The Origins of AIDS.

coco200066

If this has been covered before, my apologies. Newbie here so bare with me.

Well just watched this program called "The Origins of Aids". It was eye opening and very disturbing on several levels. See the video below. Basically it is saying that there is mounting evidence that Aids was a man made creation by Scientist working in the Belgian Congo. There are pictures, voice recordings, documents, witnesses and yet the main guy denies the allegations, go figure, when he is in most of it!

Any way the crux of the argument is that the polio vaccination back in the day had problems so they had to get another one to work. They used a certain class of Monkey but the Belgian guys used Chimps, these chimps having SIV, the ancestor to HIV. Besides Aids, using Chimps, monkeys period was and is very dangerous as many viruses are present and all are aware of this. Anyway, this nut, vaccinated 1 million in the Congo and there is direct correlation that this same area is where the first case of AIDS came from. All very disturbing, so is the pictures of innocent Chimps being led to the slaughter, they would capture them, kill the males and only use the females and babies. Then they would dissect them, in their senses! Very sick stuff.

The video below is not arranged the same although has the same people and info.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xpzly_origins-of-aids

I believe this is the exact one I watched.
http://www.documentary-film.net/search/video-listings.php?e=5

cockmynut

I wouldn't be surprised if the HIV virus was synthetic or artificial. The fact is, nobody knows where HIV came from; there are only theories. So when someone tells you it got into humans after some randy African lad porked a monkey, you can call them an idiot and be sincere.:rolleyes:

Dave!

Hey, monkies need porkin' too y'know! They just have to pay. With bananas.

humanji

Just ask MonkeyFudge how it happened! :eek:

anti-venom

coco200066 wrote:

If this has been covered before, my apologies. Newbie here so bare with me.

Well just watched this program called "The Origins of Aids". It was eye opening and very disturbing on several levels. See the video below. Basically it is saying that there is mounting evidence that Aids was a man made creation by Scientist working in the Belgian Congo. There are pictures, voice recordings, documents, witnesses and yet the main guy denies the allegations, go figure, when he is in most of it!

Any way the crux of the argument is that the polio vaccination back in the day had problems so they had to get another one to work. They used a certain class of Monkey but the Belgian guys used Chimps, these chimps having SIV, the ancestor to HIV. Besides Aids, using Chimps, monkeys period was and is very dangerous as many viruses are present and all are aware of this. Anyway, this nut, vaccinated 1 million in the Congo and there is direct correlation that this same area is where the first case of AIDS came from. All very disturbing, so is the pictures of innocent Chimps being led to the slaughter, they would capture them, kill the males and only use the females and babies. Then they would dissect them, in their senses! Very sick stuff.

The video below is not arranged the same although has the same people and info.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xpzly_origins-of-aids

I believe this is the exact one I watched.
http://www.documentary-film.net/search/video-listings.php?e=5

I havn't seen the 'The origins of aids', but a lot of speculation about this disease is simply the work of fantasists, cranks, liars, pseudo scientists, racists or conspiracy or religious nuts. A lot of the 'evidence' is easily scuppered. The theorists always seem to conveniently forget to mention such crucial factors as the lack of gene manipulation technology necessary, the differences bewteen simian and human viruses, their religious convictions etc, etc. I wouldn't get too carried away with the authenticity of this, or any other documentary purporting to offer the answers to this mystery. Besides the logistics of so many people keeping such a profound secret for so long is laughable. Human nature being what it is, it is very unlikely that one of the people involved would not get an attack of sour conscience, simply blab the whole thing while drunk or something or attempt to sell the story for millions.

The theory that aids originated by man indulging in sexual congress with monkeys is far less plausable than the straight forward theory that the simian virus was simply passed to humans by hunters contracting the virus through abrasions in the skin from contaminated monkey blood. The other more likely theory is that of people eating the flesh o the monkeys (bush meat).

Bottom line, don't go creamin' your boxers over one documentary. Go and do some research from some credible sources.

2minute Hate

anti-venom wrote:

I havn't seen the 'The origins of aids', but a lot of speculation about this disease is simply the work of fantasists, cranks, liars, pseudo scientists, racists or conspiracy or religious nuts. A lot of the 'evidence' is easily scuppered. The theorists always seem to conveniently forget to mention such crucial factors as the lack of gene manipulation technology necessary, the differences bewteen simian and human viruses, their religious convictions etc, etc. I wouldn't get too carried away with the authenticity of this, or any other documentary purporting to offer the answers to this mystery. Besides the logistics of so many people keeping such a profound secret for so long is laughable. Human nature being what it is, it is very unlikely that one of the people involved would not get an attack of sour conscience, simply blab the whole thing while drunk or something or attempt to sell the story for millions.

The theory that aids originated by man indulging in sexual congress with monkeys is far less plausable than the straight forward theory that the simian virus was simply passed to humans by hunters contracting the virus through abrasions in the skin from contaminated monkey blood. The other more likely theory is that of people eating the flesh o the monkeys (bush meat).

Bottom line, don't go creamin' your boxers over one documentary. Go and do some research from some credible sources.

