Mr. Kincaid:
Even I was going to take the easy way out of this one, just put head in sand and refuse to attempt de-threading the AIDS angle to the media’s Wright/Obama confusion. I’m so grateful you took it on. I read your piece and was very impressed at the way you untangled it all so accurately.

You taught me things I did not know—despite 22 years on the beat—or had forgotten.

I pulled down the Koehler book, and wanted to share this amazing tidbit: The Indian newspaper that first broke the AIDS Virus As US Biological Weapon “story” in 1986, (The Patriot) was funded by the KGB and its editor was the recipient of the astonishingly named “Stalin Peace Prize.”
This is very critical, what you bring up here—the Cold War roots of all these notions. 

The media reserves a clump of disdain for anybody who objects to anything that has ever occurred under the mushroom cloud of “the fight against AIDS.”

In this regard, they are exhibiting Bolshivik tendencies—auto-hostility against ‘counter-revolutionaries.’

They’ve always accused the AIDS “denialists,” formerly “dissidents,” of being frothing right wingers. I have personally been equated with the KKK, with Holocaust Deniers, Flat-earthers, Homophobes, and people who walk round wishing to kill Africans, born and unborn.

My father always finds the humor in it, even when I don’t.

He speaks very admiringly of you, and suggested in the past that I lay some stuff on you but I am glad to see you were already on the story.

Thank you.

Great job.

May angels grant you the stamina to keep going. This is a very, very big story.

It is amazing what goes on under the shadow of “Religion”.  I am saddened that this is what the world is willing to accept.  On the other hand, It is good that someone is willing to call the outrageous claims for what they are and call for accountability.  Unfortunately, the forum is small here, and the masses tend to listen to the hysteria.  Keep the diligence.

One more thing, you can listen to me debate Boyd Graves at:

http://aras.ab.ca/audio/20080401-The Great AIDS Debate - Dr. Graves vs. Mr. Crowe.mp3

“It would be a tragedy if Wright’s wild charges prevent an open and honest debate about the nature of AIDS.” Yes, indeed, but it hardly seems fair to imply that Wright could conceivably bear some primary responsibility for preventing a fair scientific discussion of the nature of HIV and AIDS. This much needed debate has been actively suppressed for many years by the very officials at the CDC and HIH whom we entrust to nurture and fund such debates. The pubic trust has been betrayed, yes, but it started long before Reverend Wright entered the scene.

For an example of what a responsible debate might resemble, have a look at Henry Bauer’s HIVSkeptic blog.

The HIV dissent “movement,” has no particular political tint, but one can readily state that it has been attacked almost exclusively by the haute left—the Voice, Nation, CJR, etc.

The conservative media mostly haven’t weighed in, while the Libertarian media have more or less joined in the drubbing of dissidents as “denialists.” (Brian Doherty at REASON is one notable exception.)

The left love government and more or less love Pharma, as an extention of Nanny State. They love sick people because sick people allow them to pump indignation, moral superiority, and facile notions about how and why sickness occurs, which places blame squarely at the feet of Daddy (which is a fusion of State, Corporations, Politicians, etc—never the individual who might wish to heal him or herself.)

The left love genetic determinsim and the concept of Viral Plagues, a la Laurie Garrett’s unending glut of never fulfilled Plague scenarios.

The left essentially created the AIDS PR zeppelin as we know it, and their hatred of dissidents reflects this.

The right, I would say, are more open to the anti-pharmaceutical movement as they realize how much Big Pharma is morphing into Big Brother, and desecrating human freedoms. Ferocious attacks on HIV Rethinkers from the right are limited to Michael Fumento, and a few others here and there.
The HIV Rethinking movement is steeped in humanist values: An opposition to state coersion, “science” that is rogue and unproven and limits personal freedom starting with the freedom not to be killed, the importance of parental rights in the face of pharma/state violence, the importance of open debate and a free media, and last but not least, a rejection of the lurid racism implicit in the HIV paradigm.

For this reason, you will find people of all political persuasions, colors, ages, stripes in the HIV Rethinkers ever expanding tent—from conservative writer Tom Bethell to radical Olympic gold medalist Lee Evans.

Anybody who hopes to use it for political gain will be disappointed; It is the intersection of Lysenkoist science and whole new freedom movement in the pharmaceutical age.

The media have failed the story catastrophically, and been the driving force in the 24 year pogrom of censorship, violence, shaming, and professional assassination that has been the plight of every single journalist who tried to approach this as a story to simply be reported.

It has all been documented.

This is the big story here—how media managed to keep an elephant of a story in the room, invisible, for a quarter of a century, inside western democracies.

