MEDUSA-RULES 13.06.2012 00:19 |
THE CO DISCOVERER OF HIV Prof. Luc Montagnier's Extended House of Numbers Interview link |
MEDUSA-RULES 13.06.2012 00:24 |
House of Numbers, Full Documentary link In House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic, an AIDS film like no other, the HIV/AIDS story is being rewritten. This is the first film to present the uncensored POVs of virtually all the major players; in their own settings, in their own words. It rocks the foundation upon which all conventional wisdom regarding HIV/AIDS is based. House of Numbers could well be the opening volley in a battle to bring sanity and clarity to an epidemic gone awry. House of Numbers Website link comments from queen fans I love queen and i hate to say it but Freddie was very wreckless during his stardom life. He used alot of drugs and antibiotics and sexual partners and didnt really care about himself? until he weakened his own immune system enough to go to the doctors who saw Karposi Sarcoma on his arm according to Jim Hutton. We now know from the use of amyl nitrate..The doctor gave him an aids diagnosis without a HIV test (FACT!) He took AZT and other drugs right up until 2 weeks before he died. AZT killed him Thinkagain6 in reply to IJustPiercedMyBrain (Show the comment) 1 week ago 2 they killed? Freddie... IJustPiercedMyBrain 2 weeks ago 3 |
mooghead 13.06.2012 01:12 |
ffs......... |
MEDUSA-RULES 13.06.2012 01:50 |
mooghead wrote: ffs.........Yes For Freddie's sake, and for the sake of millions of others also. |
YourValentine 13.06.2012 03:55 |
If you ever saw a person die of AIDS you know that this person did not die because the CDC in America invented the disease for money, that is so ridiculous. The main cause for HIV/AIDS is ignorance and in countries where campaigns were successfully conducted to educate people the infection rate has dropped to "insignificant". To claim that the pharmaceutical indstry is not interested in finding a cure is just as stupid as cynical: a pharmaceutical company finding a cure for AIDS would make billions from this cure and/or vaccination. The fact that Africa is now the continent with the worst AIDS rate only shows that lack education and knowledge avoids to beat the virus. Claiming that HIV and AIDS do not really exist is just telling people to die of ignorance. The only appropriate answer to HIV/AIDS is relentlessly campaigning for people to protect themselves. Anything else is irresponsible and plain stupid. What you say about Freddie not having been tested is just plain wrong. He was tested twice and he was infected. It does not matter where he was infected and how many sexual partners he had - nobody deserves to die that way and nobody has the right to blame the disease on the victims. A pity that such rubbish is found on a Queen message board. |
inu-liger 13.06.2012 03:58 |
"A pity that such rubbish is found on a Queen message board." Of course, one COULD also clean up such rubbish ;) |
thomasquinn 32989 13.06.2012 07:31 |
inu-liger wrote: "A pity that such rubbish is found on a Queen message board." Of course, one COULD also clean up such rubbish ;) |
emrabt 13.06.2012 10:35 |
A pity that such rubbish is found on a Queen message board. ================== O.0 |
MEDUSA-RULES 13.06.2012 11:19 |
YourValentine wrote: If you ever saw a person die of AIDS you know that this person did not die because the CDC in America invented the disease for money, that is so ridiculous. The main cause for HIV/AIDS is ignorance and in countries where campaigns were successfully conducted to educate people the infection rate has dropped to "insignificant". To claim that the pharmaceutical indstry is not interested in finding a cure is just as stupid as cynical: a pharmaceutical company finding a cure for AIDS would make billions from this cure and/or vaccination. The fact that Africa is now the continent with the worst AIDS rate only shows that lack education and knowledge avoids to beat the virus. Claiming that HIV and AIDS do not really exist is just telling people to die of ignorance. The only appropriate answer to HIV/AIDS is relentlessly campaigning for people to protect themselves. Anything else is irresponsible and plain stupid. What you say about Freddie not having been tested is just plain wrong. He was tested twice and he was infected. It does not matter where he was infected and how many sexual partners he had - nobody deserves to die that way and nobody has the right to blame the disease on the victims. A pity that such rubbish is found on a Queen message board.It is a documented fact that AZT the first publicly available aids drug destroyed peoples immune systems and killed them how the scars that Freddie had on his legs were not caused by Hiv link |
MEDUSA-RULES 13.06.2012 11:21 |
inu-liger wrote: "A pity that such rubbish is found on a Queen message board." Of course, one COULD also clean up such rubbish ;)I dont suppose you have listened to the scientists and doctors in the videos. have you ever taken aids drugs? do you know anything about what they do to you? and i dont care if you have given them to someone for that is not the same as dying from them or nearly dying from them |
MEDUSA-RULES 13.06.2012 11:36 |
Freddie was on AZT AZT Cause for Concern British Medical Association Educational Merit Award, 1992 40 minute Dispatches, Channel 4, 1992 Questions use of AZT and highlights drug toxicity VIDEO AZT Cause for Concern link 2 HIV does not cause AIDS. AZT (AIDS medication) causes AIDS link |
MEDUSA-RULES 13.06.2012 12:06 |
Health Education AIDS Liaison, Toronto AZT and Cancer New York Native, 1987 October 19th, John Lauritsen This article is copyright by John Lauritsen. He has given permission to print out this document and to photocopy it. It may not be published commercially without his permission (john_lauritsen@post.harvard.edu). Although this article is several years old, the questions it asks have never been answered, and consequently is still of great importance. It is urgently necessary to review the toxicity of AZT in light of recent marketing developments. Prior to last August, AZT therapy was officially indicated only for “AIDS”or “ARC”patients who either had “a history of cytologically confirmed Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP) or an absolute CD4 (T4 helper/inducer) lymphocyte count of less than 200/mm3 in the peripheral blood before therapy is begun.” (Physician's Desk Reference) This changed dramatically in August, when a series of press releases were issued by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and other branches of the Public Health Service (PHS), claiming that AZT was beneficial for “HIV-infected”persons with “mild symptoms of immune system damage”and also for “HIV- infected persons who have not yet developed symptoms.” The old rationale for prescribing AZT was that people with AIDS (PWAs) were suffering from a disease that was invariably fatal, that such persons had only a few months to live, and that AZT might extend their lives for a few more months. The idea was that in a desperate situation, drastic measures were called for. I have repeatedly argued that this viewpoint is wrong – that “AIDS”is not invariably fatal; that some PWAs have survived for many years and appear to be recovering; and that the only chance for recovery lies in strengthening the body, rather than injuring it through toxic chemotherapy like AZT. Instances of severe muscular atrophy and pain caused by AZT were reported in a letter to the New England Journal of Medicine. The physicians observed: “All patients had an insidious onset of myalgias, muscle tenderness, weakness, and severe muscle atrophy favoring the proximal muscle groups. Physical examinations revealed varying degrees of muscle weakness and grossly apparent atrophy. Weight loss due to muscle loss was uniformly noted; in one patient, the loss was a striking 18 kg. [40 pounds].” The physicians held AZT responsible for the muscular atrophy and pain: “We did not observe this illness before zidovudine was available, the disorder was seen in patients taking the drug for extended periods, and the syndrome was ameliorated after the drug was stopped.”[note 12] A leading British AIDS doctor, Dr. Matthew Helbert, sent Burroughs Wellcome stock into a temporary tailspin when be publicly commented on muscular atrophy and other serious, but not officially acknowledged, side effects of AZT: “Biting hard on the hand that had paid his air fare, he placed heavy emphasis on new, debilitating and sometimes deadly side-effects of Retrovir on some of his Aids patients. Some men's muscles had degenerated dramatically after long-term use of the drug. Others had rapidly developed a serious brain disease, encephalitis, soon after being taken off the drug. Given the company's duty to keep a new drug under active surveillance, Dr. Helbert asked why the company had not picked up similar cases among the thousands of people treated with Retrovir for a year or more in the United States.”