admitted he could not be certain it was the truth.

"It is still a hypothesis, but I consider that the circumstantial evidence that is put forward now is compelling," he said.

The wrong monkey

Critics of the theory say that the virus originated in chimpanzees, but Dr Koprowski has always said the primate material used in the vaccine came from Asiatic monkeys.

However, Mr Hooper said he had evidence to the contrary.

"I have individual testimony from three or four people that these chimps were used, the kidneys were excised from these chimps and sent back not only to Philadelphia where Koprowski was working but also to Belgium where they were used in cell cultures."

But Professor Preston Marks, a senior scientist at the Aaron Diamond Aids Research Centre, in New Orleans, has yet to be convinced.

"The first problem is that we have an oral vaccine that would not transmit SIV (the chimpanzee form of HIV)," he said.

"That's compounded by the fact that these viruses have existed in monkeys for millions of years, and the virus never crossed over."

Eating chimps

In that time, monkeys and chimpanzees had been hunted for food, he said.

"One's mucous membranes and mouth would be exposed to the blood and tissue of these chimpanzees and monkeys while chopping and processing them for the table.

"There has to be something else, something additional, besides oral exposure to minimal amounts of SIV."

The WHO stressed that all polio vaccines currently in use are rigorously screened and are safe.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/431167.stm


http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/dissent/documents/AIDS/Curtis92.html



info is out there.

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 09:23 PM
U think documents haven't been fudged before??

Thats all im saying.

I've seen what your presenting already.


There is also a site where you can see the patent for the cure for AIDS and that Gallo bought the patent or something to that nature.

here's the patent for it
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s
1=5676977.PN.&OS=PN/5676977&RS=PN/5676977

gallo(who was the cheif case officer for the US Special Virus Cancer Program that created the AIDS virus) just gave the cure to a guy called dr.marvin s antelman who he had gone to uni but stole some ideas from marvin, so gave the cure to him as payback

marvin & gallo told this to boyd

diggy
08-03-2009, 09:24 PM
A virus, like DAN said, cannot be made. To believe man can make a virus is to imply that man has god-like powers.

There is not much if any evidence to prove that hiv kills people.

People are told they have hiv when they take an antibody test. Antibodies suggest that the body is fighting or already has fought off the virus.

After they are told they have antibodies for hiv, they are encouraged to take medications that are highly cytotoxic (meds that attack all cells whether they are healthy or not).

Cancer patients also take cytotoxic meds, but they take them for a few days or weeks at a time then abstain from them cuz too much would KILL THEM.

When it comes to people who are hiv positive, they are put on cytotoxic meds indefinately or until death.

Could it be possible that cytotoxic medications taken by hiv positive peoples are killing them instead of the actual hiv virus??????????????

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 09:35 PM
Everybody has a cute theory or a reason to place blaim on something or someone, but nobody knows shit.

In this thread alone, there have beena bout 3 or 4 different versions.

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 09:40 PM
A virus, like DAN said, cannot be made. To believe man can make a virus is to imply that man has god-like powers.

There is not much if any evidence to prove that hiv kills people.

People are told they have hiv when they take an antibody test. Antibodies suggest that the body is fighting or already has fought off the virus.

After they are told they have antibodies for hiv, they are encouraged to take medications that are highly cytotoxic (meds that attack all cells whether they are healthy or not).

Cancer patients also take cytotoxic meds, but they take them for a few days or weeks at a time then abstain from them cuz too much would KILL THEM.

When it comes to people who are hiv positive, they are put on cytotoxic meds indefinately or until death.

Could it be possible that cytotoxic medications taken by hiv positive peoples are killing them instead of the actual hiv virus??????????????

explain those US goverment documents

they ain't fudged neither

like someone in is going to fudge US goverment documents (that can be gotten by the freedom of information act) to make it look like the US goverment created the virus, then put those documents in the library

please, yeah right

you can cherry pick what you want to believe in life, its cool, its a free world, for real

Wu-Tang Forum Internet Poster
08-03-2009, 09:40 PM
Food for Thought brings up an interesting, albeit unsubstantiated theory.

However, that article does not suggest that man made AIDS, but rather inadvertantly led to its spread.

It is something that cannot be proven, but is certainly worthy of consideration.

Sunny, I don't think anybody was saying that Africans fucked monkeys. But numerous tribes did eat, and still do eat monkeys, not just in africa, but wherever monkeys are found.

And DIggy, I agree with your conerns about AIDS and Cancer medications.

However, I disagree with the statement that HIV does not kill people.

