- TheDaliLama
- 02-01-2012, 05:01 PM
I don't ever want to get that shit again.
- Mr. Bill
- 02-01-2012, 05:09 PM
I don't ever want to get that shit again. Originally Posted by TheDaliLamaIf you're referring to HIV, there are thousands of untold stories where the individual, upon taking another 'HIV test' years later, tested negative. This only proves further that the HIV = AIDS/Death propaganda is a bald-faced lie.
.
- dilbert firestorm
- 02-01-2012, 09:55 PM
I don't ever want to get that shit again. Originally Posted by TheDaliLamano idea what you're refering to.
you need to be clearer on that score.
- dilbert firestorm
- 02-01-2012, 10:01 PM
I did read it, it doesn't address the issue of the green raccoon conversation. Originally Posted by timpagehe did state that it was "some sort of holographic projection". Its apparently very advanced.
looks like he was visited by extraterrestrials via mobile probe of a holographic sort.
why a green raccoon? maybe the aliens have a weird sense of humor .
he may well have been abducted, notes that he lost his own time.
- Mr. Bill
- 02-01-2012, 10:09 PM
This is the year 2012 - doing acid in the 60's (40-50 years ago) doesn't disqualify or diminish a person's ability to hold a job, raise a family, be a doctor, conduct research, or offer an educated opinion. I did acid many times back in those days - big deal - I'm still reasonable, industrious and I can think logically. I saw, heard and felt some weird stuff too - I just don't talk about it.
.
.
- Sa_artman
- 02-01-2012, 10:59 PM
While it's been shown there's no danger for getting or transmitting HIV sexually or otherwise, there are still other very real diseases from which you want to protect yourself - such as gonorrhea, syphilis, etc.Well, there's one way to put this to rest. Put your money where your mouth is, or in your case your ass Mr. Bill. Find an "HIV +" crack whore or in your case Liberace substitute, take it up the ass with full release. If you're so pearly eyed over this great conspiracy, I'm sure you would do anything to prove it first hand.
. Originally Posted by Mr. Bill
- Mr. Bill
- 02-01-2012, 11:04 PM
You believe in the theory, the never proven hypothesis of HIV = AIDS.
If there's no specific test for HIV, how does anyone know it exists?
Even the purported co-discoverer of HIV now says you can cure yourself with a better diet - whereas before, if you were diagnosed with the phony HIV virus, it was a death sentence.
After examining all the evidence, only someone without common sense would embrace the HIV = AIDS scam as truth - either that, or they're just a lazy dimwit.
.
If there's no specific test for HIV, how does anyone know it exists?
Even the purported co-discoverer of HIV now says you can cure yourself with a better diet - whereas before, if you were diagnosed with the phony HIV virus, it was a death sentence.
After examining all the evidence, only someone without common sense would embrace the HIV = AIDS scam as truth - either that, or they're just a lazy dimwit.
.
- CuteOldGuy
- 02-01-2012, 11:04 PM
See, Bill? This is what I have been trying to tell you. Sa_artman is clearly the winner in this debate because he cleverly insinuated that you are a homosexual. Facts or research don't matter. Demanding that you find a "Liberace substitute" is a cute way of questioning your sexuality, which completely negates the arguments you have made. They are able to do it without research, or any facts in support of their position, because they can laugh at you because the reason you hold your position isn't because of intelligence or research, it's because you must be gay.
See? Makes everything easier. This way, you don't have to think in order to respond.
See? Makes everything easier. This way, you don't have to think in order to respond.
- Mr. Bill
- 02-01-2012, 11:19 PM
Well COG, we'll just give 'em an extra heaping pile of more facts to chew on.
--------------------------------------------------------
A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF:
1) THE EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF HIV
2) AND THE HIV ANTIBODY TESTS
The only way to prove the existence of a virus is to isolate its particles. It is only by doing this that we obtain pure particles to inspect, and analyse, and to introduce into fresh cell cultures to prove particles make more of the same. After all, no matter how viral-like they may look, this is what particles must show us before they ever earn the title, virus.
Have HIV experts gone to all this trouble? No. The only reason we have HIV is antibodies. A few antibodies amongst the plethora in AIDS patients that react with a few proteins present in the lymphocyte cultures of AIDS patients. When it is all said and done, it’s not just that antibodies are used to prove some individuals are infected with HIV. For the HIV protagonists, antibodies are the proof that they have isolated HIV.
Take special note of the history of the discovery and demise of the world’s first human, leukaemia retrovirus, HL23V. As in the case of HIV, Gallo and his colleagues claimed that antibodies elevated certain culture proteins to the status of a virus. Their reasoning was then and still remains a scientific impossibility. When it was discovered that such antibodies were induced by a wide variety of stimuli that had nothing to do with viruses, and they occurred in far more healthy people than could have ever had the virus to cause leukaemia, HL23V disappeared from the annals of science.
