Lawsuit Claims US manufactured the AIDS Virus

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that pharmaceutical companies are in it for money....they are a business, not a charity.

US pharm companies.........This is a huge money maker. It doesn't have to be just the US involved...does it??

Peter Duersberg doesn't count

Edit: Murundi? I'm going to quote George Carlin. "Calm down, have some dip". There's no need for the hostility, dude

No hostility here dude, I'm just opinionating.

peace

I love the logic some of the poster are using.
“The US government has the means to do it they have BLACK military projects therefore they must have done it.”

To use hypothetical logic.......

If you were part of a governmental body who had billions of people to worry about, both domestic and abroad, and these people all had teh same desires, but not everyone could have the same thing........would you just sit idly about insuring truth and justice?

In that same sense.....if a majority of the population were doing jobs that required repitition day in and day out so that they were never learning stuff, and had a research team attempting to determine the secrets of everything from biological realities to EMG's, wouldn't you endeavour to hide that new info? After all, the repititious population doesn't need that info for their day to day functionings.........

I think it's plausible.....

Originally posted by MemoryShock
To use hypothetical logic.......

If you were part of a governmental body who had billions of people to worry about, both domestic and abroad, and these people all had teh same desires, but not everyone could have the same thing........would you just sit idly about insuring truth and justice?

In that same sense.....if a majority of the population were doing jobs that required repitition day in and day out so that they were never learning stuff, and had a research team attempting to determine the secrets of everything from biological realities to EMG's, wouldn't you endeavour to hide that new info? After all, the repititious population doesn't need that info for their day to day functionings.........

I think it's plausible.....

Highly plausible..........

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that pharmaceutical companies are in it for money....they are a business, not a charity.

US pharm companies.........This is a huge money maker. It doesn't have to be just the US involved...does it??

Absolutely; this actually supports the notion though, that there's no conspiracy involved - having worked on both sides of the pharmaceutical industry, it's fairly obvious that there's just so much competition between companies around the world...if there was a cure, believe me, we'd know about it. It would be patented to the hilt.

It just makes more sense to me:

Living bodies = more money for drug company.
Dead bodies = less money for drug company.

Basic economics, you know?

No hostility here dude, I'm just opinionating.

I didn't mean you

AIDs made the jump from simians to humans via the administration of oral polio vaccine in Africa in the 1950s. It's all perfectly documented and explained in "The River" by Bill Hamilton. The vacciines were experimental and created from the kidneys of chimpanzees. I've never seen a better theory for the origins of AIDs.

Originally posted by Jeremiah_John
AIDs made the jump from simians to humans via the administration of oral polio vaccine in Africa in the 1950s. It's all perfectly documented and explained in "The River" by Bill Hamilton. The vacciines were experimental and created from the kidneys of chimpanzees. I've never seen a better theory for the origins of AIDs.

Though I read the book with much interest, the science contained therein was without exception, pure conjecture. There were no proven links at all. A lot of "could haves" and "ifs" and "might haves" - but no actual proof.

It's an interesting book, absolutely.

But it didn't satisfy requirements as a definitive answer, or even truly plausible theory. I'd need to see much more in terms of evidence.

You may find these links interesting


New Scientist article

Oxford University paper

One more article

(edited for linkage)

[edit on 24-6-2005 by Tinkleflower]

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Absolutely; this actually supports the notion though, that there's no conspiracy involved - having worked on both sides of the pharmaceutical industry, it's fairly obvious that there's just so much competition between companies around the world...if there was a cure, believe me, we'd know about it. It would be patented to the hilt.

It just makes more sense to me:

Living bodies = more money for drug company.
Dead bodies = less money for drug company.

True say......

Well how long does it take for the 'virus' to kill though........A very long time.

The living bodies are living for quite some time with the drugs that hold back the 'virus'.

Sometimes by the time the person knows they have the 'virus' they possibly have spread it to others and even had children........

Unfortunatley these poor kids have to spend the rest of there life on drugs....hence why its such a good profiteering opportunity.......

You may want to check out this thread I made a lil' while ago about a Dr Royal Raymond Rife....

Is this information true!!!

peace

Yup, already waded through the thread

Alrighty. We're talking about a theory - that was never actually verified.

That's a fact.

We're talking a theory that may, or may not work - that's a fact.

Templarum made a lot of sense in the thread you linked - I'd agree with his arguments for the most part.

One unproven theory doth not a conspiracy make

Edit: also, "a long time" varies. It can mean 3 years. It can mean 13 years. It can mean "10 months". That's not a good argument to use

[edit on 24-6-2005 by Tinkleflower]

....then why did the first victim come from Africa, in 1959?

aids.about.com...

(If my memory serves me right - he actually died in Manchester, UK in the university hospital there and some interested academics saved samples out of curiosity.)

en.wikipedia.org...

Origins of AIDS
"Studies suggest that the virus initially spread from West Africa. It is possible that there were several initial sources corresponding to different strains of HIV (HIV-1 and HIV-2). The sample fluid earliest known for human-carrier was from 1959, which derived from a British sailor; he contracted it in what is now the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Other early samples include one for an American male-died in 1969, and one for a Norwegian sailor of 1976. The earliest journaled death more lenient to the West- in due to AIDS, is attributed to Dr. Grethe Rask who was a Danish surgeon in the early 1970s of Congo.