[note 13] Other well-known, but not officially acknowledged, side effects of AZT include damage to the kidneys, liver, and nerves. An old friend of mine was one of the earlier patients to be put on AZT. Everyone thought he was doing well. For almost a year he was occasionally able to work or go to concerts. Then one day he went into complete paralysis, and he died two days later. Now, paralysis is not an officially recognized side effect of AZT; there is no warning about it on the package. Nevertheless, there is a connection. Peter Duesberg has repeatedly referred to AZT as a “poison”, and with good reason. AZT is cytotoxic – it kills cells. AZT terminates DNA synthesis, the very life process itself, by which new cells are formed and grow. It is in the very nature of AZT to kill healthy cells. Therefore, damage to the muscles, to the nerves, and to each and every organ of the body should be considered expected consequences of AZT therapy. link So of the 300,000 deaths attributed to AIDS by the CDC since 1987, the vast majority probably died from taking AZT -- from the extreme toxicity of the drug itself, or from an opportunistic disease that resulted from the destruction of the immune system by AZT, or from developing AIDS by taking AZT,... ...especially since the recovery rate of HIV Positives and AIDS patients is so high when they stop taking AZT and other recreational drugs. "[I]n researching his 1990 book Surviving AIDS, [Michael] Callen interviewed nearly fifty people who had lived for many years not just after being pronounced HIV-positive, but after an AIDS diagnosis. He found that only four had ever used AZT; three of those had since died, and one was dying of AZT-induced lymphoma. But the overwhelming majority of the long-term survivors had somehow managed to resist the enourmous pressure to take AZT." |
MEDUSA-RULES 13.06.2012 12:09 |
in one patient, the loss was a striking 18 kg. [40 pounds].” “We did not observe this illness before zidovudine (AZT FREDDIE'S MEDS) was available, the disorder was seen in patients taking the drug for extended periods, and the syndrome was ameliorated after the drug was stopped.”[note 12] AZT is cytotoxic – it kills cells. |
emrabt 13.06.2012 12:39 |
Didn't treasure moment post about this.... but in a much more coherent manor? |
MEDUSA-RULES 13.06.2012 12:42 |
emrabt wrote: Didn't treasure moment post about this.... but in a much more coherent manor?Oh good there is someone who cares about Freddie on this board? Did you ever get the feeling That the LIE is less revealing Than a downright TRUTH? And did you think ? |
inu-liger 13.06.2012 12:50 |
emrabt wrote: Didn't treasure moment post about this.... but in a much more coherent manor? Sadly yes, their equally lunatic posts about the same b.s. were actually easier to read! |
inu-liger 13.06.2012 12:53 |
Barb, would it go against the rules if we were to ask you to reveal based on the IP address which country Medusa hails from? |
GratefulFan 13.06.2012 14:02 |
This reminds me of the Christine Maggiore movement and documentary that the Foo Fighters were associated with because of their well meaning but impressionable bass player. Her rap was that HIV did not cause AIDS and that AZT was what sickened and killed. She refused the treatment both for herself and her tiny daughter who contracted it during or shortly after birth. Naturally, they both died. Well done mom. These things read exactly like the 911 conspiracy theories. A bunch of of isolated facts that are correlative at best strung together in what is only very superficially 'logic', ironically equally appealing to the credulous and paranoid both. |
GratefulFan 13.06.2012 14:03 |
inu-liger wrote: Barb, would it go against the rules if we were to ask you to reveal based on the IP address which country Medusa hails from?One would hope so. |
Holly2003 13.06.2012 14:22 |
Does Crackpot City have an IP address? |
Micrówave 13.06.2012 15:28 |
I think we need to take it easy on MEDUSA RULES. I think I may have figured it out, but a few of you are not reading it's posts too closely. Thankfully, I am here to do that and interpret the life of one "MEDUSA RULES". First off, it's not "Medusa". The MED stands for "Meds"... it gets them from the USA because our Meds are far superior to the ones from other less fortunate countries. So, in fact, his user name is a ringing endorsement. You might notice some jibberish, from time to time, but that's only because it's time for another dose. Remember what Brian said... "AIDS affects us all". We should really be offering uplifting words of encouragement for MEDUSA RULES during these difficult times. I will be your defender, MEDUSA RULES. The rest of you just leave him/her alone. He/She is not an animal... In exchange, MEDUSA, would you allow me exclusive rights to the following AIDS questions post mortem? 1. How much weight did you lose? 2. What were your last words? 3. Who was in the room when you passed? 4. What song did you right about your disease twenty years ago? 5. How did you get "it"? 6. Were you really gay? Now, I hope it's not too soon but... I hope you all will buy my new 'tell-all' book "MEDUSA and Me". |
GratefulFan 13.06.2012 15:57 |
Crackpot City actually has 11 IP addresses and that's not that many. They're quite hard to acquire so everybody's out get them. I'm listening to 'Gettin' in Tune' right now so Who's with me. |
Holly2003 13.06.2012 16:14 |
wow! |
emrabt 14.06.2012 00:58 |
just when you think the site can't get any lower BAMB more suprises. |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 03:19 |
your disinterest in documented scientific facts in regards to patient doctor assesment of the affects of the medicine that Freddie took, shows your complete denial or interest in, what truly killed him. It also shows you do not care about any others, except yourselves. And what you write here is actually important, because Life is Real and so is judgement, but that shall be proven later. |
emrabt 14.06.2012 03:24 |
It also shows you do not care about any others, except yourselves. ========================= If i didn't care, explain why I go to the local graveyard every week and put flowers on the graves of the people I murder? |
YourValentine 14.06.2012 03:29 |
Having an opinion is not against Queenzone rules and the IP addresses are protected. As to the detrimental effect of AIDS medication, mainly AZT: It is well possible that AZT does have a bad impact on the overall health of the patient but that is certainly true for chemotherapy, as well. To say that AZT killed Fredie Mercury is certainly not true - he already had symptoms when medication started and he died after stopping taking medication - there is not the slightest proof that AZT was in any ways a cause of his death but he did have AIDS related symptoms, so he most probably died of them. I have an issue with the hostility of such discussions. If you see someone suffer you simply do not want scientists and self-appointed experts fight with such ideologically blinded hatred - you want people to work together on curing or at least controlling the disease. Much progress has been made with anti-viral therapy and hopefully more progress will be made in the future. We have no cure for cancer yet and nobody blames it on an alleged hidden agenda of the pharmaceutical industry. There is no cure for diabetes yet but people can get old with proper insulin therapy. Compared to diabetes AIDS is a new problem and people can already live with it. The goal must be to erase it and there are good chances to reach that goal if we address the issue with common sense. |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 03:54 |