This is why most of you, and most HIV experts, have never heard of it. Yet in the AIDS era we have the same method used to prove the existence of HIV, and a large number of instances of HIV antibodies where there is no HIV. But we still believe in HIV.
The message for us is plain and simple. HIV might exist but there is no proof that it does exist. As you listen to what is still the best evidence for HIV, imagine it is 1983, you are the consummate, disinterested scientist, living in Paris, working at the Pasteur Institute and charged with the task of discovery. Try to decide, each one of you, what you discovered. Was it a retrovirus HIV or have you let down your guard and allowed the immune system to trick you once again with antibodies which mean something entirely different but which you have mistakenly, once again called a retrovirus and HIV?
Rest of analysis: http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/perthg...neva/index.htm
.
--------------------------------------------------------
A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF:
1) THE EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF HIV
2) AND THE HIV ANTIBODY TESTS
The only way to prove the existence of a virus is to isolate its particles. It is only by doing this that we obtain pure particles to inspect, and analyse, and to introduce into fresh cell cultures to prove particles make more of the same. After all, no matter how viral-like they may look, this is what particles must show us before they ever earn the title, virus.
Have HIV experts gone to all this trouble? No. The only reason we have HIV is antibodies. A few antibodies amongst the plethora in AIDS patients that react with a few proteins present in the lymphocyte cultures of AIDS patients. When it is all said and done, it’s not just that antibodies are used to prove some individuals are infected with HIV. For the HIV protagonists, antibodies are the proof that they have isolated HIV.
Take special note of the history of the discovery and demise of the world’s first human, leukaemia retrovirus, HL23V. As in the case of HIV, Gallo and his colleagues claimed that antibodies elevated certain culture proteins to the status of a virus. Their reasoning was then and still remains a scientific impossibility. When it was discovered that such antibodies were induced by a wide variety of stimuli that had nothing to do with viruses, and they occurred in far more healthy people than could have ever had the virus to cause leukaemia, HL23V disappeared from the annals of science.
This is why most of you, and most HIV experts, have never heard of it. Yet in the AIDS era we have the same method used to prove the existence of HIV, and a large number of instances of HIV antibodies where there is no HIV. But we still believe in HIV.
The message for us is plain and simple. HIV might exist but there is no proof that it does exist. As you listen to what is still the best evidence for HIV, imagine it is 1983, you are the consummate, disinterested scientist, living in Paris, working at the Pasteur Institute and charged with the task of discovery. Try to decide, each one of you, what you discovered. Was it a retrovirus HIV or have you let down your guard and allowed the immune system to trick you once again with antibodies which mean something entirely different but which you have mistakenly, once again called a retrovirus and HIV?
Rest of analysis: http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/perthg...neva/index.htm
.
- CuteOldGuy
- 02-01-2012, 11:29 PM
I can tell I'm going to have to do this myself.
Ok Sa_artman, Your Assholiness and the rest. YOU'RE FUCKING FAGGOTS!
Ok Bill, you take it from here.
Ok Sa_artman, Your Assholiness and the rest. YOU'RE FUCKING FAGGOTS!
Ok Bill, you take it from here.
- Mr. Bill
- 02-01-2012, 11:38 PM
I can tell I'm going to have to do this myself.COG, I bring a message, period - I'm not here to engage 'tards in some back and forth game to prove their manhood. That's highschool shit. I would hope you can appreciate my position and don't perpetuate these pissing contests in my thread. On the other hand, I look forward to any sensible input or debate from you and others on the HIV topic.
Ok Sa_artman, Your Assholiness and the rest. YOU'RE FUCKING FAGGOTS!
Ok Bill, you take it from here. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
Thanks.
.
- Mr. Bill
- 02-02-2012, 01:14 PM
The AIDS Investigation
by Liam Scheff
Question: Is the AIDS industry honest?
Ask yourself if you have ever heard this, or anything like this before:
How about this?
Dr. Nancy Padian, the researcher who ran that study out of U.C. Berkeley, was also in “House of Numbers.” She said that HIV was one of the hardest viruses to transmit, and added that ‘everybody knows that.’
So, I’ll ask again:
Is the AIDS industry honest? Is it even close to honest? Is it transparent? Do you ever hear statements like these in the media? Would you like to know why?
If so, you’ll have to brave being attacked in print and word, by – you guessed it – the AIDS industry. Those who ask questions are smeared and libeled in the press, even for exploring or exposing publicly available information from the standard medical literature. The AIDS pharma goon squad (and there surely is one) will call you an “AIDS Denialist” if you dare poke your critical thinking past their threshold….
How do I know this? Because I have bothered to do exactly so. I have written critically about AIDS, and found it to be a violently corrupted industry, ruled by absurdly bad science – science infused and infected by the discredited racist science of the early 20th Century – Eugenics – but most strongly resembling Apartheid, in its construction.
