AIDS is a man made virus !

You guys have to be kidding me if you think this conversation has never taken place in the history of man.

Scientist A: You know what, genetically we have differences right?

Scientist B: True dat.

Scientist A: I wonder if it's possible to create a biological weapon that only affects the communist of China.

Scientist B: True dat...if possible...but how do we test it though?

Scientist A: Flue shots, hep A shots, veterans, minorties, homos, etc etc.

Scientist B: Bet we can sale it to the government also.

Scientist A: True dat.

That conversation has never EVER taken place?

[edit on 2-8-2010 by Come Clean]

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
No, it doesn't make sense. No matter who your "enemy" is, you are 99.7% genetically identical to them. Any disease you create will be just as dangerous to you as it is to them.

I have agreed with most of your posts obviously. But, why doesn't it make sense? Why did they make Anthrax?

What I mean is, why did they alter anthrax? Couldn't have been for a good use, correct?

[edit on 2-8-2010 by Nutter]

They didn't create or alter anthrax, it is a naturally occuring bacteria. Humans just found that they could simulate and amplify the natural drying and spore-forming process to create it in large quantities. There's also a reason it has never been widely used...it's the reason I posted above. Why use something that is just as likely to hurt your own soldiers/citizens?

And if you think about it, miscegenation (race mixing) was not allowed historically. All the other deviant behavior (homosexuality) was considered to be reserved for the underclass.

Where these mad scientist went wrong was not taking into account a civil rights movement. They doomed themselves in the process of destroying the minority of America.

Originally posted by Come Clean
You guys have to be kidding me if you think this conversation has never taken place in the history of man.

Scientist A: You know what, genetically we have differences right?

Scientist B: True dat.

Scientist A: I wonder if it's possible to create a biological weapon that only affects the communist of China.

Scientist B: True dat...if possible...but how do we test it though?

Scientist A: Flue shots, hep A shots, veterans, minorties, homos, etc etc.

Scientist B: Bet we can sale it to the government also.

Scientist A: True dat.

That conversation has never EVER taken place?

[edit on 2-8-2010 by Come Clean]

There's a difference between an event taking place, and an event being a scientific reality. The reality part comes in when you realize humans are too genetically similar when you get to the cellular level for any disease to be created (especially before we even knew what DNA was, as would have to have been the case if HIV were created) that targets only one ethnicity.

Given the long history of humans meeting new people, having sex with them, and repeating, none of us are genetically different enough for this to be a reality.

Originally posted by Come Clean

Originally posted by rangersdad
reply to post by alysha.angel

 

This isnt exactly news. I have known about it for over 30 yrs now.
If I remember the story right, it came out of Africa when the citizens there were having sex with monkeys and then with women...then it came out that it was man made by the CIA.

So why come Europeans don't have Goat Aids?

Because the CIA wants to clear out Africa of all citizens for some
reason..maybe for their minerals or something??

I concede they wouldn't do it to the majority. That's why I don't believe in chemtrails. They just wouldn't do it to their own. But they would absolutely do it to the underclass. Even that's becoming a problem. That's why the entire world went on red alert for the swine flu.

reply to post by Come Clean


Go ahead give me a Biology lesson because believe me Ive heard it. Genetics is far more than just sex chromosomes, and simple genes that you've pointed out. Yes tall people are different than short people and women are different than men those are only phenotype differences that most likely are easily genotype differences. I am different genetically than you are, granted we are close. So to wipe out china like you said. You would first have to isolate a gene they all share that couldnt be carried by our future generations or given to them because that just ruins the point, you would then have to mutate it into people sex cells, depending on if its controlled by one gene or many and if its a recessive or dominant gene you would still have problems getting it passed down, by way of meiosis which makes 4 cells with 13 chromosomes which could be carrying the potent form of the gene or not. Now all this changes if it is sex-linked and if its sex-linked recessive it gets tricky because both partners would have to be carriers and pass down the recessive gene to the new offspring. It also depends on the effect of the disease would it kill the baby at birth or just cause infertility in the new offspring. With a genetic disease that cause infertility you would roughly have to infect half population to make them carriers and thats only if its the dominant form. If its recessive then well thatd be a fun time because its a 1/4 chance on a punnet square, so from that 500,000 infected roughly 125,000 would be affected to be sure fire to pass it down and 250,000 would be sure fire carriers. Need I go on or do I still need the Biology lesson sir?

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Originally posted by Come Clean
If you really think about it. Why wouldn't a military develop biological weapons that attack the enemy at the genetic level?

It just makes sense that man made diseases exist.

No, it doesn't make sense. No matter who your "enemy" is, you are 99.7% genetically identical to them. Any disease you create will be just as dangerous to you as it is to them.

It may not make sense to you, but it definitely makes sense to those in power.