Fortunately, mass media is itself the shot and sagging elephant Orwell gave us to depict Colonialism in his famous essay. Going down slowly, unable to comprehend why.

I have questioned, challenged and debunked the junk science surrounding HIV/AIDS since 1984 and I am just beginning to realize that we are discussing the cause of something that has no proof for its basic assumption, namely that a CD4 cell deficiency is a valid scientific explanation for any clinical disease, let alone AIDS.

The Concorde study (1993) demonstrated that CD4 cells neither correlate to nor predict, either disease progression or death, in people said to have AIDS and yet, since 1993, two thirds of all the AIDS cases are people who, with no clinical illness and no AIDS indicator diseases, are claimed to have AIDS because they test positive on a non-specific antibody test and have low CD4 counts.

Something is very wrong with this picture!

Mr Kincaid,

We wrote a post on myspace.com/blac_ny, that ‘Wright is ‘right’, US government created HIV’. Let me say we simply cited the many books (we don’t think every one was ‘communist misinformation) supporting this pervasive belief in the Black community that HIV was created in a ‘lab’ (We question the position that HIV and AIDS was created to kill Black people. We know it first came to the media’s attention because of its effect on White gay men. So, if HIV was man made, it must have been created to kill both ‘outcast’ populations) First, we think we r on the same page (the fight against misinformation on HIV and AIDS). Although we (I) have lived with a so-called ‘positive’ HIV test since 1992 (started and stopped AIDS meds years ago) and ‘my’ brother, on AIDS drugs, died from liver disease with a so-called ‘undetectable viral load’, ‘I’ still have questioned over the years the theory that HIV causes AIDS (and I have an open mind on the existence of HIV)This includes my questions about the effectiveness of the AIDS ‘cocktail’. We have always liked David Crowne, Pres. of ‘Rethinking AIDS’ (we heard the ‘Boyd/Crowne debate) and we r members of ‘Rethinking AIDS’. I have personally attended NYC HEAL meeting . Plus, I ‘love’ Henry Bauer’s book which challenges the believe that HIV is a epidermic. . Our questions were directed toward the comment by Rev. Wright that the US government created AIDS(although we believe Wright has hurt Obama’s campaign). 80% of Black people believe the ‘HIV was created by the US government long before the Wright controversy. NO question, the Wright comment directly challenges the belief that HIV has never been scientifically proven to exist and it challenges the HIV’doesn’t discriminate’ dogma. Clearly, the Black community has ‘not’ been largely engaged in the ‘does AIDS exist debate (except for Dr. Boyd and Tony Brown’s belief that AIDS was created by man) Providing Black people with the information on the different beliefs and Books supporting the belief that HIV was created in a biowarfare lab is a part of our mission. You must admit, the fact that Africa is the so-call epicenter of AIDS and a disproportionate number of the Black community has positive HIV test results, adds gas to the conspiracy theories. Perhaps the ‘debate’ will create more interest in the truth among Blacks where the belief that HIV is a ‘crisis’ in the Black community dominates much of what is said about HIV and AIDS. Respect. DENNIS

I too share many of the above sentiments and there isn’t any need to repeat them. As a full-blown AIDS person, who has a high viral load and low CD4’s and do not take the antiretroviral medications and there are many others such as myself out here, we must question the validity of HIV causing AIDS.

Antiretroviral medications and not HIV are causing AIDS along with the life-styles, etc. of those who acquire AIDS. It is right to question the HIV hypothesis, as this is the biggest, medical blunder of all time.

Curious that an atypical bacterium, mycoplasma, has been proposed as the real culprit in those apparently infected with HIV.  Were this the case, responses to macrolide antiobiotics would long since have been documented and published.  Mr. Green might best spend some time on the wards to see that macrolides of all types have had little or no effect on this illness.  To state otherwise requires some references.  Mr Green?  Hello?

Chris Foley, Truman Green:

Luc Montagnier’s team pubished two sorely neglected papers reporting that “HIV” doesn’t kill cells in the presence of tetracycline antibiotics. They concluded that the actual pathogen is a mycoplasma: Lemaitre et al., Research in Virology 141 (1990) 5-16; INfetion and Immunity, 60 (1992) 742-8

Phyllis Pease, “AIDS, Cancer and Arthritis” (2005), is a cogent critique of the neglect of mycoplasmas as pathogens, inclduing in AIDS

Why does the cause of AIDS have to be infectious? There’s little evidence that it is infectious (see Padian study, African studies that show women more likely to be positive than men etc.) and how can we even talk about the “cause of AIDS”, when AIDS is about 30 different diseases linked only by HIV. Remove HIV from the picture and there’s just 30 different diseases. Why the desire for a single cause for them?