If your claim that Freddie had aids like symptoms before he took any medication, refers to the skin lesions on his legs, then that is also discussed in the medical scientific literature and videos, which prove this condition was known before the AIDS misnomar WAS INVENTED.It was caused by recreational inhalent sex drugs used within the gay community. Any additions to the cause of the myriad of diseases known in human history have not been found to be caused BY AIDS, becuase DISEASE Itself attacks IMMUNE SYSTEMS, DISEASE IS THE CAUSE OF DEPLETED IMMUNITY The rules of medicine have truly not been changed by media press conferences in the 1980's that disregarded every protocol of medicine and lawful sceintific conduct . All fatal diseases have one thing in common, they overcome the bodies IMMUNE SYSTEM to the point of DEATH, this is WHAT is termed as AIDS. AIDS Is not a disease It is mereley an accronym FOR AQUIRED IMMUNE DIFICIENCY it is A misnoma to call aids a disease, A CLEVER PLOY, A TRICK. Because all diseases cause IMMUNE DIFICIENCY and if acute enough to completely overcome all attemopts by the body to fight them LEAD TO DEATH. The immune system is constantly fighting various pullutents in the body, this immune system relies on the bodies T CELLS to keep up the fight. it also is weakend by the use of ILLICIT DRUGS, BAD DIET-AGE, STRESS AND SUCH THINGS AS FLU AND COLDS ETC. THIS IS WHY WHEN YOU HEAR ABOUT THE SWINE FLU DEATHS for example, those that had underlying health problems, those who's immune systems were already fghting an illness, the old, whos immunity was naturally diminishing with age, and the very young, were more likely to end up dying from that flu. AZT (That was a former cancer drug considered to toxic to be used on humans for treatment) IS KNOWN TO DESTROY T CELLS and so destroy the immune system and lead to any disease being able to succefully KILL. THE NEW DRUGS ARE JUST AS FATAL, Yet are designed to act in a slower and more covert manner. tHe door way that leads to people being given these toxic T CELL KILLING drugs IS THE HIV POSITIVE STATUS IT IS NOT ILLNESS. HIV TESTING IS A PROVEN MEDICAL FRAUD DESIGNED TO LEAD ONE TO BEING GIVEN A TREATMENT OF THESE TOXIC T CELL KILLING, DRUGS. T CELL KILLING DRUGS ,THAT DESTROY THE IMMUNE SYSTEM AND MAKE YOU DIE OF ANY NUMBER OF KNOWN DISEASES. people who were given the HIV status and took those T CELL KILLING drugs under advice DIED While people who were given the HIV STATUS and refused to take to toxic T CELL Killing drugs LIVED OFcourse in many millions of people there are varioubles, on the side of those that lived obviously some did die, but it was NOT because of HIV STATUS People die every second, some were old, some already had a medical problem before they got hiv status , some died of diseases, some of acccidents, heart ATTACKS whatever! But the point is overwhelmingly OVERWHELMINGLY!! those that REFUSED the TOXIC DRUGS THAT KILLED THEIR IMMUNITY BY KILLING THEIR T CELLS LIVED! And every single one that took the aids drugs azt died. unless they came off them, in which case there are recoveries documented, even of children, children that are now fully grown healthy adults! AIDS the media spun un scietific medical fraud lie = MURDER AIDS SHOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 04:38 |
As to the detrimental effect of AIDS medication, mainly AZT: It is well possible that AZT does have a bad impact on the overall health of the patient AZT destroys T CELLS T CELLS create the IMMUNE SYSTEM If you destroy T CELLS You destroy the IMMUNE SYSTEM AND CAN DIE OF A COMMON COLD JUST LIKE THE SO CALLED CONDITION OF A.I.DS You need go no further just digest that one truth AND IS IS THE TRUTH There can be no doubt the manufacturers themeclves admitted it. Then went onto to make the new drugs you will refer to after AZT MURDER! |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 04:52 |
MEDICAL FRAUD In 1984, Robert Gallo, a research scientist working for the National Institute of Health (NIH), announced in a press conference that he had discovered the probable cause of AIDS, and that it was a retrovirus later called HIV: Human Immunodeficiency Virus. HERE >>>>> Without having published his findings for peer review he announced this to the press. The media immediately ran with it, and people began demanding funding into research into HIV, all based on the assumption that HIV is a sexually-transmitted pathogen that causes AIDS. READ MORE link |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 04:54 |
AZT IS TOXIC CAUSES DEATH BY KILLING THE IMMUNE SYSTEM CAUSES THE IMMUNE SYSTEM TO FIGHT AGANIST IT BUT AZT WINS KILLS THE IMMUNE SYSTEM AND SO LEADS TO DEATH BY COMMON GERMS AZT SUPPRESSES THE IMMUNE SYSTEM The original drug used to treat people with AIDS, called AZT, was not created for AIDS treatment. AZT was originally developed in the 70's as a chemotherapy drug for cancer patients, but it was not approved because it was determined to be too toxic. Chemotherapy for cancer patients is limited to a certain duration, while AZT and similar drugs are prescribed to AIDS patients for the rest of their lives. The study that lead to FDA approval for AZT has now been shown to have been fraudulent. The package for AZT says: "TOXIC. Toxic by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed. Wear suitable protective clothing." Among other side effects, AZT destroys the bone marrow of the body. The reason doctors see an initial rise in their patients' T cell count after taking AZT is because the bone marrow is where T cells are produced. AZT destroys the bone marrow and this releases more T cells from the marrow into the blood. Prolonged use of AZT has been shown to suppress the immune system and lower T cell counts. About 95% of AIDS-related deaths have occurred since the release of AZT. READ MORE link |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 05:09 |
THERE IS NO OFFICIAL APPROVAL OF ANY HIV TESTS. HIV tests are not standardized. This is because HIV has never been isolated from human blood, so there is no way to know how specific the tests are to HIV infection. The Food & Drug Administration (FDA) does not approve a single HIV test for the diagnosis of HIV infection. here are a variety of tests, and the results are interpreted differently in different countries. So the same sample of blood could test positive in the United States while testing negative in Europe. Another more expensive HIV test is the viral load test. Viral load testing makes use of PCR: polymerase chain reaction. It takes a very small amount of genetic material and makes enough copies of it that you can detect it. Dr. Kary Mullis THE NOBEL PRIZE WINNING INVENTER OF THE VIRAL LOAD TESTS BY PCR SAYS HIV DOES NOT CAUSE AIDS AND PCR DOES NOT FIND HIV IN THE BLOOD Dr. Kary Mullis, who won a Nobel prize for inventing PCR, is among the scientists who say that HIV does not cause AIDS. He claims that viral load testing is a misuse of PCR. PCR does not find isolated virus in the blood. It finds pieces of RNA strands "thought" to belong to HIV. READ MORE link Remember what A.I.D.S is it is not a disease it a an accronym FOR A DESTROYED IMMUNE SYSTEM CAUSED BY AZT amongst other drugsd that are TOXIC and kill CELL required to maintain the immune system azt is one DRUG amongst other such IMMUNE SYSTEM DESTROYERS that are USED TO TREAT HIV STATUS PEOPLE and so KILL THEIR IMMUNITIY TO ALL DISEASES |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 05:26 |
WERE THE PREGNANT MOTHER'S THAT TOOK PHYLIDAMIDE GUILTY FOR WHAT HAPPNED TO THEIR CHILDREN? OR WERE THE MOTHERS OF PREGNANT MOTHERS GUILTY FOR ENCOURAGING OR ADMINISTERING PHALIDIMIDE TO THEIR DAUGHTERS GUILTY OF WHAT HAPPNED TO THEIR GRANDCHILDREN NO OFCOURSE NOT! BUT THE GOV BODIES IF THEY KNEW WHAT PHALIDIMDE WOULD DO WRE GUILTY AND THE GV BODIES KNEW WHAT AZT DOES AND RULED IT TOO TOXIC FOR HUMAN CONSUPTION AS DID THE MANUFACTUERS. |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 07:04 |
ANTIRETROVIRAL SIDE EFFECT LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH The newer protease inhibitors used in combo therapy are also a type of chemotherapy. They work by preventing the replication of genetic material belonging to HIV. But these proteins are not specific to HIV, and the protease inhibitors do not exclusively target HIV. The highest cause of death today for people with AIDS is liver failure. Liver failure is not an AIDS-defining illness, but it is a known side-effect of the protease inhibitors. AIDS patients can see the disappearance of some symptoms while taking the drug cocktails. This is because the drugs they are taking are global poisons that kill many microbes in the body that may be pathogenic, such as bacteria and other viruses. So if they had flu like symptoms as part of what they thought was aids that flue would be killed for example or if they caught any other disease because of being on azt previously, coming off it and recovering slightly from its toxicity, then they went on the newer range of drugs, but still suffered from whatver disease they had caught while on the strong T cell immune destroyer AZT The new drug might actually kill the disease they aquired while on AZT BUT THEY WILL STILL END UP DEAD FROM LIVER FAILURE EVENTUALLY link |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 07:13 |
