The Truth About The AIDS Virus

[Astroboy]

Originally Posted by Anubis

It is obvious that you have neither read, nor understood, any posts I have made during this debate. I posted the Mclean's article long before you started turning this into something personal. Why would I would post an article about inflated infection stats unless that was exactly what I was discussing prior to you getting your panties in a bunch about this entire topic? Do you even read what someone's point of view is prior to firing off personal attacks accusing others of racism and bigotry?

I have posted all the reasons as to why I feel that we have not heard the truth about this alleged "epidemic". Everyone else here seems to understand my points except you, and I don't feel like repeating myself ad nauseum simply because you have some personal agenda that matters only to yourself. You are focusing on only one point I made, and even that has been taken out of context. Don't accuse me of "intellectual dishonesty" when you have spent this entire debate desperately trying to turn it into something it never was in the first place. Find another game, son. I have no interest in feeding trolls.

There you go again bringing up an issue that I don't have a problem with. How many times do I have to tell you that your AIDS statistics issue are not my concern? Had you only talk about that topic only I would have never jumped into this thread.

You are the one who doesn't read the posts. I only jumped into to debate you when you posted information that denies the link between HIV and AIDS. Why wouldn't I only argue about the singular point that I disagree with? How have I taken things out of context? Maybe you should explain more clearly why you say "I don't know" regarding whether HIV causes AIDS but keep quoting and vigorously defend a man that denies that connection.

Your are the one who made this personal. I put forth evidence in support of my arguments and tried to stick to the issue. I never called you an idiot. In fact I said "You are not dumb, just extremely wrong." You are the first one to infer others were dumb because according to you it only required high school level science to understand global warming. You were the first to name call by saying that I was a "fanatic" with an agenda. I was ready to put this debate to bed and not post any more right up to that point when you made it personal.

You seem to think that just because I feel strongly against people posting false medical information that this constitutes an agenda. Should I think it is no big deal that people promote lies that can kill people? Do I also have to show you a list of people who have died as a result of denying that HIV is harmful? What agenda do think I have other than basic human concern and attempts to prevent unnecessary death? It is that simple. Your conspiracy mind is making my motivation far more complicated than reality.

As far as calling me "son"... Do not be fooled by my avatar. I'm quite sure I'm a lot older than you think. While you were a "child of the 80s" I was well into my adulthood. The avatar is only a nostalgic cartoon from the 60s. So don't try to talk down to me as if you are either older or wiser.

Do you even know what a troll is? It is someone who puts out outlandish or controversial posts on the Internet in order to elicit an emotional response. Only in that have you been successful. Congratulations.

[exo_doc]

OK, a few questions;

1.If the Aids virus were given to two different types of monkeys, then released into the wild, why are they not all dead now? Or at the very least close to extinction?

2.If certain ethnic groups were being targeted, how or why did HIV/Aids spread into the general population of non-gay whites? Now ethnic minorities do make up a large percentage of the infected, but wouldn't that be from lifestyle and not race? I mean for the most part.

3. Why didn't these "controllers" take into account blood donors? How many people of every color got or continue to get HIV/Aids from donated blood? There are still cases of viral transmission through blood and blood products given during surgery or emergency transfusion due to blood loss. Unless you beleive you're never getting into a car accident or will never have to have major surgery, you'd be playing Russian Roulette.
Unless, of course, there is a secret cure the Contollers have access too, then I guess this argument would be moot.

4. One point I haven't heard anyone make is : If the HIV/Aids virus did not exist Prior to either 1959 or 1972, depending on the source, why has this disease not been diagnosed before?
To clarify, if HIV/AIDS is not artificial, and has been in certain monkey populations years before humans turned it into an "epidemic", why are there no records of people contracting and dying from it? There are other diseases/syndromes that attack the immune system. Were these diagnosed instead of HIV/AIDS?
It would seem to me some studly dude or sexy female would have been bitten by a green monkey before and contracted the virus, and spread it on it's merry way via sex with multiple parteners LONG before now.

5. And it's been pointed out, HIV/AIDS as a population controller isn't very effective or effecient. NOT to downplay the significance of the millions who have died from it, I beleive in the sanctity of all life, and the loss of so many is horribly tragic.
But you've got to admit it's effects on world or ethnic population haven't been very minor as a whole.