It does not directly kill people, but most certainly weakens the immune system to the point that a common cold or pneumonia can kill its host.

Of course, it can be argued that cytotoxic meds do the exact same thing.

diggy
08-03-2009, 09:50 PM
explain those US goverment documents

they ain't fudged neither

like someone in is going to fudge US goverment documents (that can be gotten by the freedom of information act) to make it look like the US goverment created the virus, then put those documents in the library

please, yeah right

you can cherry pick what you want to believe in life, its cool, its a free world, for real



I did not cherry pick anything.

I've done extensive research.

I've researched the works or Peter Deuseberg and others.

There is a video called "HIV Fact or Fiction". Please watch it.

That flow chart, when looked at critically, is a procedure for how to conduct an experiment. It is NOT a flow chart of how HIV/AIDS was developed. I've seen that flow chart before. Please look at it critically. Understand that the language used on the chart uses scientific terminology.

Boyd was mislead on what the flowchart meant.

Again, please look at the chart with a critical eye.





And DIggy, I agree with your concerns about AIDS and Cancer medications.

However, I disagree with the statement that HIV does not kill people.

It does not directly kill people, but most certainly weakens the immune system to the point that a common cold or pneumonia can kill its host.

Of course, it can be argued that cytotoxic meds do the exact same thing.


I could be wrong about HIV not killing. That is possible. But in many cases, people are at least at face value, healthy individuals. They are told they are sick and will die in 10 years cuz of something discovered in their blood. They are put on cytotoxic meds that cause the following symptoms:


Diarrhea
Weight loss
Hunger loss
Weakness
Depression
Liver Failure

There are also a host of other symptoms they suffer from. They go downhill from there until they end up in the hospital and die.

I don't know of any or many cases of people who have hiv and refuse meds and die. But there are many cases of people who are told they have hiv, take meds and suffer the symptoms, and die!!!

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 09:54 PM
Sunny, I don't think anybody was saying that Africans fucked monkeys. But numerous tribes did eat, and still do eat monkeys, not just in africa, but wherever monkeys are found.




if this was true, these villagers would have been doing this from the beginning of time, cities only started in Africa in the early to mid 20th century, tribes have been migrating all over the continent from the beginning of time

if your theory was true or added up, there would be no people in africa let alone anywhere else, the human race would have been wiped out a long time ago

why did the AIDS explosion happen on a mass level only in the late 70s, early 80's all over the world after all this monkey eating from the beginning of time, why then

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 09:57 PM
Thats interesting.

How do you explain Kaposi's Sarcoma?? the cancerous brown lesions patients get.

From the meds??

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 10:02 PM
if this was true, these villagers would have been doing this from the beginning of time, cities only started in Africa in the early to mid 20th century, tribes have been migrating all over the continent from the beginning of time

if your theory was true or added up, there would be no people in africa let alone anywhere else, the human race would have been wiped out a long time ago

why did the AIDS explosion happen on a mass level only in the late 70s, early 80's all over the world after all this monkey eating from the beginning of time, why then

why did plague explode in europe and asia when it did???

Cities only started in african in the early to mid 20th century???LOL. Laughable.

There are many theories as to why it started when it did. Its possible that it was a medical fuck up, in fact, from all i have seen, that seems to be the most plausible case for it.

The HIV/AIDS as a biological weapon just does not make sense from a biological weapons making standpoint. That is just my opinion.

But we dont kno...there are so many possibilities.

Just because Aids was not identified until the seventies and eighties dont mean shit either. HIV could have been around who knows how long.

Nobody can really say.

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 10:20 PM
I did not cherry pick anything.

I've done extensive research.

I've researched the works or Peter Deuseberg and others.

There is a video called "HIV Fact or Fiction". Please watch it.

That flow chart, when looked at critically, is a procedure for how to conduct an experiment. It is NOT a flow chart of how HIV/AIDS was developed. I've seen that flow chart before. Please look at it critically. Understand that the language used on the chart uses scientific terminology.

Boyd was mislead on what the flowchart meant.

Again, please look at the chart with a critical eye.






I could be wrong about HIV not killing. That is possible. But in many cases, people are at least at face value, healthy individuals. They are told they are sick and will die in 10 years cuz of something discovered in their blood. They are put on cytotoxic meds that cause the following symptoms:


Diarrhea
Weight loss
Hunger loss
Weakness
Depression
Liver Failure

There are also a host of other symptoms they suffer from. They go downhill from there until they end up in the hospital and die.