If it doesn't, why is their even a biological weapons program?

Why do they continue to produce weapons grade versions of already deadly viruses?

Why is there a preponderance of evidence going all the way back to the late 60's?

Honestly you can try an refute it all you want but this isn't a conspiracy thing. I remember checking out some of these sources, in the library, in the early 90's before there even was an internet or Bill Cooper. The governments own documents damn them in regards to this subject.

[edit on 2-8-2010 by ISHAMAGI]

reply to post by Come Clean
From what I heard the HIV would off all the gays , the people of low moral character, sick people, hemophiliac's.
much like Hitler had tried to do.

Originally posted by ISHAMAGI

It may not make sense to you, but it definitely makes sense to those in power.

It doesn't make sense tactically and scientifically.

If it doesn't, why is their even a biological weapons program?

We have a defensive bioweapons program, not offensive. You can't fight what you don't understand thoroughly.

Why do they continue to produce weapons grade versions of already deadly viruses?

They don't. America ended it's offensive bioweapons programs in the 1960s under Nixon when we signed the bioweapons convention and Geneva convention pacts. There is no evidence of offensive research beyond that point.

Why is there a preponderance of evidence going all the way back to the late 60's?

Evidence for the creation of HIV? There isn't any. Just anecdotes and "what ifs".

Honestly you can try an refute it all you want but this isn't a conspiracy thing. I remember checking out some of these sources in the early 90's before there even was an internet. The governments own documents damn them in regards to this subject.

Then post these documents, please.

reply to post by Come Clean


Even though this in context is true they are genetic diseases that affect certain races, regions what have you. For example the Ashkenkazi jews are more susceptible to Tay-Sachs than other types of people, Sickle cell anemia is more prevalent in the African-America community. None of this is to say that everyone is protected from these diseases, also genetic disease would take a long time to affect a culture since they only occur with the creation of offspring. This isnt a practical way of genocide, I'm not promoting genocide but I am just saying its not practical

reply to post by ISHAMAGI


Im sure the government tried, I mean during the 60's and 70's they would try anything to beat the communists, even quite ridiculous methods like genetic engineering even though they had little knowledge of it then.

reply to post by Nutter


I would like to see some evidence of every single gay person in the world in the late 70's that got hep b shot died, please show me this?

IF it weren't for AIDS, how would the globalist elite have significantly depopulated Planet Earth?

the only known virus or drug that was created by the government was '___'. AIDS is far more advanced than that.

it wasn't man made, it was introduced to man, we just decided to take it a step further. i'm telling you, these guys know what they're doing.

reply to post by mothershipzeta


The reason it was made via blood and sex was to make it spread faster...everyone has sex...everyone has blood.Aids is controllable,where as small pox wasn't.I wouldn't doubt if they have the cure for aids out there somewhere,just in case.You make more money on the medicine in the long run.Just because it takes longer to kill someone doesn't mean nothing considering millions have died from it and are dying from it.It only took a few years if you think about it.


More than 25 million people have died from aids since 1981.
Over 33 million people living with aids today.

Since 1981?That's 29 years.That's about a million a year.2 million died in 2008 and the number rises every year.

Source www.avert.org...

I think aids is putting a huge dent in the population.

Then you have Malaria..millions of people die a year from Malaria.

i remember when i was in the eighth grade and the teacher told us aids came from monkeys and that it transfered to humans, but this is going against what they teach you in school
thanks for posting and hopefully we can find some proof for this!

AIDS being man-made, for the purpose of population control, has never made sense to me. Even back in the late-70s when AIDS actually began to make its mark (it had actually appeared first in a teenage boy from St. Louis back in 1966-67) its incubation period could last as long as 10 years without treatment. And as with the biological weapon theory, a 10-year incubation period is wholly inefficient. Even more inefficient is introducing it en masse to the homosexual community of Europe and North America. Giving it to people who have absolutely no chance of producing offspring is just absurd. When in the history of Man have homosexuals been a threat to over-populate the planet? Never. If population control is your true goal, then you would give it to young heterosexuals, mostly females, so that not only would they die, but that they would also not be likely to give birth between contracting the virus and dying.

But that's not what happened. More homosexual males in Europe and North America came down with it than did heterosexuals in the former Belgian Congo, now Zaire, which is where most scientists believe AIDS originated from.

Today, however, it's the complete opposite. It's a bigger problem there than it is anywhere else. But the entire beginning of the AIDS epidemic, and the epidemic overall, appears to be more of a Nazi-like medical program to kill off the "undesirables" of the world than it does straight-up, unbiased population control.

I'm not saying that's what it is. I just think that's the more likely scenario.

That is ridiculous: Aids is indigenous to africa, specifically among primates - to put it rudely, aids was probably passed to humans through someone making a bestiality video.