PRESENCE OF ANTIBODIES MEANS IMMUNITY but not with hiv Usually, if you test positive for antibodies that means that your immune system has effectively fought off a pathogen and you now have immunity. But with the HIV test, the logic is reversed. Instead of meaning that you now have immunity to HIV, testing positive is said to mean that you are infected and your immune system has failed to neutralize the virus. The great hope for many who believe that HIV causes AIDS is that researchers will some day develop a vaccine. But vaccines work by causing your body to produce antibodies specific to a pathogen. If a vaccine for HIV was created, everyone who had the vaccine would then test positive for HIV on the non-specific antibody tests now in use. IT IS NOT SCIENCE ITS BULLSHIT HIV IS A SCAM AND A PATHWAY TO KIILING PEOPLE BY GIVING THEM DRUGS WHICH DESTROY THEIR IMMUNE SYSTEMS AND SO YOU HAVE ANOTHER "AIDS" DEATH link HIV STATUS- NO DRUGS = LIFE HIV STATUS- DRUGS = DEATH That is the documented data of cause and affect |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 07:27 |
The common saying Oh what a tangled web we weave when we first set out to decieve Is commonly though to be a cautionary saying aimed at the deciever. But it can be equally used to illustrate hw a web of deception so cloaks to the truth that is deadly affective in doing what it was meant to do. DECIEVE! That is the HIV AND AIDS STORY A WEB OF DECIET THAT IS SO EASY TO SEE THROUGH IF YOU LOOK. AND IN YOUR INCREDULITY MAKE SURE YOUR NOT IGNORANT OF RECENT HISTORY WHERE ORGANISED PROGRAMMES OF MASS EXTERMINATION STERALIZATION AND CRUELTY BEYOND BELIEF WERE IN AFFECT THAT MADE MONEY FOR INTERANTIONAL COPORATIONS |
emrabt 14.06.2012 08:17 |
have you emailed Brian may about this? |
emrabt 14.06.2012 08:22 |
Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies? Rivers and seas boiling? Forty years of darkness? The dead rising from the grave? Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria? |
emrabt 14.06.2012 08:27 |
Air pollution revolution gun control Sound of soul Shooting rockets to the moon Kids growing up too soon Politicians say more taxes will Solve everything Fear in the air tension everywhere Unemployment rising fast Eve of destruction tax deduction City inspectors bill collectors Mod clothes in demand Population out of hand Suicide many bills hippies moving To the hills |
emrabt 14.06.2012 08:29 |
The Chimera Virus The Chimera Virus is an organic virus that infects machines, Can create mirages, mimic the occupants upon which it is infecting. |
emrabt 14.06.2012 08:32 |
A quiet crowd began to gather outside the Oldmann family crypt. About twenty people stood under the full moonlight, the cemetery was the busiest it had been in years. Only a few of the faces in the crowed knew the Oldmanns, the rest were there to witness the crypt being sealed. both struggling through the tight net crowd. |
emrabt 14.06.2012 08:34 |
have you emailed Brian may about this? |
thomasquinn 32989 14.06.2012 09:01 |
MEDUSA-RULES wrote: your disinterest in documented scientific facts in regards to patient doctor assesment of the affects of the medicine that Freddie took, shows your complete denial or interest in, what truly killed him. It also shows you do not care about any others, except yourselves. And what you write here is actually important, because Life is Real and so is judgement, but that shall be proven later.A YouTube video has NOTHING to do with 'scientific facts'. Your erratic posting shows that you do not yourself understand the matter you are posting. I'm sure you mean well, but you are still writing bullsh*t. |
Amazon 14.06.2012 09:45 |
Who cares if he means well? This is astonishingly offensive, not to mention ignorant, and I can not believe that anybody who calls themselves a Queen fan would believe such garbage! |
thomasquinn 32989 14.06.2012 10:02 |
Amazon wrote: Who cares if he means well? This is astonishingly offensive, not to mention ignorant, and I can not believe that anybody who calls themselves a Queen fan would believe such garbage!I believe this person to be, so to speak, not quite sane. |
Micrówave 14.06.2012 10:33 |
So you guys actually read all 9 of those AIDS Fun Facts posts he wrote? |
Amazon 14.06.2012 10:33 |
If this guy was an actual Queen fan, he wouldn't be dishonoring Freddie by attempting to change the circumstances in which he died. |
Amazon 14.06.2012 10:34 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote: "I believe this person to be, so to speak, not quite sane." You're probably right. I mean, anyone who could ever subscribe to the the aids denialism movement have, at best, a screw missing. I should say that I don't necessarily have a problem with conspiracy theorists as a few are probably quite valid, and many, if not most, are harmless. I mean, if someone wants to believe that the moon landing never happened, it's not hurting anyone. However there are certain things which are so indisputable and so inarguable- and which the attempt to deny them does hurt people- that the very fact that anyone would contest them is probably a sign of their insanity, and in extreme cases a sign of their lack of humanity. The Holocaust is one example. Another is AIDS. I'm probably sounding quite dramatic, however one of the reasons so many people are dying from AIDS is that they are taught rubbish by people who either don't know what they are talking about (and may have been taught the rubbish by others), or don't care. |
inu-liger 14.06.2012 12:43 |
Barb, PLEASE ban this crackhead idiot |
MEDUSA-RULES 14.06.2012 17:05 |
Amazon wrote: If this guy was an actual Queen fan, he wouldn't be dishonoring Freddie by attempting to change the circumstances in which he died.I cannot change the fact Freddie died in agony but i can try and make sure it does not happen to other people. |
Saint Jiub 14.06.2012 18:51 |
|
Saint Jiub 14.06.2012 18:52 |
I can't resist feeding the trollS |
GratefulFan 14.06.2012 18:59 |
MEDUSA-RULES wrote:I cannot change the fact Freddie died in agony but i can try and make sure it does not happen to other people.Okay well we'll miss you, but we appreciate it. |
GratefulFan 14.06.2012 18:59 |
Double post. Whatever QZ! :) |
emrabt 14.06.2012 20:07 |
I cannot change the fact Freddie died in agony but i can try and make sure it does not happen to other people. =========================== So how is posting this here going to stop that? |
The Real Wizard 14.06.2012 23:16 |
inu-liger wrote: Barb, would it go against the rules if we were to ask you to reveal based on the IP address which country Medusa hails from?We set a very dangerous precedent when we want to ban someone because they express an unpopular opinion. Free speech is a cornerstone of civilized society. Until he trolls people and does this on a daily basis, there is no need to ban him. |
emrabt 15.06.2012 02:23 |
Until he trolls people and does this on a daily basis, there is no need to ban him. ============ But you must agree his posts of his dream biopic cast should be deleted from threads that have no relevance. I have no problem with mad ramblings, but spamming the board? |
The Real Wizard 15.06.2012 02:50 |
Of course, spam is spam, no matter the subject. But on the subject of the source of AIDS - it really is something worthy of discussion. The approach in this thread so far isn't exactly inviting, so here is an alternative - a CBC special from 2004: link Unlike most conspiracy-oriented stuff, the presentation is most excellent, and leaves much food for thought. |
thomasquinn 32989 15.06.2012 06:45 |
When looking at conspiracy theories, it is *extremely* important to find out where they started. Conspiracy nuts, so critical of every kind of information except their own, never do that. It is so important to know, because conspiracy theories are rarely harmless, those originally propagating them rarely believe in them, and they always serve some ulterior purpose, closely related to the ideology of those who start them. The simple fact of the matter is that, depending on what kind of conspiracy theory it is, they nearly all start in the same place: Conspiracy theories about the New World Order or other 'all-powerful government' conspiracies like the supposed Obama death-camps are all, or nearly all, started by far-right extremists who know them to be false. They are really the successors to Cold War myths about omnipresent communist conspiracies. Conspiracy theories about Freemasons and godless/irreligious extremism are nearly all started by ultra-orthodox Catholics. Conspiracy theories about disease and medicine, such as this topic, tend to stem from the New Age groups (which, incidentally, are extremely popualar among neo-nazis), with support often coming from extremist religious groups who hate medicine because they believe it to be an insult to god, as opposed to lying to people, which is apparently sanctioned. The only conspiracy theories I know of that are present among all kinds of groups are those regarding UFOs, which probably indicates that it is more of a fashion thing than a true conspiracy theory. |