I don't know of any or many cases of people who have hiv and refuse meds and die. But there are many cases of people who are told they have hiv, take meds and suffer the symptoms, and die!!!

have you seen the progress reports from the Special Virus Program, there basically trying to create new AIDS type viruses by putting zoonotic(animal) viruses into the human genome, its blantantly obvious if you have read those reports


explain this paragraph from the US goverment document called house resolution 15090 by a doctor macarthur from the US army from 1969 tuesday july 1

"within the next 5 to 10 years.it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease causing organisms. 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

a research program to explore the feasibility of this could be completed in approximately 6 years at a total cost of $10 million"

there basically saying they know how to create a AIDS type virus, but need $10million to create an it in 5 to 10 years

the US Special Virus Program ended in 1978, 9 years later,

on the flowchart it says at the end of it

'phase 5:plan and execute clinical trials to evaluate control measures'

now if thats not layman's english, then i don't know what is

the WHO smallpox vaccinations and the US goverment's Center For Disease And Control's hepatitis b vaccination programs started in the late 70's in the areas were the mass explosion of AIDS cases started simutaneously

do the research people and add it up

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 10:24 PM
why did plague explode in europe and asia when it did???

Cities only started in african in the early to mid 20th century???LOL. Laughable.

.

1.the plague isn't a retro virus, its usually impossible for animal retro-virius to cross over like how AIDS did

2.do your research, most proper cities on a mass scale started in africa in the early 20th century, do the research

Olive Oil Goombah
08-03-2009, 10:40 PM
you are sweeping everything that challenges what you say under the rug to attempt to prove your way is right.

Whether or not plague was a retro virus wasn't the point.

Proper Cities?? please explain to me what a 'proper city' is and how africa never had one prior to the 20th century.

I think you need to do more research instead of just assuming pretty much everything based upon a few documents and a flow chart.

The language is NOT plain english. You are stretching the interpretation into the molding of your choice.

Like I said, Im not condeming your theory, but besides what i just mentioned, you really dont have much.

diggy
08-03-2009, 10:56 PM
have you seen the progress reports from the Special Virus Program, there basically trying to create new AIDS type viruses by putting zoonotic(animal) viruses into the human genome, its blantantly obvious if you have read those reports

I have not read those reports.

If you have it, I would like to see it.


explain this paragraph from the US goverment document called house resolution 15090 by a doctor macarthur from the US army from 1969 tuesday july 1

"within the next 5 to 10 years.it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease causing organisms. 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

It would be foolish of me to analyse this paragraph not in relation to the whole document.

If you have the whole document, I would like to read it before I give a conclusion.




'phase 5:plan and execute clinical trials to evaluate control measures'

now if thats not layman's english, then i don't know what is


This is exactly what I am talking about. It is NOT laymans' English.

execute: To carry out or accomplish

control : To verify or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or by comparing with another standard.

The above words are relating to an experiment.


the WHO smallpox vaccinations and the US goverment's Center For Disease And Control's hepatitis b vaccination programs started in the late 70's in the areas were the mass explosion of AIDS cases started simutaneously

do the research people and add it up

Yes, I know about this. Just because they SAID the innoculated people had AIDS, does not make it so. Do you think a murderer is gonna tell the truth about his victims?

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 11:08 PM
you are sweeping everything that challenges what you say under the rug to attempt to prove your way is right.

Whether or not plague was a retro virus wasn't the point.

Proper Cities?? please explain to me what a 'proper city' is and how africa never had one prior to the 20th century.

I think you need to do more research instead of just assuming pretty much everything based upon a few documents and a flow chart.

The language is NOT plain english. You are stretching the interpretation into the molding of your choice.

Like I said, Im not condeming your theory, but besides what i just mentioned, you really dont have much.

i'm not molding nuthin into nuthin,

your coming wit your opions, wit nuthin to back it up, which is cool, everyone is entilted to there opions, it's a free world

you can't answer my questions wit any facts or evidence, documents or scienitific arguments to make your point, apart saying everything is fudged by the boogie man to make the US goverment look bad, spreading this propaganda into US librarys, yeah right

if the plague is retro virus is the question, because if you new what a retro virus is, which the AIDS virus is, you would know, if you had done any real authentic research that its usually impossible for retro viruses to jump the specie barrier like AIDS had

if this was possible like this, it would have happened a long time ago and the human being race would have been wiped out a long time ago

the majority of developed cities on a mass level, started in africa in the early 20th century, do the research, have you even been to africa, do you even have family there, were are you getting your info on cities on a mass level being built before the 1900's in africa

LONDON!
08-03-2009, 11:18 PM
I have not read those reports.