David Crowe, I believe there may be an error in your logic. No one is suggesting that the 30 illnesses to which you refer are causing the immune depression; only that they result from it.

Henry Bauer, you are correct, Luc Montaigner, co-discoverer of HTLV-lll/LAV (HIV), believes that HIV is harmless without a mycoplasma, and that hiv could never do the things attributed to it by conventional Aidism.

HIV is indeed, very dangerous, not in itself, but rather because of what often accompanies it—mycoplasma fermentans incognitus.

I hope everyone will google: “patent 5242820” to study exactly why its discoverer, US Army employee, Shih Ching Lo, claimed that this “novel” mycoplasma could do everything which has been falsely attributed to HIV.

My proposal for the delivery of these agents to blacks, gays and drug addicts:

1. Gays by hepatitis B vaccine

2. Blacks because none or very few of us have the CCR5 32 base pair deletion which arrived in the European population as a mutation and which saved many of them from the smallpox virus, which is, like HIV a CCR5-tropic virus. This makes blacks approx. 5 times more likely to contract hiv than whites, which coincides with the statistics.

3. Users of illegal street drugs by way of contamination of the drugs.

A gay, black drug addict would therefore be a member of the group with the highest risk for HIV and AIDS.

I certainly am not an expert on this subject.  But I do want to convey to all of you, including the “scientific experts”

I had a conversation with a gay man in San Fransisco in the spring of 1971.  He said that men who participated in anal sex were dying at a young age.  He said it was wideapread and that none one knew the cause. 

So, my message is”  HIV/Aids began yearsa before the “experts” say it did.

You guys need to research further.

Johndg, possibly gay men were dying due to drug use such as, poppers or drugs used to relax the spinchter muscle for sex. If one researches the first cases in this country, they were on both sides of the coast and in healthy males who were given Hepatitis B vaccinations. Claims have been made that these vaccinations were contaminated. However, this theory would not explain all cases amd leads me to believe that AIDS is due to many factors.

Of course the US created AIDS!! And if you try to prove it otherwise, you are part of the conspiracy!!

Peter Barry Chowka has an in-depth analysis of this whole issue here:
http://www.naturalhealthvillage.com/

Aids is a binary weapon; the first stage is HIV.

The trigger is one of the cell-wall deficient, pleomorphic (variable) mycoplasmas. Mycoplasma Fermentans and Mycoplasma Penetrans act to upgrade an otherwise harmless retrovirus to killer status. Both of these microbes were vectored by way of vaccinations; both of them were created or upgraded in a lab and administered to specific communities. The bulk of the hundreds of billions that have been stolen by the pharmaceutical companies and medical science researchers was taken by way of the totally corrupt and sinister HIV equals AIDS paradigm for the development and administration of useless, often fatal chemotherapies and nonsensical Hiv vaccinations, including the most recent by Merk, which has finally attained its well-deserved demise. Its only effect was that it made recipients even more likely to contract Hiv.

I challenge the people who appear on this forum, David Crowe, president of Rethinking Aids, Celia Farber, who wrote that fantastic piece in Harpers, HH Bauer for his book on the failure of the HIV/AIDS paradigm, Michael Ellner, president of Heal and Sepp Hasselberger from whom I learned about the antibody tests hoax, to stop hiding from the obvious truth—that Aids is the result of biological warfare research.

The world’s best-kept secret is that these cell-wall deficient organisms also cause many, if not all CANCERS. This has been suppressed by medical science, biological warfare researchers and the cancer industry.

It may not be true that the truth will set us free—it might, in fact, result in the hiring of men in black, but I hope that Cliff Kincaid, who blames the Russians for the AIDS/biological warfare story, and the other well-known posters on this forum will use their considerable talents to expose the truth about Aids and Cancer instead of continuing to present only half of the story—that HIV does not cause AIDS.

Bacteria, not viruses, mutations, oncogenes or aneuploidy cause cancer.

The truth begins at 5242820.

I don’t think Dr. Shyh Lo ever claimed mycoplasma incognitus/penetrans caused AIDS, he didn’t find it in all AIDS patients, but what he did prove that they were pathogenic in their own right because he induced a fatal disease in mice and monkeys and ruled it to be the cause of death of several previously healthy people that died of undiagnosed infections.

AIDS seems to be a complicated disease, and people who want to blame only one agent whether it’s Drugs or HIV are suffering from Tunnel vision.

I agree with the above poster, its Mycoplasma that was probably the bioweapon, here is the peer reviewed evidence.

Histopathology and doxycycline treatment in a previously healthy non-AIDS patient systemically infected by Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitus strain).
Lo SC, Buchholz CL, Wear DJ, Hohm RC, Marty AM.