The Real Wizard 15.06.2012 11:34 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote: When looking at conspiracy theories, it is *extremely* important to find out where they started. Conspiracy nuts, so critical of every kind of information except their own, never do that. It is so important to know, because conspiracy theories are rarely harmless, those originally propagating them rarely believe in them, and they always serve some ulterior purpose, closely related to the ideology of those who start them. The simple fact of the matter is that, depending on what kind of conspiracy theory it is, they nearly all start in the same placeExcellent summation of the mentality. But labeling every viewpoint that goes against the grain as a conspiracy theory is an equally dangerous precedent. It assumes that every government and every corporation has told the truth about every issue that remains under debate. |
thomasquinn 32989 15.06.2012 13:42 |
The Real Wizard wrote:Agreed, but I think that such views as posted by the topic starter definitely qualify as conspiracy theories. There is, naturally, a great grey divide between the plausible and the far-out, and it can often be difficult to discern the outrageous from the unconventional, and so we should indeed be careful in applying the label 'conspiracy theory'.thomasquinn 32989 wrote: When looking at conspiracy theories, it is *extremely* important to find out where they started. Conspiracy nuts, so critical of every kind of information except their own, never do that. It is so important to know, because conspiracy theories are rarely harmless, those originally propagating them rarely believe in them, and they always serve some ulterior purpose, closely related to the ideology of those who start them. The simple fact of the matter is that, depending on what kind of conspiracy theory it is, they nearly all start in the same placeExcellent summation of the mentality. But labeling every viewpoint that goes against the grain as a conspiracy theory is an equally dangerous precedent. It assumes that every government and every corporation has told the truth about every issue that remains under debate. Incidentally, what I find very interesting is the way evidence (or the lack thereof) is treated in conspiracy theories: the absence of evidence in support of the theory is regarded as clear proof of a cover-up, whereas any present evidence against it is also considered evidence of a cover-up. That is an interesting position from a hermeneutical point of view. |
The Real Wizard 15.06.2012 13:58 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote: the absence of evidence in support of the theory is regarded as clear proof of a cover-up, whereas any present evidence against it is also considered evidence of a cover-upAnd that's just it. That means one cannot defend oneself with a rebuttal. The rebuttal means "of course they considered our theory, which makes us right." It just defies logic, and sounds more self-aggrandizing than anything. |
MEDUSA-RULES 15.06.2012 18:28 |
"the absence of evidence in support of the theory " WHEN PEOPLES LIVES ARE AT STAKE THEORY IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH MEDICINE IS NOT MEANT TO WORK BY THEORY And the evidence proves the theory wrong. yet it was not a theory in any case it was fraud. for true the orIginator of "the theory", states that hiv can be recovered from and is not fatal. Yet the fraudster who bypassed all legal channels, with the aid and abettance of the corrupt in power at the time, made millions by his toxic cancer drug that had once been refused as too toxic, prior to his hijacking the HIV THEORY, to his own gain and fame, and to the loss of life for millions. |
inu-liger 15.06.2012 18:38 |
"MEDICINE IS NOT MEANT TO WORK BY THEORY" The research & development process certainly DOES involve some level of theory depending on the type of medicine and cure being aimed for, you fool |
thomasquinn 32989 16.06.2012 07:25 |
I guess that this is another case of a person not understanding what "theory" means. Rather like Treasure Moment, who was convinced that "music theory" meant "draconic laws prohibiting you from doing anything the way you want to". |
john bodega 16.06.2012 13:42 |
Yeah. You could really help yourself by checking on this site here, Medusa. link It explains the common misconception concerning the word 'theory'. In a nutshell, in scientific circles it's completely different from how we treat the word 'theory' in our day-to-day vernacular. |
emrabt 16.06.2012 14:56 |
It explains the common misconception concerning the word 'theory'. In a nutshell, in scientific circles it's completely different from how we treat the word 'theory' in our vernacular. ================ I must be the only person who uses theory correctly in day-to-day use then? |
john bodega 17.06.2012 05:13 |
It's very possible! |
MEDUSA-RULES 17.06.2012 07:25 |
emrabt wrote: It explains the common misconception concerning the word 'theory'. In a nutshell, in scientific circles it's completely different from how we treat the word 'theory' in our vernacular. ================ I must be the only person who uses theory correctly in day-to-day use then?peer review and retesting of claims (THEORIES) in a laboratory, to see if the results are the same, is needed in ethical medicine/ science. Infact it is THE LAW. This was not the case wth HIV AIDS , THE BROKE THE LAW AND ALL ETHICAL MEDICAL PRACTICE AND USED THE MEDIA AND POLITICIONS to promote their theory and make use and money out of their toxic drug. This is the root of the problem, and the means by which the fraud was achieved. aids IS also A CATCH ALL FRAUD For there was and has been for years and years, plenty of scientifically based evidence, for every single disease the fraudsters claimed were caused by aids. But they in their fraud ignored the known science, by claiming vitually all known disease was the result of HIV AIDS The list of AIDS diseases is ever changing and being added too yet all the diseases and conditions already have known causes and were already known by medical science. AIDS IS NOT A DISEASE IT IS CONDITION CAUSED BY TOXIC DRUGS IN REGARDS TO THE AIDS HOAX And it is a condition that was and is already known by medical science before anyone thought of using it to murder millions with by protraying it as a disease. They simply induced the condition of immune deficiency through handing out TOXINS IN TOXIC DRUGS WHICH KILLED T CELLS IN THE HUMAN BODY and mad the recipient unable to fight any disease. They could only go ahead with it by the use of Fraud though using up the Hiv route which is and never was proven for the test for hiv is a fraud in itself As the labelling of the test states it cannot be used to diagnose hiv infection and HIV was never put through the loops of usual scientific and medical ethical rules. IT WAS SIMPLY ANNOUNCED AT A MEDIA PRESS CONFERENCE BY A CONMAN WHO WANTED TO SELL HIS ONCE REJECTED TOXIC DRUG, A DRUG HE KNEW FULL WELL WOULD DESTROY THE BODIES IMMUNE SYSTEM- and so case immune deficiency commonly known as AIDS but it is aquired not by infection but by the drugs fraudulantly marketed to cure HIV which does not cause AIDS!! HIV IS PROVEN TO NOT CAUSE AIDS because if it did everyone would become immune deficient who was said to have it AND they would go on to develop so called AIDS and DIE. but they dont! Only those given the toxic immune stystem destroying AIDS DRUGS GET IMMUNE DEFIECIENCY AND EVENTUALLY DIE FROM IMMUNE DEFICIENCY which allows every disease known to man to kill them. |
MEDUSA-RULES 17.06.2012 07:59 |
If a vaccine for HIV was created, everyone who had the vaccine would then test positive for HIV on the non-specific antibody tests now in use. HIV IS NOT SCIENCE ITS BULLSHIT |
thomasquinn 32989 17.06.2012 08:10 |
So, in short, * you don't know how the human immune system works * you don't understand the mechanics of viruses * you haven't got a clue what "theory" means, because "peer review" and "theory" are unrelated concepts * you are too lazy to do any research for yourself, instead you just parrot misinterpretations of YouTube videos. How old are you, Medusa? Because if the answer is >14, you should be in a mental hospital. |
thomasquinn 32989 17.06.2012 08:45 |
If you'd even just paid attention to the videos you *yourself* posted, Medusa, you'd know that Montagnier does *not*, *ever* claim that AIDS is not caused by HIV. A direct quote by Montagnier: "Montagnier said he was "surprised" that Robert Gallo was not also recognized by the Nobel Committee: "It was important to prove that HIV was the cause of AIDS, and Gallo had a very important role in that. I'm very sorry for Robert Gallo."" |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 18:01 |