6. The CDC and the medical community may not have officially recognized HIV/AIDS/GRID until 1982 as it's own disease/syndrome, but they damn sure knew something was going on at least by October of 1979. OMNI magazines issue for October 1979 has an article called "Disease X". I have the copy right here (I have at least one of every issue). It states the medical community had a mysterious and very scary problem on thier hands, and goes on to describe the HIV/AIDS symptoms, and what they were doing about it. Obviously, they didn't know to call it HIV, or AIDS, or even GRID, but there is no doubt that was what they were describing. One of the early vicitms they discuss developed a cyst in the brain of otherwise harmless common bacteria that grew big enough to kill him by cerebral hemmorhage in just a few days. In the autopsy, they discovered his immune system was virtually non-existent. That man was a New York native in 1976.
That's right. 1976.
If HIV/AIDS wasn't introduced to African, Haitian, and other select groups until 1977, how did he contract it?

What do you guys think?

[Anubis]

A few thought on some of your questions:

Originally Posted by exo_doc

1.If the Aids virus were given to two different types of monkeys, then released into the wild, why are they not all dead now? Or at the very least close to extinction?

As I pointed out in an earlier article, AIDS does not kill people fast enough to be efficient at population control. During the period 1990-1996 in Canada, AIDS was responsible for only 750 deaths. By comparison, influenza killed an average of 4000 per year.

Originally Posted by exo_doc

3. Why didn't these "controllers" take into account blood donors? How many people of every color got or continue to get HIV/Aids from donated blood? There are still cases of viral transmission through blood and blood products given during surgery or emergency transfusion due to blood loss. Unless you beleive you're never getting into a car accident or will never have to have major surgery, you'd be playing Russian Roulette.
Unless, of course, there is a secret cure the Contollers have access too, then I guess this argument would be moot.

One would assume that if this disease was purposly spread by entities unknown specifically to kill humans, getting it mixed up in the world's blood supply would only hasten the process.

Originally Posted by exo_doc

4. One point I haven't heard anyone make is : If the HIV/Aids virus did not exist Prior to either 1959 or 1972, depending on the source, why has this disease not been diagnosed before?
To clarify, if HIV/AIDS is not artificial, and has been in certain monkey populations years before humans turned it into an "epidemic", why are there no records of people contracting and dying from it? There are other diseases/syndromes that attack the immune system. Were these diagnosed instead of HIV/AIDS?
It would seem to me some studly dude or sexy female would have been bitten by a green monkey before and contracted the virus, and spread it on it's merry way via sex with multiple parteners LONG before now.

This is something I have wondered about as well. The Columbus expedition brought syphillis back from the New World to the Old. Within a decade, it had spread around Europe to the point it was relatively common. As I posted above, there are many theories that state that the worldwide infection rate of HIV/AIDS has been greatly exaggerated due to primitive testing methods that don't affirm the presence of the HIV virus to come up positive. Many of these tests rely simply on antibody counts, and if said counts are below a certain threshold, AIDS is the diagnosis. Unfortunately, low antibody counts can be caused by malnutrition, parasitic infection and other diseases that are all relatively common in Africa.

[digigeek]

Originally Posted by MagentaCandle

Since the 1970s, AIDS has killed more than 21.8 million people. Today, about 34-36 million people are living with HIV or AIDS, a total that is expected to reach 47 million in 2010. By 2025, the number of people infected with AIDS is estimated to reach upwards of 80 Million people.

The entire population of the country of Ireland is around 4,109,086. Compare that to the 21,000,000 that have already died from AIDS, and I think you can see how much damage it has truly done to the World. In other words, the AIDS virus has already wiped out over 5 IRELANDS worth of people.

Wrong again, bucko. It could never wipe out Ireland. Why? Leprechauns, you fool!

[Anubis]

Originally Posted by digigeek

Wrong again, bucko. It could never wipe out Ireland. Why? Leprechauns, you fool!

Aye, don't mess with the wee little people.

[Irishseekers]

Originally Posted by digigeek

Wrong again, bucko. It could never wipe out Ireland. Why? Leprechauns, you fool!