Department of Infectious and Parasitic Diseases Pathology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, D.C. 20306-6000.

The newly recognized human pathogenic mycoplasma M. fermentans (incognitus strain) causes a fatal systemic infection in experimental monkeys, infects patients with AIDS, and apparently is associated with a fatal disease in previously healthy non-AIDS patients. An apparently immunocompetent male who lacked evidence of HIV infection developed fever, malaise, progressive weight loss, and diarrhea and had extensive tissue necrosis involving liver and spleen. M. fermentans (incognitus strain) was centered at the advancing margins of these necrotizing lesions. Following the treatment of 300 mg doxycycline per day for 6 weeks, he recovered fully. He has no fever or diarrhea, and his abnormal liver function tests have returned to normal. He regained all lost strength and 14 kg of lost weight and has remained disease free for more than 1 year.

PMID: 1788266 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

This is what the Nicolsons found in many GWI/CFS patients, and when they found it in sick vets armed agents from the DOD threatened them to stop thier research and their boss Dr. Fred Conrad was shot in the head right after he told them it was part of the bioweapons program. I don’t think they would lie about that, here is their barely fictionilized book. What hell they went through at the MD cancer center where they worked is unbeleivable. A nobel Laurete in medicine Dr. Roger Guilemann has given it a good review along with other scientists.

http://www.projectdaylily.com/

Hi Ive seen the Film Hiv fact or fraud, and was very impressed with Duesberg’s debunking of HIV. In his book “Inventing the AIDS Virus” he quickly dissmisses Dr. Shyh Ching Lo’s mycoplasma incognitus hypothesis, which I disagree with. Dr. Lo never claimed his mycoplasmas caused AIDS, rather because he induced a fatal wasting disease in mice and monkeys and he clearly ruled it to be the cause of death of 6 HIV negative people that suddenly died of an undiagnosed infection that they were pathenogenic to humans. I know he didnt find Mycoplasma in 100% of AIDS patients, he seemed to embrace the multifactorial hypothesis. I agree with him that mycoplasmas are pathenogenic in their own right, and he also felt (at least back then) that HIV was benign. Lo’s hypothesis was not that mycoplasmas cause AIDS, rather that mycoplasma incognitus was pathenogenic in their own right, and subset of AIDS patients are infected with a pathengenic mycoplasma. It is easy to understand how AZT poisoning, hard drug use, and a mycoplasma can cause similar symptoms and be ruled as the same disease, when they are really different diseases masquerading as one another. Here is some of Lo’s work and some of my comments. First here are details of the 6 deaths that clearly show mycoplasmas are pathenogenic in thier own right.