If you have it, I would like to see it.






It would be foolish of me to analyse this paragraph not in relation to the whole document.

If you have the whole document, I would like to read it before I give a conclusion.







This is exactly what I am talking about. It is NOT laymans' English.

execute: To carry out or accomplish

control : To verify or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or by comparing with another standard.

The above words are relating to an experiment.




Yes, I know about this. Just because they SAID the innoculated people had AIDS, does not make it so. Do you think a murderer is gonna tell the truth about his victims?

i haven't got any of the progress reports on me, but i have seen them(i'll get em when i come to the US, check in main librarys, reqest for them), but i have the logic flowchart and the relevant page of the house resolution 15090(which is easy to obtain the whole thing aswell, request for all the pages), i can send it too you if you want them, pm me

if you read whats in the progress reports you would quickly clock onto what the flowchart is detailing, trust me on that

Robert
08-04-2009, 08:28 AM
This thread, on one hand, has given me new found respect for Diggy and a greater understanding of his arguement.

On the other hand, it has led me to believe that "LONDON!" doesn't even understand the literature he is using as evidence.

Dan is also mighty restrained. Overall, an unusually calm KTL experience.

LONDON!
08-04-2009, 12:39 PM
whats so theirs not to understand from a military guy asking congress for

"within the next 5 to 10 years.it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease causing organisms. 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

a research program to explore the feasibility of this could be completed in approximately 6 years at a total cost of $10 million"

explain this

"refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease"

thats what AIDS does, he's basically saying he wants $10 million to create a new virus that no human has immunity to, thats plain english for any 11 year old

from the US Special Cancer Virus Program's Logic Flowchart at the end of it it says

Phase 5-'Plan and execute clinical trials to evaluate control measures'

this means and i'll give you the benefit of doubt, because you haven't seen any of the 15 annual progress reports from that program, that shows they were creating new viruses by putting animal viruses into the human genome, but it means they will 'plan' 'clinical trials' for this new virus and basically see what will happen, if thats not layman's english, then i don't know what is

explain this photograph of the virus they were working dr.robert gallo called the esp 1 virus, that looks identical to the AIDS virus

http://www.boydgraves.com/news/101102.html

Robert
08-04-2009, 01:09 PM
whats so theirs not to understand from a military guy asking congress for

"within the next 5 to 10 years.it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease causing organisms. 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

a research program to explore the feasibility of this could be completed in approximately 6 years at a total cost of $10 million"

explain this

"refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease"

thats what AIDS does, he's basically saying he wants $10 million to create a new virus (not a virus, a disease causing organism) that no human has immunity to, thats plain english for any 11 year old

from the US Special Cancer Virus Program's Logic Flowchart at the end of it it says

Phase 5-'Plan and execute clinical trials to evaluate control measures'

FMJ could you please talk a bit more about the flow chart?

this means and i'll give you the benefit of doubt, because you haven't seen any of the 15 annual progress reports from that program, that shows they were creating new viruses by putting animal viruses into the human genome, but it means they will 'plan' 'clinical trials' for this new virus and basically see what will happen, if thats not layman's english, then i don't know what is

explain this photograph of the virus they were working dr.robert gallo called the esp 1 virus, that looks identical to the AIDS virus

http://www.boydgraves.com/news/101102.html

A virus is not a "micro organism" or a "disease causing organism". A virus is not a living organism.

Basically what you've done there is presumed they are talking about HIV/AIDS when they could be talking about anything. Or maybe there is more to this article that explains your point further?

If not, the "evidence" you have provided up until this point does not point to the conclusion you've arrived at.

Why haven't you provided any evidence regarding the "15 annual progress reports" from the US Special Cancer Virus Program? Am I supposed to just believe you?

Edit: I just read one of your earlier posts and see why you don't have these documents. Still, I am not prepared to believe what you are saying without them.

Your final piece of evidence, the photo, is so inconclusive it isn't funny.

FMJ can you talk about the flow chart a bit more?

LONDON!
08-04-2009, 01:45 PM
A virus is not a "micro organism" or a "disease causing organism". A virus is not a living organism.



Basically what you've done there is presumed they are talking about HIV/AIDS when they could be talking about anything. Or maybe there is more to this article that explains your point further?

If not, the "evidence" you have provided up until this point does not point to the conclusion you've arrived at.

Why haven't you provided any evidence regarding the "15 annual progress reports" from the US Special Cancer Virus Program? Am I supposed to just believe you?