If I told you that we in the West would find a way to put sexual restrictions on Africans, interfere with their childbirth and fertility, speculate anxiously at the pathogenic nature of the normative sex of homosexual men, drug massive populations with immensely toxic drugs that shorten life expectancy, damage and kill children and adults – would you assume I was talking about a science fiction novel?
What if I told you that you, yourself, would contribute to this program, wear its symbol, buy clothes that supported it, attend fundraisers, and openly praise the individuals whose obsession was this pseudo-scientific interference in the sex lives of the poor, African and homosexual populations of the world?
Maybe that’s too much to consider… but ask yourself, why are we obsessed with the sexual aspect of what we now call AIDS? Ask yourself why you’ve never read the Padian study. Why it’s excised from the Wikipedia page on AIDS – why this, the longest study of its kind, is censored in the media?
Ask yourself what Luc Montagnier is talking about, when he talks about improving the immune system of AIDS patients, in order to help them ‘get rid of the virus,’ and recover…
But be warned, you may quickly find yourself turning into an “AIDS Denialist,” at least, according to the goon squad.
But don’t sweat it…you’ll be in good company.
http://liamscheff.com/the-hiv-aids-investigation/
.
by Liam Scheff
Question: Is the AIDS industry honest?
Ask yourself if you have ever heard this, or anything like this before:
“We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected. Our immune system will get rid of the virus within a few weeks, if you have a good immune system.”Who said it? Luc Montagnier, 2008 Nobel Prize winner for ‘discovering HIV,’ (quoted in “House of Numbers,” 2009). But he’s been saying things like this for years. In the film, he goes on to agree that that Africans who are helped out of poverty (fed and given clean water, etc) can overcome the infection.
How about this?
“We followed up 175 HIV-discordant couples [one partner tests positive, one negative] over time, for a total of approximately 282 couple-years of follow up… No transmission [of HIV] occurred among the 25% of couples who did not use their condoms consistently, nor among the 47 couples who intermittently practiced unsafe sex during the entire duration of follow-up…”That is, 175 mixed (HIV positive/negative) couples had sex – anal and vaginal – for 6 years, with and without condoms, and nobody who was negative became positive.
“We observed no seroconversions after entry into the study [nobody became HIV positive]…This evidence argues for low infectivity in the absence of either needle sharing and/or other cofactors.”
Dr. Nancy Padian, the researcher who ran that study out of U.C. Berkeley, was also in “House of Numbers.” She said that HIV was one of the hardest viruses to transmit, and added that ‘everybody knows that.’
So, I’ll ask again:
Is the AIDS industry honest? Is it even close to honest? Is it transparent? Do you ever hear statements like these in the media? Would you like to know why?
If so, you’ll have to brave being attacked in print and word, by – you guessed it – the AIDS industry. Those who ask questions are smeared and libeled in the press, even for exploring or exposing publicly available information from the standard medical literature. The AIDS pharma goon squad (and there surely is one) will call you an “AIDS Denialist” if you dare poke your critical thinking past their threshold….
How do I know this? Because I have bothered to do exactly so. I have written critically about AIDS, and found it to be a violently corrupted industry, ruled by absurdly bad science – science infused and infected by the discredited racist science of the early 20th Century – Eugenics – but most strongly resembling Apartheid, in its construction.
If I told you that we in the West would find a way to put sexual restrictions on Africans, interfere with their childbirth and fertility, speculate anxiously at the pathogenic nature of the normative sex of homosexual men, drug massive populations with immensely toxic drugs that shorten life expectancy, damage and kill children and adults – would you assume I was talking about a science fiction novel?
What if I told you that you, yourself, would contribute to this program, wear its symbol, buy clothes that supported it, attend fundraisers, and openly praise the individuals whose obsession was this pseudo-scientific interference in the sex lives of the poor, African and homosexual populations of the world?
Maybe that’s too much to consider… but ask yourself, why are we obsessed with the sexual aspect of what we now call AIDS? Ask yourself why you’ve never read the Padian study. Why it’s excised from the Wikipedia page on AIDS – why this, the longest study of its kind, is censored in the media?
Ask yourself what Luc Montagnier is talking about, when he talks about improving the immune system of AIDS patients, in order to help them ‘get rid of the virus,’ and recover…
But be warned, you may quickly find yourself turning into an “AIDS Denialist,” at least, according to the goon squad.
But don’t sweat it…you’ll be in good company.
http://liamscheff.com/the-hiv-aids-investigation/
.
- Mr. Bill
- 02-02-2012, 01:19 PM
After all the hype, beyond all the media publicity, aside from the deception and pharmaceutical murders by the medical community, HIV/AIDS is a plan to depopulate the continent of Africa.