EXAMPLE 21
M. fermentans incognitus Identified In Non-AIDS Patients
Six patients from six different geographic areas who presented with acute
flu-like ilnesses were studied. The patients developed persistent fevers,
lymphadenopathy or diarrhea, pneumonia, and/or heart, liver, or adrenal
failure. They all died in 1-7 weeks.
These patients had no serological evidence of HIV infection and could not
be classified as AIDS patients according to CDC criteria. The clinical
signs as well as laboratory and pathological studies of these patients
suggested an active infectious process, although no etiological agent was
found despite extensive infectious disease work-ups during their
hospitalization.
Post-mortem examinations showed histopathological lesions of fulminant
necrosis involving the lymph nodes, spleen, lungs, liver, adrenal glands,
heart, and/or brain. No viral inclusion cells, bacteria, fungi, or
parasites could be identified in these tissues using special tissue stains.
However, the use of rabbit antiserum and the monoclonal antibodies raised
against M. fermentans incognitus (Example 8), the pathogen shown to cause
fatal systemic infection in primates (Example 10), revealed M. fermentans
incognitus antigens in these necrotizing lesions. In situ hybridization
using a .sup.35 S labeled M. fermentans incognitus-specific DNA probe
(Example 18) also detected M. fermentans incognitus genetic material in the
areas of necrosis.
Furthermore, M. fermentans incognitus particles were identified
ultrastructurally in these histopathological lesions. M. fermentans
incognitus was associated with the systemic necrotizing lesions in these
previously healthly non-AIDS patients with an acute fatal disease.
Typical areas of necrosis due to the M. fermentans incognitus infection of
these patients are shown in FIG. 21. Most of the tissues which had massive
necrosis showed only minimal lymphocytic or histiocytic response and few
neutrophils (FIGS. 21A, B and C). FIG. 21A is a photomicrograph of splenic
tissue (x 30.5). FIG. 21B shows the peripheral margin of necrosis of 21A (x
153). FIG. 21C is a photomicrograph of lymph node tissue (x 15.25).
Occasionally, a chronic or acute inflammatory reaction could be identified
in the areas of necrosis (FIG. 21D). FIG. 21D is a photomicrograph of
adrenal gland tissue (x 153).
Representative samples of the immunostained tissues of these patients are
shown in FIGS. 22A-D. FIG. 22A is a photomicrograph of spleen tissue (x
80). FIG. 22B is a higher magnification of the margin of necrosis of 22A (x
353). FIG. 22C is a photomicrograph of lymph node tissue (x 257). FIG. 22D
is a higher magnification of cells with positive cytoplasmic staining of
22C (x 706). FIG. 22E is a photomicrograph of hemorrhagic necrosis in
adrenal gland tissue (x 706). The areas which displayed the highest
concentration of M. fermentans incognitus related antigens were often at
the margin of necrosis.
However, the necrotic center and peripheral unaffected areas had relatively
low reactivity. Most of the positively stained cells were identified as
lymphocytes or histiocytes in the lymph nodes and spleen, or reactive
mononuclear cells in the liver, lungs, adrenal glands and heart.
Immunostaining of control tissues with necrotizing lesions from patients
with cat scratch disease, Hodgkin’s disease, malignant lymphoma,
cryptococcal fungal infections and hemorrhagic splenic tissues of Hairy
cell leukemia did not display a positive reaction. Serum obtained from the
same rabbit before immunizaiton with M. fermentans incognitus antigens also
failed to display a positive immunoreaction in the necrotizing lesions of
the six patients.
Using a .sup.35 S radiolabeled psb-2.2 M. fermentans incognitus DNA probe
(Example 18), strong labeling of clusters of cells at the margins of
necrosis of the affected tissues was observed. The affected tissues tested
were formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded spleen, lung, lymph node, adrenal
gland liver and bone marrow. The intensity of the labeling, or the number
of grains localized in the cells at the margin of necrosis was well above
the level present at either the necrosis (FIGS. 23A and B). However, there
were also clusters of apparently viable cells in the necrosis which were
also strongly labeled (FIG. 23C). FIG. 23A shows strong labeling of cells
at the peripheral zone of necrosis (x 76.5). FIG. 23B is a higher
magnification of 23A (x 422). FIG. 23C shows the occasional positive
labeling in an area of diffuse necrosis in the spleen (x 150). The inset of
23C is a higher magnification (x 422).
Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded liver and spleen tissues from a patient
with pancreatic carcinoma were used as negative controls, and showed no
labeling above background levels. A control probe of .sup.35 S labeled
cloning vector DNA, not containing psb-2.2 M. fermentans incognitus DNA did
not label any of the tested tissues (FIG. 23D). FIG. 23D is the same area
of FIG. 23C in the consecutive tissue section, hybridized with .sup.35 S
labeled cloning vector DNA not containing psb-2.2 M. fermentans incognitus
DNA (x 150) (i.e., control for 23C).
Areas of the necrotizing lesions which immunostained most positively for M.
fermentans incognitus specific antigens were examined by electromicroscopy.
Particles with characteristic ultrastructural features of M. fermentans
incognitus were directly identified in all the lesions. These particles in
the areas of necrosis, morphologically resembled M. fermentans incognitus
previously identified in Sb51 cells (Example 4) and in the tissues of
experimentally inoculated monkeys (Example 10). The particles were
heterogeneous in size and shape, with most particles being spherical and
about 140 to 280 nm in diameter. At the margin of necrosis, the M.
fermentans incognitus particles were located in the cytoplasm of cells with
apparently no cytopathic changes, or in fragments of cytoplasm from
completely disrupted cells (FIG. 24). FIG. 24 shows electron mircographs of
tissues derived from areas highly positive for M. fermentans
incognitus-specific antigens. FIG. 24A is an electron micrograph at a
margin of necrosis in adrenal gland tissues (Bar=1,000 nm). FIG. 24A.sub.2
is a higher magnification of 24A (Bar=100 nm). FIGS. 24B.sub.1, and B.sub.2
are electron micrographs of the peripheral zone of necrosis in lymph node
tissue (Bar=1,000 nm). FIG. 24B.sub.3 is a higher magnification of
24B.sub.2 (Bar=100 nm).
Table 5, below, summarizes the profiles and histopathological findings for
each of the six patients.
TABLE 5
__________________________________________________________________________
Summary of Patient’s Profiles and Histopathological Findings
Tissue with necrotic
Duration
lesions identified
Personal
Salient clinical of illness by biopsy or at Patient
Profiles presentation (weeks) autopsy
__________________________________________________________________________
1 29-year old
arthralgia, myalgia, conjunc-
4.5 spleen, lung
black man
tivitis, persistent fever,
hypercalcemia, liver failure
(late), ARDs* (late)
2 33-year old
persistent fever, diarrhea,
7 lymph nodes, liver,
white woman
generalized lymphadenopathy,
spleen, kidneys
abnormal liver functions,
seizure (late)
3 40-year old
arthralgia, myalgia, sore
3.5 adrenal glands
white man
throat, chest pain, persis-
(bilateral), heart,
tent fever, malaise, diarrhea,
brain
finger numbness, comatose
(late)
4 31-year old
vomiting and diarrhea, tremor,
1.5 liver, spleen
black woman
fever, epigastric and chest
pain, abnormal liver functions,
headache
5 23-year old
Watery diarrhea, vomiting,
3 liver, heart
white man
jaundice, arthralgia, myalgia
6 33-year old
fever, malaise, nausea and
1 spleen, liver
black man
vomiting, myalgia and weakness,
liver failure and jaundice,
confusion and hallucinations
(late)
__________________________________________________________________________
*ARDS Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Lo SC; Dawson MS; Newton PB 3rd; Sonoda MA; Shih JW; Engler WF; Wang RY; Wear DJ. Association of the virus-like infectious agent originally reported in patients with AIDS with acute fatal disease in previously healthy non-AIDS patients. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TROPICAL MEDICINE AND HYGIENE, September 1989, volume 41, number 3, pages 364-376.