why do you think Montagneirs saying anything? Dont you realise he is only doing this to cover his guilt? why else has he now come out and said HIV does not lead to aids and can be recovered from with a good diet? he is guilty as hell about it all yet still wants to appear "respectable" so as not to lose his funding, so he praises Galo tell me how the hell can he hosenstly praise galo now he has said he bleives HIV CAN BE RECOVERED FROM LIKE A SILMPLE FLU WITH THE RIGHT BASIC HEALTH STANDARDS DIET ETC? How can he with a straight face say anything good about Galo When he knows galo has made his name claiming it KILLS PEOPLE> AND HAS SOLD HIS TOXIC T CELL KILLING DRUG For YEARS if HE KNOWS ITS A LIE!! HE SAYS GALO'S LIE IS A LIE IN THE INTERVIEW!! Nobel Loreate and Discoverer of ''HIV'', Luc Montagnier: The Body Can Naturally Get Rid of ''HIV'' link THATS PROOF ENOUGH OF HIS FALSE FLATTERING OF GALLO! HE CANT HONESTLY SAY GALLO DERSERVES A PEACE PRIZE! IF HE THINKS HE IS AN INCOMPETENT IDIOT WITH THE BLOOD OF MILLIONS ON HIS HANDS MORE LIKE DESERVING OF A FRIGGING OSCAR MAYBE ! but what he says direcrlty contradicts the gallo lie! so if two such men oppose each others findings how can they both think eachother deserve their award! BETTER THINK BEFORE YOU PUT YOUR FOOT UP YOUR ARSE AGAIN And scrape that Jesuit shite off your foot while your at it. |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 18:11 |
and are you too thick to work out what Montagniers is doing! HE KNOWS FULL WELL HIV WONT DO A DAMN THING TO YOU WHY ELSE DOES HE SAYS ITS LIKE A SIMPLE FLU AND CAN BE EASILY RECOVERED FROM BECAUSE HE KNOWS ITS ALL BULLSHIT THAT'S WHY ITS ALL FOR HIS PERSONAL DAMAGE CONTROL HE SEES THE TIDE IS TURNING HE KNOWS THE SCAM IS EXPOSED HE WANTS TO SAVE HIS OWN ASS SOWMHOW |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 18:12 |
AND MARK MY WORDS YOU PEICES OF SHIT MONITERING THIS YOUR DAY IS DONE YOU ARE TOTALY FUCKED YOU MURDERING PEICES OF SHIT ITS OVER FOR YOU. |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 18:40 |
DR GALLO DESERVED OF JAIL October 2008: A quarter-century after the discovery of HIV and the invention of the HIV blood test at the Pasteur Institut in Paris, the Nobel Prize in Medicine was awarded to Pasteur researchers Francoise Barre and Luc Montagnier. Not included in that award was Robert Gallo, who for many of those 25 years had attempted to claim credit as the discoverer, and later the co-discoverer, of HIV. With that verdict, science at last accepted what the evidence had long shown, that the fundamental discoveries leading to the recognition of HIV as the cause of AIDS had occurred in France, and not in Gallo’s laboratory at the U.S. National Cancer Institute. One of the most divisive and destructive disputes in modern scientific history had at last been laid to rest. — John Crewdson ‘ The tale of Dr. Robert Gallo’s role in the discovery of the virus that causes AIDS is one of those stories that wouldn’t be believable as fiction...Science Fictions is bursting with allegations leveled at Dr. Gallo, his associates, rivals and enemies, that include deception, misconduct, incompetence, fraud, sabotage, back-stabbing, double-dealing, overstatements, half-truths, outright lies, a clandestine affair with a co-worker, a bribery attempt, denials, evasions, coverups and serial rewritings of history.’ — New York Times ‘ Scrupulously researched and sweeping... Science Fictions documents enough treachery, negligence and megalomania to make even the most trusting of readers skeptical of the scientific establishment.’ — Washington Post science at last accepted what the evidence had long shown, that the fundamental discoveries leading to the recognition of HIV as the cause of AIDS had occurred in France, and not in Gallo’s laboratory at the U.S. National Cancer Institute. One of the most divisive and destructive disputes in modern scientific history had at last been laid to rest. — John Crewdson Published by Little, Brown & Co., a division of AOL Time-Warner Order from Amazon.com link yes the invisible unfound hiv WAS DISCOVERED In FRANCE BY THE MAN WHO NOW SAYS IT'S AS HARMLESS A COMMON FLU science at last accepted what the evidence had long shown, that the fundamental discoveries leading to the recognition of HIV as the cause of AIDS had occurred in France, and not in Gallo’s laboratory at the U.S. yes the invisible unfound hiv WAS DISCOVERED In FRANCE BY THE MAN WHO NOW SAYS IT'S AS HARMLESS A COMMON FLU link |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 18:55 |
Win Free Money! just talk to your local HIV/AIDS specialist or the Terence Higgins Trust and ask for the references That's right, there are two prizes on offer: £50,000 and $50,000. These are genuine awards to be wone for the first person to meet the criteria for either. How to win £50,000 This is a continuation of the previous Continuum award, generously made available by Alex Verney-Elliot, offered to the first person who can demonstrate proof of the isolation of HIV as a distinct, exogenous infectious retrovirus. You may think that would be easy - just talk to your local HIV/AIDS specialist or the Terence Higgins Trust and ask for the references, but there is the problem: There aren't any. That's the thing. Nowhere in any medical or scientific literature is any evidence that HIV has ever been isolated from any patient, from blood, semen, saliva, urine or breastmilk. You'll soon realise that science has increasingly been playing fast and loose with the meaning of words that we always thought had precise meanings. You may have been under the mistaken impression that 'isolate' a virus actually mean to separate it and purify a collections of viruses from other biological matter in someone's body. That is not what's been happening though, because despite vast numbers of people allegedly having a 'viral load' of, let's say, 50,000 per ml of blood, scientists have been unable to actually find any whole HIV in their blood, which may seem a bit strange to you. How there be all these viruses in a patient's blood if no-one can find any? link |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 19:07 |
the scum of the earth that shall literally burn in hell unless they repent New York Post: AIDS TOTS USED AS 'GUINEA PIGS' February 29, 2004 -- The state Health Department has launched a probe into potentially dangerous drug research conducted on HIV-infected infants and children at a Manhattan foster-care agency, The Post has learned. Some 50 foster kids were used as "guinea pigs" in 13 experiments with high doses of AIDS medications at Manhattan's Incarnation Children's Center, sources said. |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 19:09 |
"It will surely lead to a scientifically healthier society if the burden of proof for HIV as a deadly pathogen is returned to where it belongs - to those who maintain that HIV causes AIDS - and others are allowed to pursue alternative approaches in the battle for eradication of the disease." ~ Dr. Beverly Griffin, Director and Professor of virology, Royal Postgraduate Medical School in London |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 19:20 |
banned by the blind, the ignorant , the useless, the scum. No, not queen-badline mods lol, (hi, freaks! you could at least 'act normal'), but banned by the tv news. CENSORED TV NEWS ITEM U.K.'s Channel 4 News commissioned a 1998 World AIDS Day News Report from Meditel on HIV testing and the leading scientists who for the first time presented comprehensive data on profound inaccuracies underlying HIV testing and the identification of HIV at the World AIDS Conference in Geneva in July 1998. Channel 4 News supervised 4 drafts of the script and approved a press release and broadcast date. Interviews were taped, and the news feature was edited at Channel 4 News, including an interview with a young gay man who had contradictory test results at London teaching hospitals. On Thursday 26th November, the commissioned report was banned by Channel 4 News Editor Jim Gray. HIV Test Questioned - Meditel Report link so if they are well give them t cell killing drugs,yes, aids drugs. aids drugs kill,and NOW it's time the killing stopped. |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 19:42 |