On the contrary ... i only see speculative suggestions in your response ( is
that your idea of research???) have u done any on this subject ? What facts
exactly r u quoting ....... oh yes , i see .........NONE!
Watch the documentaries out there and scour the web
and bookshops for info.... then u might get the real picture that Aids could
well have been man-made ,

practice what u preach Creamer!!

bonkey

2minute Hate wrote:

On the contrary ... i only see speculative suggestions in your response

So you understand why a speculative theory isn't strong enough...excellent.

Watch the documentaries out there and scour the web
and bookshops for info.... then u might get the real picture that Aids could
well have been man-made ,

Damn...and I thought you understood why a speculative theory wasn't good enough. AIDS could have been man-made. Yes. Indeed it could. Thats a epeculative theory.

practice what u preach Creamer!!

Insults aside....Et Tu, Brute.

cockmynut

bonkey wrote:

Damn...and I thought you understood why a speculative theory wasn't good enough. AIDS could have been man-made. Yes. Indeed it could.

Indeed. Nobody knows where HIV came from; all that exists are theories about its origin. It could be artificial and it could be natural.

Although to be honest, neither would surprise me.

Diogenes

A relevant piece discussing those who attack anti retrovirual drugs

In this world, which is not as remote as you might think from where you're sat, Zackie Achmat is a hero: the founder of the Treatment Action Campaign in South Africa, he recently won a breakthrough in his long battle against the vitamin-loving Aids denialists of Mbeki's government, to make HIV medication available through the public health system.

Achmat is also HIV positive, and was wealthy enough to afford antiretroviral medication, but deprived himself, risking his own life, as a matter of principle, until they were made widely available, despite even the personal pleas of Nelson Mandela, an avowed and public supporter of both antiretroviral medication and Achmat's work.

Achmat's victory, tragically a decade too late, was a deep wound for Matthias Rath, the German vitamin impresario who claims that his vitamin pills are better for Aids than medication, and his colleague Anthony Brink, a barrister and the leader of an allied organisation, the Treatment Information Group, which campaigns vociferously against the currently available antiretroviral medication, claiming - loudly - that they are not just ineffective but actively harmful.

This man Anthony Brink has now managed to file a complaint against Achmat with, of all places, the Hague international criminal court: Achmat is accused of genocide, for successfully campaigning to to get access to HIV drugs for the South African people.

Brink "respectfully submit" that the international criminal court should punish Achmat with "permanent confinement in a small, white, steel and concrete cage, bright fluorescent light on all the time ... warders putting him out only to work every day in the prison garden to cultivate nutrient-rich vegetables, including when it's raining". This is supposed to be a serious war crimes document, remember.

Then it gets nasty. Achmat should be forced to take his HIV medication ("which he claims to take") and it should be "pushed if necessary down his forced-open gullet with a finger, or, if he bites, kicks and screams too much, dripped into his arm".

And how will this forced administration be possible? He should be, white barrister Anthony Brink respectfully submits, "restrained on a gurney with cable ties around his ankles, wrists and neck ... until he gives up the ghost on them, so as to eradicate this foulest, most loathsome, unscrupulous and malevolent blight on the human race, who has plagued and poisoned the people of South Africa".

I don't think it's out of line to suggest this is particularly vile considering that Achmat is a "coloured" man, by the apartheid government's classification: and let's not forget that Achmat, a longstanding anti-apartheid and gay rights campaigner, was imprisoned under that brutal regime.

From The Guardian's bad science column.

The dubious claims about HIV and retrovirual drugs are killing thousands every week. It's appalling. These claims are horrendous...

r3nu4l

OP, many moons ago a book called "TheRiver" was written with extensive referencing and was very well researched...claiming that HIV was man-made. The problem wasn't with the research but the incredible leaps of logic taken by the author.

As for HIV being man-made, researchers at our very own NUI Maynooth were anlysing blood samples from Malawi taken over many decades and dating back decades. Their analysis revealed HIV in the blood of people in the early 1950's...at around the same time we first discovered the structure of DNA...therefore making it impossible to have engineered the virus, as a molecular biologist I can tell you that we simply didn't have the techniques back then to do that.

Interestingly, the same team also discovered a hitherto unknown strain of HIV from these blood samples. This strain of HIV has since become extinct and cannot be found anywhere on earth. Work is now ongoing to establish what weakness halted that straina nd if it can be applied to todays HIV strains.

Oracle

What's more interesting and a lot more plausible are the ideas that are presented here: http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/whistleblowers.htm

The Gnome

Diogenes wrote:

These claims are horrendous...

That may have been the most distubing thing I've read in a long time.

r3nu4l

Oracle wrote:

What's more interesting and a lot more plausible are the ideas that are presented here: http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/whistleblowers.htm

Right, so the millions dying of AIDS in the developing world are dying not because of HIV infection but because they took lots of recreational drugs and AZT? - This is what Duesburg says!

That's funny because they were dying of AIDS years before AZT was ever developed and also because even after it was developed people in these countries didn't have access to AZT.