To the poster who self-identifies as “S”: I find it interesting that you have posted a link to Garth and Nancy Nicolson’s book, “Project Day Lily,” yet you are claiming that Lo did not believe that M.fermentans Incognitus causes Aids.

The Nicolson’s expose has as its main theme that Hiv is, in fact, the “false flag” that I claim it to be, and that it is really the mycoplasma that is the killing pathogen.

Project Day Lily is a fictionalized account of the creation and coverup of a biological weapon identified in the book as a mycoplasma. The Nicolsons claim to have used a fictionalized account in order to project themselves from certain forces and agencies which would not appreciate their exposition of the role of mycoplasmas as agents of biological warfare.

Garth and Nancy Nicolson, two of the world’s foremost researchers of mycoplasmas, best known for finding and treating mycoplasma infection in Gulf War soldiers, and who wrote the book, use the name, Dr. Lon, in place of Dr. Shyh Ching Lo, who received the patent for M.fermentans Incognitus. (5242820).

From the book:

“Dr. Richard Armwhite, the egocentric general officer, interrupted Dr. Lon. “Oh come off it, Dr. Long. Don’t tell me you’re going soft on us. Besides, it’s not as if it’s a virus that cannot be treated with antibiotics.” Dr. Armwhite continued, “It’s not HIV, you know.” Dr. Lon sarcastically answered, “No, It’s worse.” He paused again and then continued, “You’ve got to know that this is probably the true killer in HIV-AiDS. My lab has found this in 80% of AIDS patients, and it is especially high in the late stages of the disease. This is what is really killing the HIV-infected people, not the HIV virus.”

General Armwhite looked at Dr. Lon and became highly irritated. “I am warning you, Dr. Lon….You know damn well that officially it is HIV that causes AIDS, and that’s how it’s going to stay. It just got out of hand in Africa, you know, and no one cared about those fags in New York anyway. They will never find out that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS without the mycoplasma infection.”

This is a fictionalized account, but I believe that anyone who is not deluded by the Duesbergian theory of street-drugs-and poppers/Aids, and who has an independent mind and a serious understanding of the history of AIDS, and not beholden to any intellectual tribalism, will eventually come to the conclusion that Aids is a man-made illness.

Except HIV is a figment - An imaginary virus that has never been isolated.

Political constructs do not have viral causes!

I believe we are dealing with genocide - gay men, non-whites and the very poor are being socially isolated and medically murdered under the cloak of HIV/AIDS.

In my opinion these crimes against humanity involve chemo/psychological-warfare and not bio-warfare.

The lumping of the various health challenges of these high risk social health groups under the banner of a sexually transmitted CD4 deficiency syndrome was a hoax, designed to discourage sex, save the failing cancer industry and justify the need for funding the Public Health Service…

If public health officials lied about who is at risk and why—(They did!)  Why should we believe anything they tell us.