Edit: I just read one of your earlier posts and see why you don't have these documents. Still, I am not prepared to believe what you are saying without them.

Your final piece of evidence, the photo, is so inconclusive it isn't funny.

FMJ can you talk about the flow chart a bit more?


1.some viruses are micro organisms, what are you talking about?

2.if you think that photo is inclusive, then i guess pigs can fly too

3. this is what i and pofessor donald w scott, MA, Msc and a lot of other scientist, professors and researchers believes the virus to be, which is a modified(weaponized) sheep retrovirus(mutates a lot more, more than the common cold) derived from visna-maedi-rida(scrapie) retrovirus from sheep and a immune system suppressant derived from the mycoplasma fermantans, which comes from the deoxyribonucleic acid(dna) of the zoonotic(animal) disease baterium known as brucella abortus

4.the flowchart outlines 5 phases

phase 1-selection of specimens and detection of virus or virus expression
phase 2a-establishment of replication and intial characterization
phase 2b-replication and characterization of virus expression
phase 3a-definition of presumptive disease relationships and complete characterization
phase 3b-complete characterization:demostration of virus mediated functions essential for induction and maintenance of neoplasia
phase 4a-immunological control
phase 4b-biochemical control
phase 5-plan execute clinical trials to evalute control measures

diggy
08-04-2009, 02:13 PM
FMJ can you talk about the flow chart a bit more?


Respect.

The flow chart is nothing but a scientific procedural model to follow when conducting an experiment.

Some people look at words like "execute" and "control" on the flow chart and conclude that the government were trying to execute and control people when that is not the case.

These words relate to an experiment.

execute: To carry out or accomplish

control : To verify or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or by comparing with another standard.




Anyway, here is the chart:

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/AIDS%20and%20Population%20Elimination/aids_flowchart-svcp_1972.jpg

Robert
08-04-2009, 02:19 PM
Edit: directed at LONDON.

Hang on.

Isn't there a great deal of conjecture around whether viruses are alive or not?

If a virus isn't alive, then it isn't an organism.

However, after having a bit of a look around, I see there are a lot of contradictory statements on a number of science-based websites.

I don't think you would find the same contradictions in scholarly literature, but unfortunately I don't have access to that at the moment.

For example, on one website, under the definition for "organism", viruses are listed as an example. Yet in the definition for "microorganism" on the same website, it says "Viruses and prions, although microscopic, are not considered microorganisms by others because they are generally regarded as non-living".

I hope that clears up what I was talking about.

Robert
08-04-2009, 02:23 PM
Respect.

The flow chart is nothing but a scientific procedural model to follow when conducting an experiment.

Some people look at words like "execute" and "control" on the flow chart and conclude that the government were trying to execute and control people when that is not the case.

These words relate to an experiment.

execute: To carry out or accomplish

control : To verify or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or by comparing with another standard.




Anyway, here is the chart:

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/AIDS%20and%20Population%20Elimination/aids_flowchart-svcp_1972.jpg

Thank you for providing the chart.

I understand what "control" and "execute" mean in this context (you'd fucking hope so given I have a science degree).

However, I was wondering if you knew anything of the "annual reports" regarding the flow chart that LONDON! is referring to?

LONDON!
08-04-2009, 02:31 PM
Respect.

The flow chart is nothing but a scientific procedural model to follow when conducting an experiment.

Some people look at words like "execute" and "control" on the flow chart and conclude that the government were trying to execute and control people when that is not the case.

These words relate to an experiment.

execute: To carry out or accomplish

control : To verify or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or by comparing with another standard.




Anyway, here is the chart:

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/AIDS%20and%20Population%20Elimination/aids_flowchart-svcp_1972.jpg

its not 'excute' and 'control' people are looking at, its conduct 'clinical trials' of a virus called esp 1 that looks 99.9% like the AIDS virus

Olive Oil Goombah
08-04-2009, 05:21 PM
You cannot make that assumption. Only a scientist could. Unless you are indeed a scientist.
But your not.

Nobody on this site could probably do that accurately.

LONDON!
08-04-2009, 06:37 PM
You cannot make that assumption. Only a scientist could. Unless you are indeed a scientist.
But your not.

Nobody on this site could probably do that accurately.

what are you talking about, yes i can make that assumption because its basic common sense a 13 year old could work out, if you do the proper research, this isn't quantum physics, if you can't work it out, then thats diffrent, thats cool, theirs nuthin wrong wit that, its a free world

professors, scientist, doctors like Professor Donald W Scott MA, MSC, Dr.Leonard G Horowitz DMD, MA, MPH, agree wit my 'assumptions' if that makes you feel better

diggy
08-04-2009, 09:42 PM
Thank you for providing the chart.