Love the picture "Leprechauns" are just myths of one country's history but that creature has never been considered in Ireland to have ever existed!...."Magenta candle" your history of Ireland is a little bit flawed' for example, ..Ireland is divided into two states" I live in the Republic of Ireland ' where the population is close to around six million people and are mainly Catholic.The other state is called Northern Ireland which is mainly Protestant ,THE population within Northern Ireland is around two million" But eight hundred thousand of those people within that state are of the Catholic faith,This state is a power shareing goverment between
"Catholics" and "Protestants",... Which came about after a peace deal after a long dividing conflict in the 1990s

[A. Warren Johnson]

Originally Posted by Astroboy

Y I don't know anyone close who is HIV positive or gay. I have no agenda.

A fanatic is someone who sticks to their belief system despite the facts and evidence.

So Astro, just because you don't know anyone with HIV or AIDS it makes it okay for a corrupt banker controlled Government to perpetually lie and claim drugs designed to kill them will help keep them alive, when in fact the correlation between HIV and AIDS does not match up? Don't misunderstand what I'm saying here, there is a correlation, but it's a much closer match between AIDS and Drug use then between HIV and AIDS. I seriously doubt you take this subject seriously, I mean anyone can just link websites that have spooky langauge, but you haven't really done anything to further this debate. I believe you don't have an agenda, but you shouldn't say that you are not a fanatic, because it's quite clear you are and you have illustrated this point countless times on this thread. Just because you link the rest of us supposed evidence of what you believe doesn't nessacerally make it correct. I also highly doubt you even bothered to watch the documentary I linked because you don't want to even entertain the notion that you may possibly be wrong. I guess it would hurt your pride to much to bother looking into the alternative theory, because right now, as it stands, both of our views are just that: Theroies. Nothing either way has been proven, so for you to link up information that could potenially be wrong and state it as an absoulte truth is just irresposible. I personally believe that there is no evidence to prove your hypothyisis, but at the same time I'm not going to post links on here and state that it is absoulte truth.

[Aaron LeClair]

I have crabs.

[Ally]

Originally Posted by Aaron LeClair

I have crabs.

They are spreading everywhere!

http://www.unoriginal.co.uk/footage82_6.html

[alucard]

Originally Posted by MagentaCandle

The Controllers are the ones responsible for releasing the AIDS virus on the Human population. They've killed millions of people already. Do you think they give a damn about you or me?

Something that all people should be aware of, is that AIDS was created in 1974 at Fort Detrick, Maryland, which is now called NCI - The National Cancer Institute. Officially, it was called the Fort Detrick Biological Warfare Center, which was an integral part of the National Cancer Institute.

The AIDS virus was developed under the supervision of a CIA program called MK-NAOMI by the SOD - Special Operations Division -- of the Army.

Ok so now that you know where AIDS was originally created, now it's important to know why it was created.

There are a few reasons actually. You have to understand that back in the mid-to-late 60's, The Controllers realized that ever since the end of World War 2, the number of people on this Planet was skyrocketing. They called it the "Population Bomb". To find a way to equal out the increasing birth rates, these men came up with three ways to bolster the death rates.

The First was proposed in the infamous Report from Iron Mountain that essentially said that World peace is not a desirable thing. So, instead of beginning another catastrophic war that would undoubtedly end in nuclear annihilation, they proposed a series of small, ongoing, isolated wars. In fact, did you guys know that at times there have been over 39 different wars taking place in the World? And it wasn't just coincidence. And you have to ask yourself, who are the people fighting these wars? The answer - young, foreign men that are most likely to reproduce.

So your basing your theory on the fact that theGov. made and released this virus as a way to thin out tho population and started little wars here and there? Hey you obviously are a well educated person and in no way am I saying your theories are not true, but I myself believe that the Government would not release a killer virus without : having a cure :and I do not believe they could cover this up as long as they have,I could be dead wrong but who knows for sure? Don't get me wrong, the popwers that really run countrys, control the money and natural reserves are ruthless self centered egotistical maniacs and wouldn't hesitate to do thus, they have done far worse already,and call me crazy but I have spent my whole adult life researching the occult coverups, gov. experimentation on kids in orphanages with radiation and mind control with massive doses of LSD, THE LIST GOES ON AND ON. Whole towns sprayed with chemicals as trials for further use. I just cannot bring myself to thuink they could keep a seret this long,of course thats only my opinion. Good insights though, thanks alucard