scientific society Journal endorses the demand for retraction of gallo's 4 original FRAUDULANT reports. 21 Jan – In 2008 – shortly after HIV co-discoverer Luc Montagnier MD accepted a Nobel Prize that Robert Gallo MD didn’t receive - Semmelweis Society International (SSI) endorsed a demand by 37 scientists and researchers for the journal Science to retract Gallo’s four original reports. Despite much fanfare, Gallo’s four original reports (1, 2, 3, 4) never explained how he isolated HIV and never proved that HIV attacks cells or causes AIDS. And when then-HHS Secretary Margaret Heckler and Gallo claimed to have discovered “the probable cause of AIDS” (video min:11:00), no one ever bothered to check. While ”probable cause” allows policemen to question a man waiting near a bank, it doesn’t allow them to arrest him for bank robbery. And while HIV might be present among sick people, it doesn’t mean that HIV makes people sick anymore than fire trucks parked at structure fires caused the fire. Those who built their careers on Gallo’s assumptions received millions in research funding, while those who questioned it suffered retaliation. Like Capt. Renault’s discovery of gambling at Rick’s casino, the editors at journals like Nature and Science seem to think that self-flagellation, hand-wringing and teeth-gnashing among scientists like Jennifer Crocker and M. Lynne Cooper is sufficient – and maybe it is, for now. After all, as long as politicians profit from pharmaceutical kickbacks and insider trading, it’s unlikely that Rick’s casino will hear from the Justice Department anytime soon. one can only begin to imagine the global impact when Dr. Gallo’s fraud is fully understood. link |
MEDUSA-RULES 18.06.2012 19:49 |
Hillary Clinton: HIV Not a Significant Risk 15 March: NEW YORK - According to a US Cable released by WikiLeaks, the US Government has ceased all HIV testing of visa applicants, declaring that HIV infection is “not a communicable disease that is of significant public health risk.” BECAUSE IT ISNT AND THEY ALREADY GOT THE ONES THEY WANTED TO KILL THROUGH AIDS DRUGS FORGET HIV IT DOESNT EXIST. FLU DOES THOUGH I CONCEED THAT (thanks dr monteplodbooboo) HIV IT DOESNT EXIST UNLESS YOU WANT TO BELIEVE US visa applicants DONT HAVE SEX link HIV IT DOESNT EXIST niether does aids as its not aquired its given by toxic drugs |
inu-liger 18.06.2012 20:15 |
STOP SPAMMING THE BOARD, YOU TWIT!!! FFS |
john bodega 19.06.2012 02:16 |
"HIV IT DOESNT EXIST niether does aids" Oh cool. I didn't realise the Vatican had an account on here. |
YourValentine 19.06.2012 03:49 |
@ Medusa rules. AIDS does exist. It is true that sometimes symptoms are falsely connected to AIDS when there is not proof. However - if you look at the history of AIDS: In the early 1980s ALL patients died within a short period after the first symptoms showed. They did not die of any side effects of AIDS medication because there was no AIDS medication. They died of infections their compromised immune sytem could not handle although they were often healthy young men in good shape who had no prior diseases. It is gross that now - 30 years later - people come out and claim that these early patients died of a bad life style - that they ruined their immunne system by ruthless sex practices and many sexually transmitted diseases. This is so untrue, it makes me mad. Think of all the haemophiliacs who were infected through transfusions - what are you telling them? That there is no virus but only bad side effects of antiviral drugs? Too bad that so many of them died before any drugs were available. I am all for discussiong and rethinking and keeping an open mind. But one thing is for sure: safer sex is still the only hope for millions today. Denying the existence of HIV/AIDS does not help prevent new infections - it can be deadly for millions of uneducated young people. |
john bodega 19.06.2012 10:38 |
"HIV IT DOESNT EXIST niether does aids" Are you willing to bet your life on it? Go to Africa, get it on with some gangbangers, and come back here in a few years to tell us all about your non-existent condition. |
brENsKi 19.06.2012 17:32 |
inu-liger wrote: STOP SPAMMING THE BOARD, YOU TWIT!!! FFSsurely that's a typo? replace "i" in "twit" with an "a" |
GratefulFan 19.06.2012 20:27 |
Speaking of conspiracies and HIV, if anybody wants to have a shag-nap with Julian Assange without a condom, he'll be at the Ecuadorian Embassy. |
john bodega 19.06.2012 23:36 |
By his own words, it was a *cough* 'honey pot' situation. So basically, if I see a 50 inch flatscreen TV in a shop window, it's okay if I steal it. Because really, they shouldn't have put it there if they didn't want me to take it. Right? |
thomasquinn 32989 20.06.2012 05:06 |
Zebonka12 wrote: By his own words, it was a *cough* 'honey pot' situation. So basically, if I see a 50 inch flatscreen TV in a shop window, it's okay if I steal it. Because really, they shouldn't have put it there if they didn't want me to take it. Right?It's his right to request political asylum, just as it is Equador's right to turn the request down. |
Amazon 20.06.2012 06:44 |
Say what you want about Assange, but if I was him, I would be doing the exact same thing. Afterall, there is an extremely high chance that he could be extradited to the US, and that would be horrific. He almost certainly is bargaining with Sweden for assurances that he won't be extradited to the US, but unless he is offered such assurances, this is not such a crazy move. |
YourValentine 20.06.2012 07:07 |
A risky maneuver - after all Ecuador is not exactly a model state when it comes to Human rights and if they turn him down he would be jailed in London immediately. As to the alleged rape charges: nobody ever claimed that Assange used any force or the two women in question did not consent or were underaged or anything like that. Assange was cleared from all charges and could leave Sweden legally. Only a few weeks and a couple of prosecutors later all of a sudden there was a bad crime and extradition was asked. Let us not forget that no judge in Sweden signed the arrest warrant and no charges have been pressed. I think Assange is perhaps a bit paranoid and Sweden might not send him to the USA but on the other hand he has been under arrest for over a year now while no charges have been pressed and no evidence has been presented. Everybody should become paranoid under such circumstances. |
thomasquinn 32989 20.06.2012 08:59 |
A dodgy guy booked on dodgy charges, no more, no less. |
Micrówave 20.06.2012 10:15 |
It took me exactly 5 minutes and 55 seconds to read this thread. Uncanny. It must be about AIDS. Can we talk about cars for a little while now? |
brENsKi 20.06.2012 13:43 |
i love the new alfa giulietta |
john bodega 20.06.2012 23:27 |
"he could be extradited to the US, and that would be horrific" It would ROCK. He's had a good long run now, but whatever happened to a world where you answer for your transgressions?? Maybe we've never lived in such a world, but we ought to. He should've known the risks when he got into this racket. |
Amazon 21.06.2012 00:40 |
Zebonka12 wrote: "It would ROCK. He's had a good long run now, but whatever happened to a world where you answer for your transgressions??" The problem is that the way the Americans might get him to answer for it are a denial of due process, and torture. Not to mention, he isn't an American citizen. He's an Australian citizen and never broke Australian law. "Maybe we've never lived in such a world, but we ought to." Not if they include what America wants to do to him, even though he's an Australian who never broke Australian law. "He should've known the risks when he got into this racket." Not this kind of risk. Zebonka, whatever you think of him, surely you don't think he should be thrown to the wolves? |
john bodega 21.06.2012 01:25 |
"Not this kind of risk" When assessing risk, you don't factor in only the consequences that you think are appropriate according to your own values. If I move to Mexico and decide to start a one man war against the cartels, should I disregard the possibility of winding up beheaded by some gangbanger just because I don't think it's fair that I should be beheaded while performing a civic duty? It is not outlandish to imagine that the USA would be pissed when you leak their information. By all accounts Assange is possessed of some intelligence, but if he couldn't have seen this turn of events coming then he's as daft as a hippo on lithium. "He's an Australian citizen" That didn't seem to bother anyone when it was Van Nguyen's turn. I could've been physically sick over what they did to that poor kid, but again - the possible consequences must've crossed his mind before he embarked on his chosen course of action. All I'm saying is that Assange has things to answer for. He should man up and stop hiding. I'm not naive enough to say that we live in a world where truth needs no defense, but I can't say I have a lot of faith in this man if he's not willing to go to court for his beliefs. "Only a few weeks and a couple of prosecutors later all of a sudden there was a bad crime and extradition was asked" I've known too many people that were assaulted for this topic to be palatable for any length of time. I understand that the presumption of innocence is there to protect us, but there's too much about the case that leaves me with the feeling that the man is not above board. The waft of self-interest that comes out of everything he says doesn't help matters. "surely you don't think he should be thrown to the wolves? " They still do that?? |