“AIDS FIGHT IS SKEWED BY FEDERAL CAMPAIGN EXAGGERATING RISKS
Most Heterosexuals Face Scant Peril but Receive Large Portion of Funds”, May 1, 1996 Wall Street Journal Page 1 and entire inside Page A6

I do not believe there is any merit in the bio-warfare theory because:

1. The CD4-deficiency causes AIDS theory has been profoundly discredited
2. Testing positive on any antibody test is not proof of an active infection
3. The sexual transmission of AIDS has been profoundly discredited
The research is clear the life-extending treatments actually shorten lives

No one is suggesting that mycoplasmae are not harmless. I am not convinced that they cause AIDS. If they do, how has such a select group of the population been exposed to them? I think that Duesberg’s hypothesis has some merit, however, their may be other co-factors and health habits that enter into the equation. I think that we all might agree that these people have low immunity. It boggles my mind that no studies are being done with all of the funds available to prove or disprove this. They don’t want to know the truth as their funding would cease to exist.

“S”, you have written, regarding Shyh Ching Lo’s position on the origin of AIDS: ”...he seemed to embrace the multifactorial hypothesis.”

Will you please present a quotation from Lo’s body of work which gives you this impression? I have been searching in vain. I think if you have read his comments in the patent for M.fermentans Incognitus, you will understand that Lo believed that this “novel,” “pathogenic mycoplasma” was a much better candidate as an immune system destroyer than HIV.

Michael Ellner, you write, apparently to supply evidence that HIV is not a man-made virus:

“I do not believe there is any merit in the biowarfare theory because…”

1. CD4 deficiency…disproved.
2. testing positive is not proof of active infection.
3. sexual transmission has been discredited.

While I agree with all of these assertions, I must suggest that whether they are true or false, has nothing to do with whether HIV is a man-made, synthetic retrovirus, or that AIDS was developed using biowarfare technology.

Here’s my evidence that HIV exists, not as a naturally-occuring entitiy, but rather, as one constucted in a lab.

First: Google “Latent Viruses and Mutated Oncogenes—No Evidence for Pathogenesis: by Peter Duesberg, and find Chapter IV, Section A, entitled: “Mutated Proto-myc Genes and Burkitt’s Lymphoma. In the fourth paragraph from the title you will find this sentence:

“In efforts to develope a system that is more efficient than transfection for introducing mutated proto-myc genes into cells or animals, synthetic retroviruses with the coding region of the human proto-myc gene were constructed.”

I believe that these “synthetic retroviruses” were created by the prototechnology which also allowed the creation of so-called HIV, and also that Peter Duesberg was involved in the development of this technology.

Here are patents for two synthetic viruses:

U.S. Patent 4859587. From the patent: “Recombinant herpes simples viruses.”

“Methods of preparing recombinant viruses, vaccines, incorporating the viruses and methods of immunizing a human host by innoculation with the vaccines are disclosed.”

Also: US Patent 6846670

From the patent: “Genetically engineered herpes virus for the treatment of cardiovascular disease.”

May we now initially agree that scientists have constructed synthetic viruses?

Michael Ellner, besides the apparent conversation between you, Montagnier and Lo, could you please supply us with any published comments by them which support your assertion that “both agreed that AIDS was multi-factorial and doubted that any single agent could be the “cause.”

I have never found anything in the published works of Lo or Montagnier to support a “multifactorial” cause for AIDS.

I am sure that if these gentlemen truly believed this it would be possible to find it in their published works. Such a thing would be difficult for them NOT to mention in their many published works and studies.

As you might be aware, Montagnier, along with Robert Gallo, was happy to accept President Reagan’s peacemaking in the controversy over which one of them had discovered the cause of Aids, so-called HIV.

In case you are responding to my comments, I have never claimed that HIV is a “stealth” virus. I’ve repeated several times on this forum that I believe that HIV is completely benign and harmless, and certainly has never been used to target anyone, gay, drug-addicted or poor.

My theory is that HIV is a “false flag” and various mycoplasmas—fermentans and penetrans—and perhaps the Lyme Disease bacteria, Borrelia Burgdorferi, are the true immune system destroyers.

And I believe that the cobbled-together proteins and gene products known as HIV were obviously constructed in a lab and are used as the backbone of the phony HIV causes Aids paradigm.

And that Lo’s “pathogenic mycoplasma” for which the United States Army has the patent, was developed as an agent of biological warfare.

Montagnier apparently came to believe that HIV was harmless unless it was accompanied by a mycoplasma, which he considered a co-factor.

For Montagnier to have accepted a multifactorial cause of AIDS would have meant that he had disavowed his own claim to have discovered the Aids virus, so-called HIV. To my knowledge, he has not done this or returned the royalty money he has received from his “discovery.”

He has never written that he believes in the Duesberg/Crowe street drugs/ bath houses/  poppers, multifactorial hypothesis. Although we all understand that AZT and other DNA chain terminators, nucleoside and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and various protease inhibitors have killed thousands.