The official date for the beginning of the AIDS pandemic is marked as June 5, 1981, when the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention reported in a newsletter that unusual clusters of Kaposi's sarcoma were discovered in gay men in New York and San Francisco in the late 1970s. More KS clusters were discovered among these otherwise healthy men in other cities throughout the country, and a subsequent investigation of these infections revealed that the victims had other opportunistic diseases as well. Many died within a few months of diagnosis despite receiving the best treatments at the time, leading to speculation that they had an immune disorder hampering their ability to fight the multiple infections.

The AIDS report of opportunistic infections for gay male intravenous drug users from the 1980s was initially termed 'GRID' (Gay Related Immune Deficiency). However, similar opportunistic infections were reported in people in other categories. By the end of 1982, more AIDS cases emerged around the world, especially blood transfusion recipients, intravenous drug users, and immigrants from certain countries such as Haiti. The disorder was officially renamed AIDS at the end of 1983.

Some past studies of AIDS in Africa have used a very loose definition that results in the overdiagnosis of AIDS, even when HIV is not present, because this definition avoids expensive tests. This complicates epidemiological comparisons. The controversial OPV AIDS hypothesis raises speculation that the origin of AIDS is due to the oral polio vaccination program that took place in the late 1950s of Africa."

it looks like it came from oral polio vaccination that took place in Africa, guess the genes in Africans cause a change.


always knew there be side effects wen rushing a new treatment would backfire.

Just bear in mind wikipedia is a public forum - articles are submitted by the public.

Thus....some of the information there just isn't reliable.

(That, and it doesn't say that the hypothesis is valid...it's just mentioning one controversial theory)



[edit on 24-6-2005 by Tinkleflower]

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Absolutely; this actually supports the notion though, that there's no conspiracy involved - having worked on both sides of the pharmaceutical industry, it's fairly obvious that there's just so much competition between companies around the world...if there was a cure, believe me, we'd know about it. It would be patented to the hilt.

It just makes more sense to me:

Living bodies = more money for drug company.
Dead bodies = less money for drug company.

Basic economics, you know?

I'm not so sure about that. If you have a cure, how are you going to continue to make money on the cure? Drug companies aren't exactly making big money on the Polio vaccine and Small Pox vaccine (until the recent Small Pox scare - which could have been artificially produced to help increase business for the pharms) anymore. If you can cure everyone, than how do you continue to make money when you have next to no one to cure anymore?

Living bodies definitely equal more money for the drug companies, and doesn't it make more sense to keep people hoping that they will be cured of their ailments than to actually cure them? If you make them think the drugs are making them (or going to make them) better, then they'll continue to buy the drugs, won't they? Do they care whether we die? Of course not, we breed like rabbits nowadays. We probably breed faster than we actually die now (especially in areas that aren't war-torn) - when one person dies, we have ten more to replace them.

Economics has taught me that hope is the easiest thing to sell and make money off of. How else do you explain the wealth of the Catholic church?

The problem is that there's a new mutation of AIDS that is making the rounds now that kills in months instead of years. There was a patient that caught HIV in October of last year, and had AIDS within about two months or so. It's resistant to AZT and every other drug that is currently used on AIDS. If the Flu virus can mutate, which it does every couple of years or so, so taht the latest vaccine doesn't work on it, then why couldn't something else? If there was some kind of Vinas(?) Virus infecting someone in Africa, and they took the oral Polio vaccine who's to say there wasn't some kind of interaction between them that created a new virus. Or they ate a primate that was infected with something else, and the interacted and mutated. The virus world is incredibly dynamic and viruses mutate all the time. We currently have a cure for NO viruses because of the way they are and the way they mutate so quickly. It doesn't take much to mutate a virus.

The AIDs virus was conducted by the CIA to eliminate all African Americans.

NOT AS EXTREAM CONSPERISY:

Many viruses were created by the Anunaki or Nephilim or giants or Aliens or whatever you prefer in order to keep us (Sumerian religion) in order while they were on there planet of Neribu. (The Humans were there slave race creation) Notice that many viruses look man made or Antenna like creations.


[edit on 9-7-2005 by The Surrealist]

PICS OF VIRUS

AIDS
www.rachnaindia.com...

VIRUS STRUCTURE
micro.magnet.fsu.edu... ... Douse this not look like a spider... or a Probe even!?

Have anyone noticed the meaning of "I" in HIV and AIDS?

Immuno-deficiency? Think about it: a virus designated to weaken or wreck havoc on the immunity system of human beings.

No wonders news reports usually mentioning about people dying from AIDS, "...has died from the complications of AIDS," or "...died from complications with AIDS," but nary a mention what did these people actually died from because HIV/AIDS just weakens and/or destroy the human body's ability to fight off any other infection or disease.

Oh no, hope this will not be another 'Betty Cash' type hearing ie let's go through the motions for public interest then dismiss the case as non-evidentual.
It would surely be surprising to me if the case made it beyond the hearing phase.

Dallas

Any updates on this one?

It's worth watching.

Originally posted by soficrow
Any updates on this one?

It's worth watching.

The site from the Org. Article has an update from Nune 28th, but warns not to post anything from the site so follow this link:

www.dldewey.com...

However, this is the only site that really seems to have any information about it. The case is supposed to be in the San Diego Federal Court with case number 04 CV 1345, but after spending some time searching I can find no reference to that particular case.