YourValentine 21.06.2012 03:40 |
Zebonka - the difference between Van Nguyen (I was also physically sick when I heard about his fate)and Assange was: Van Nguyen did what is illegal anywhere in the world while almost nobody knows that not wearing a condome can be a "rape" crime in Sweden - even if the women do not press charges. I had never heard about something that ridiculous and would have never expected that this is possible in a country like Sweden. Even if you start with a condom and lose it in the "process" you can be guilty of a rape crime - would you like to have sex in Sweden? It is blatantly obvious that the charges are abused by the Swedish prosecutor: if he wanted to question Assange he could have done it while he was in Sweden or he could travel to England which is a member of the European Union, after all. It is about a friggin' condome, for God's sake! You must not like Assange or agree with him but that a citizen can be hunted over such ridiculous charges with an international arrest warrant should make us wonder. If I were in his shoes and had heard all the "hang him" calls from American politicians I might be frightened, as well. He has been under arrest for almost 2 years now over really ridiculous charges while former dictator Pinochet (just to name an example) was NOT held by England and the arrest warrant by a Spanish prosecutor was declined. |
john bodega 21.06.2012 07:59 |
I can see what you're getting at, with regards to the law itself. It's really more Assange's attitude and conduct that's bothered me the most. And I'm frankly never really satisfied with the process in any high profile legal proceedings, because the fact that it's a circus always overrides anything else. |
Micrówave 21.06.2012 17:09 |
But from what I can tell, Sweden must be the best country in the world to live in. They seem to have their marbles together. |
catqueen 22.06.2012 13:37 |
YourValentine wrote: Zebonka - the difference between Van Nguyen (I was also physically sick when I heard about his fate)and Assange was: Van Nguyen did what is illegal anywhere in the world while almost nobody knows that not wearing a condome can be a "rape" crime in Sweden - even if the women do not press charges. I had never heard about something that ridiculous and would have never expected that this is possible in a country like Sweden. Even if you start with a condom and lose it in the "process" you can be guilty of a rape crime - would you like to have sex in Sweden? It is blatantly obvious that the charges are abused by the Swedish prosecutor: if he wanted to question Assange he could have done it while he was in Sweden or he could travel to England which is a member of the European Union, after all. It is about a friggin' condome, for God's sake! I don't understand how it makes a difference whether he wore a condom or not... I mean obviously it makes a difference to health/pregnancy, but legally? Is it always illegal? And if she asked him to wear one, then why didn't she just ask him not to have sex with her if she was gonna sue him for not wearing one? So weird. You must not like Assange or agree with him but that a citizen can be hunted over such ridiculous charges with an international arrest warrant should make us wonder. If I were in his shoes and had heard all the "hang him" calls from American politicians I might be frightened, as well. He has been under arrest for almost 2 years now over really ridiculous charges while former dictator Pinochet (just to name an example) was NOT held by England and the arrest warrant by a Spanish prosecutor was declined. |
GratefulFan 22.06.2012 15:17 |
One of the charges relating to condom use is that in full knowledge that she would not voluntarily agree to sex without one - and that she had not agreed to sex without one through a couple of his valiant tries the evening before - he penetrated her while she was sleeping without a condom the next morning. That would be criminal in any sane and civilized country in the world. How can that be consent at that moment? Surely there are stronger defenses for such a complex man and a complex case than resorting to trivializing and dismissing such obvious rights violating and assaultative sexual behaviour? |
catqueen 22.06.2012 16:58 |
GratefulFan wrote: One of the charges relating to condom use is that in full knowledge that she would not voluntarily agree to sex without one - and that she had not agreed to sex without one through a couple of his valiant tries the evening before - he penetrated her while she was sleeping without a condom the next morning. That would be criminal in any sane and civilized country in the world. How can that be consent at that moment? Surely there are stronger defenses for such a complex man and a complex case than resorting to trivializing and dismissing such obvious rights violating and assaultative sexual behaviour?She must have been one hell of a deep sleeper. |
GratefulFan 22.06.2012 17:42 |
The claim is that she didn't sleep through the entire episode, only the initiation and however many moments it took her to get her bearings. There is nothing about the way she alleges the events unfolded that is not credible, and Assange as far as I know has never denied it either. His side, I believe, hinges on the fact that she grudgingly allowed it to continue once she awoke, something she also acknowledges. So your seeming implication that she was dishonest or the story was not credible is likely a little unfair. |
john bodega 23.06.2012 02:22 |
Sorry, but the event does not meet my standards for implausibility. His attitude towards the matter in public, and the fact that his mother is one of these enabling "MY BOY IS AN ANGEL" cows ... the burden of proof is on him to show that he isn't really some 'Me me me me me!' nerd who wants to be on the front of some magazines while people like Manning do all of the work (and face the music for him). Where's the solidarity? Worthless fuck. |
thomasquinn 32989 24.06.2012 08:13 |
Zebonka12 wrote: the burden of proof is on him to show that he isn't really someI understand, and partially share, your sentiments, however, I emphatically reject the above. The entire foundation of our legal system, and of any decent legal system, is that one has to be proven guilty. If we reverse the burden of proof, we end up with an untenable situation. Imagine the following: I buy a car. Some guy walks by, and decides "hey, that's a nice set of wheels", calls the cops, and says that I've stolen the car. The cops come, with said guy. I ask them if they are by any chance stark raving mad, they assure me they aren't, inform me of the fact that said guy claims I stole the car from him. I, of course, deny, at which point the cops tell me to *prove* that I didn't steal it. So, I rush indoors and return with the proper paperwork. "He must've forged it", the guy says. So the cops turn to me "can you prove that you haven't forged these, sir?" Can you see where this is heading? Guilt can be proven most of the time. Innocence is almost impossible to prove. |
john bodega 24.06.2012 10:18 |
Oh, very true. I was running my mouth faster than my brain (business as fuckin' usual) and didn't mean 'burden of proof' in the legal sense. Even though most of the rest of my comments relate to a legal matter. I guess what I'd really like is to believe that he does actually stand for something, because wouldn't that be nice? What I mean to say is that at this point it's up to him to throw us a bone. Because everything else I've ever heard from him does not ring true to someone who is prepared to see his job through regardless of what will happen to him. I'd be an ass if I claimed to be up on all of the legalities, but on a personal level it just feels screwy that he keeps coming up with new ways of dodging the folks that are after him. The parties concerned need to declare to get this business over with. Sweden's got to clarify what would happen if he went there (as far as deportation goes). And honestly - he can't just expect to live a life skipping every town where he's accused of doing something screwy. Wouldn't I just love to avoid legal proceedings whenever I feel like I haven't done anything wrong. It shits me to tears though. So much nonsense in the media; how are you even meant to have a proper trial after that? The whole thing is infuriating. And I think it's exactly how he likes it. He's had so much fun getting the spotlight that he's forgotten why he wanted it in the first place. |