I believe that you are incorrect about this but would be happy to admit that I’m wrong if you can supply quotations from the works of Montagnier or Lo which support a multifactorial cause of AIDS.

Sources, please.

Co-factors:

These are extracts from my review (published in the Journal of Scientific Exploration, 19 #3 (2005) 413—419) of the memoirs of Gallo and of Montagnier:

Virus Hunting: AIDS, Cancer, and the Human Retrovirus : a Story of Scientific Discovery, by Robert Gallo, BasicBooks, 1991.
Virus: The Co-Discoverer of HIV Tracks Its Rampage and Charts the Future, by Luc Montagnier, W. W. Norton, 2000 (translated by Stephen Sartarelli from the French,  Des virus et des hommes, Editions Odile Jacob, 1994; parts of the text updated to 1998).

Contradicting much of what Montagnier says elsewhere in the book is his conviction that HIV alone is no serious threat to health, that it requires some as-yet-unknown co-factor to lead from HIV infection to AIDS, most likely the mycoplasma that Montagnier’s group has isolated from a number of AIDS patients (pp. 124, 169—178, 183 ff.).

Gallo has never publicly admitted in plain words that HIV is not the necessary and sufficient cause of AIDS; in his book, he “presents the irrefutable evidence that HIV causes AIDS (chapter 15)” (p.7). Yet at several places he acknowledges that infection by HIV (p. 199) and progression to AIDS (pp. 252—252) depend on some co-factor, possibly certain venereal diseases (p. 199) or a new human herpes virus (p. 252), perhaps HHV-6 (pp. 254—255); the HTLVs that Gallo himself had earlier discovered being “the only known specific co-factors for AIDS” (p. 248, emphasis in original). He insists that HIV is the sine qua non, that AIDS will still occur without co-factors, it will “probably just take longer”, and he dismisses as “unlikely” Montagnier’s belief that a mycoplasma is responsible for the depletion of T4 cells that produces AIDS (p. 297). On the other hand, he also writes that “If not all HIV-infected people develop AIDS (and that is a possibility)” (p. 302)

Michael Ellner, Luc Montagnier considered the mycoplasmas or other microbes to be co-factors, by which he specifically meant other microbes which could upgrade HIV from a benign to a killer status. This upgrading comprised Montagnier’s “co-factor” hypothesis. It is entirely distinct from the Crowe/Duesberg “multifactorial” hypothesis.

This belief in an HIV upgrader does not represent the “multi-factorial” cause of Aids, which you and Mr. Bauer, and Mr. Crowe have been supporting on this forum. As you know the multifactorial hypothesis claims that Aids is not caused by a microbe which, by itself, destroys the immune system, such is claimed for HIV, but by factors such as lifestyle, multi-bacterial infections picked up by gays in bathhouses, which overwhelm the immune system, inhaling poppers, street drugs such as cocaine, meth and heroin and including the antiretrovirals, as they came on stream in the nineties.

I found your quote on a quotation website, without any reference to its source. Unless you supply some sources for it, is it not logical for me to assume that you found it on the same website and don’t really know its derivation? It was taken completely out of context and presented here to support your claim that Montagnier supported the “multifactorial” origin of Aids.

It would not occur to most serious people to support their ideas by going to quotation websites without any understanding of the origin or context of the quote.

Will you please supply us with the exact reference, that is, publication from which the quote was taken so we may assess the context and discover Montagnier’s understanding of the existence of co-factors?

Montagnier’s quote regarding ethnicity was similar to Mr. Bauer’s recognition of the fact that HIV seems to be able to read the DNA of the person with whom it comes into contact, which results in black people being much more susceptible to infection.

Less than two years ago it was discovered that alleles are not inherited, one from each parent, as it has always been assumed. Some alleles are inherited in clusters. What this means is that,  if lymphocyte receptors are among the cells that are inherited assymetrically, it is very possible that black people, who always possess receptors such as CCR5 and others, will be several times more likely to become infected with HIV than Caucasian people, and not just in the slight discrepancy that had been theorized earlier.

In the quote which you presented, Montagnier was apparently speculating about co-receptors as factors determining which ethnic group will become more easily infected. This is an epidemiologic finding as opposed to an etiologic finding, which is the context of Montagnier’s co-factor hypothesis.

I’d like to ask you also if Montagnier agreed with your assessment that “Hiv is a figment—an imaginary virus,” as you have written on this forum? Perhaps he let you know his feeling on this as you were engaging in conversation while you “hung out.”

So far, all of those whose works I have studied, who believe that HIV does not exist, also believe in the “multifactorial” cause of AIDS.