Before AIDS, it was called 'Slim.' Slim was basically a diversionary label for starvation, dirty water, stolen land and immunosuppressive vaccines.
The plan: depopulation of Africa
A cover story to conceal the plan: HIV
Medical dupes to provide the cover story: Gallo, Montagnier, Serwadda, and others
An international health agency that would do everything except help solve the real and continuing causes of death in Africa: WHO (The World Health Organization)
A diversionary and phony debate that actually forwards the depopulation agenda: whether to lower prices on toxic and destructive AIDS drugs for Africa
.
Before AIDS, it was called 'Slim.' Slim was basically a diversionary label for starvation, dirty water, stolen land and immunosuppressive vaccines.
Enter HIV / AIDS
The plan: depopulation of Africa
A cover story to conceal the plan: HIV
Medical dupes to provide the cover story: Gallo, Montagnier, Serwadda, and others
An international health agency that would do everything except help solve the real and continuing causes of death in Africa: WHO (The World Health Organization)
A diversionary and phony debate that actually forwards the depopulation agenda: whether to lower prices on toxic and destructive AIDS drugs for Africa
.
- Mr. Bill
- 02-02-2012, 01:26 PM
The AIDS Orphan Drug Scandal
by Liam Scheff
In 2004, I broke open the NIH Clinical Trial Scandal, the internationally-covered story of hundreds of New York City orphans used by government agencies and pharmaceutical companies in deadly AIDS drug trials.
In reporting this issue, I entered the orphanage where children were being used as guinea pigs, and over a period of several years, took interviews with mothers, children and childcare workers at the Incarnation Children’s Center. I also interviewed the medical director, and investigated the FDA documentation and published medical literature on the tests and drugs used, drugs which were often force-fed through nasal and gastric tubes to the children.
I reported several deaths in children, and although the mainstream denied that any deaths were due to drug toxicity, they admit that over 200 children died.
In 2005, the city of New York hired the VERA Institute to form a final report on the drug trials. VERA was given no access to medical records for any of the children used in trials. Their report was published in 2008.
They reported that twenty-five children died during the drug studies, that an additional fifty-five children died following the studies (in foster care), and, according to Tim Ross, Director of the Child Welfare program at VERA, 29% of the remaining 417 children who were used in drug studies are now dead (out of a total 532 children that are admitted to have been used).
No payment or compensation has been paid to any of the children used in the trials, or to their families.
.
by Liam Scheff
In 2004, I broke open the NIH Clinical Trial Scandal, the internationally-covered story of hundreds of New York City orphans used by government agencies and pharmaceutical companies in deadly AIDS drug trials.
In reporting this issue, I entered the orphanage where children were being used as guinea pigs, and over a period of several years, took interviews with mothers, children and childcare workers at the Incarnation Children’s Center. I also interviewed the medical director, and investigated the FDA documentation and published medical literature on the tests and drugs used, drugs which were often force-fed through nasal and gastric tubes to the children.
I reported several deaths in children, and although the mainstream denied that any deaths were due to drug toxicity, they admit that over 200 children died.
In 2005, the city of New York hired the VERA Institute to form a final report on the drug trials. VERA was given no access to medical records for any of the children used in trials. Their report was published in 2008.
They reported that twenty-five children died during the drug studies, that an additional fifty-five children died following the studies (in foster care), and, according to Tim Ross, Director of the Child Welfare program at VERA, 29% of the remaining 417 children who were used in drug studies are now dead (out of a total 532 children that are admitted to have been used).
No payment or compensation has been paid to any of the children used in the trials, or to their families.
- Inside Incarnation NY Press July/Aug 2005 – Interviews with children and childcare workers from the orphanage. Radio Interview with a childcare worker from ICC.
- The House That AIDS Built | The Nurse’s Story – Altheal.org January 2004 -The original expose.
- The ICC Investigation Continues Altheal.org May 2004
- The ICC Audio Interviews and Thalidomide Document February 2007 -interview with the medical director of the orphanage, and drugging with Thalidomide on orphans at ICC.
- Still on Trial NY Press, April 2005
- Noble Doctors Crux Magazine,November 2004 | Reductionism On Trial An Aids Debate, Summer 2006
- Knowing is Beautiful and Sex Crimes- Parts one and two of “The Hidden Face of HIV” GNN 2005 - a review and analysis of what is known as “HIV Testing”, in two parts. PDF – pt.1 | pt.2 | References
.
- WTF
- 02-02-2012, 01:27 PM
COG, I bring a message, period - I'm not here to engage 'tards in some back and forth game to prove their manhood. That's highschool shit. I would hope you can appreciate my position and don't perpetuate these pissing contests in my thread. On the other hand, I look forward to any sensible input or debate from you and others on the HIV topic.Yea cutiepie, quit acting like some highschooler that just got picked for the cast of Glee!
Thanks.
. Originally Posted by Mr. Bill