I understand what "control" and "execute" mean in this context (you'd fucking hope so given I have a science degree).

However, I was wondering if you knew anything of the "annual reports" regarding the flow chart that LONDON! is referring to?


I don't know anything about them.

If he could show them in this thread we could know what he's talking about.

Robert
08-05-2009, 02:51 AM
Just to go back to something: as I said earlier, if viruses are not living then they are not organisms. There is a fair bit of conjecture on how they should be classified. So how exactly do we know this military official was talking about a virus when he said "microorganism"?

That does not seem so clear cut to me.

GODIZILLAH
08-05-2009, 03:45 AM
Wow

LONDON!
08-05-2009, 07:05 AM
I don't know anything about them.

If he could show them in this thread we could know what he's talking about.

i don't have them wit me, each report is about 300 pages long

@robert
i'll say it again, some viruses are micro organisms, this is known

Robert
08-05-2009, 12:58 PM
i don't have them wit me, each report is about 300 pages long

@robert
i'll say it again, some viruses are micro organisms, this is known

Care to name some?

LONDON!
08-05-2009, 04:30 PM
Care to name some?


Definition of Virus


Virus: A microorganism smaller than a bacteria, which cannot grow or reproduce apart from a living cell. A virus invades living cells and uses their chemical machinery to keep itself alive and to replicate itself. It may reproduce with fidelity or with errors (mutations)-this ability to mutate is responsible for the ability of some viruses to change slightly in each infected person, making treatment more difficult.

Viruses cause many common human infections, and are also responsible for a bevy of rare diseases. Examples of viral illnesses range from the common cold, which is usually caused by one of the rhinoviruses, to acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), which is caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

Viruses may contain either DNA or RNA as their genetic material. Herpes simplex virus and the hepatitis- B virus are DNA viruses. RNA viruses have an enzyme called reverse transcriptase that permits the usual sequence of DNA-to-RNA to be reversed so the virus can make a DNA version of itself. RNA viruses include HIV and the hepatitis C virus.

Robert
08-06-2009, 01:00 PM
So basically you didn't provide any examples of specific viruses that are considered microorganisms (ie you didn't answer my question).

I don't need you to show me definitions. I understand that some definitions indicate viruses are microorganisms and some indicate that they are not. That wasn't my point.

I know for a fact, from my studies, that a large proportion of the scientific community don't consider viruses to be living or to be microorganisms.

"Viruses and prions, although microscopic, are not considered microorganisms because they are generally regarded as non-living"

So how have you in any way addressed my question? Essentially you've said the same thing three times without getting anywhere.

LORD NOSE
08-06-2009, 02:08 PM
what has these book,news reports,and doctors told you about aids ?

you believe them ?

Aids is fake

LORD NOSE
08-06-2009, 02:08 PM
what has these book,news reports,and doctors told you about aids ?

you believe them ?

Aids is fake

Eternal360z
08-06-2009, 02:51 PM
Wait... Just to poke my head in... Science can make viruses...
http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/07_02/polio_create.shtml

diggy
08-06-2009, 09:09 PM
Wait... Just to poke my head in... Science can make viruses...
http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/07_02/polio_create.shtml

They basically looked at a genetic structure of a virus (it's genetic blueprint) and added the necessary biochemicals into DNA.

They did not make it, they duplicated it; they made a copy.

This is different from what another individual was talking about. The other was talking about making a new virus.

LONDON!
08-07-2009, 03:47 PM
So basically you didn't provide any examples of specific viruses that are considered microorganisms (ie you didn't answer my question).

I don't need you to show me definitions. I understand that some definitions indicate viruses are microorganisms and some indicate that they are not. That wasn't my point.

I know for a fact, from my studies, that a large proportion of the scientific community don't consider viruses to be living or to be microorganisms.

"Viruses and prions, although microscopic, are not considered microorganisms because they are generally regarded as non-living"

So how have you in any way addressed my question? Essentially you've said the same thing three times without getting anywhere.





i answered your question, you just don't want to add it up, its a question of symantics, read the last paragraph and it shall set you free

Robert
08-08-2009, 03:03 AM
It isn't semantics at all. As a scientist I don't know how you could say that.

I understand you're answer I just don't agree with it. I guess we'll leave it at that because until you show some more concrete evidence I don't really see any progression being made here.