| qz08927 23.09.2012 21:35 |
HIV TEST IS BEING PROVEN TO BE FRAUDULENT IN THE COURTS IT IS TIME FOR QUEEN TO DO SOMETHING USEFUL AND STOP COLLECTING MONEY FOR MURDERERS THEN U CAN SAVE BADGERS According to HIV test manufacturers, FDA-approved HIV tests do not detect HIV and cannot be used to diagnose HIV. link AIDS drugs cause cancer and kill. link And KILL link Many HIV medications contain drugs like Sustiva (Efavirenz) link , a benzoxazine (BZX) link that compromises immune function after ONE DOSE link and can produce life-long psychological and physical injuries.link (More information about HIV drugs and the diseases they cause is found here link ) THIS EVIDENCE IS WINNING CASE AFTER CASE IN COURTS THOSE BASTARDS MURDERED FREDDIE link AIDS drugs cause cancer and kill. FREDDIE WAS BEING GIVEN CHEMO IN HIS LAST DAYS! HIV PROVEN TO BE TOO FRAUDULANT FOR COURT- CASES THROWN OUT -AIDS DRUGS CAUSE OF AIDS DEATHS VIDEO link The Robert Scott Bell Show, wih Liam Scheff and Clark Baker "In April 2011, OMSJ counsel deposed the Director of the Indiana State Department of Health in charge of HIV-related policy. He began to dismantle her credibility in less than one hour." HIV PROVEN TO BE TOO FRAUDULANT TO BE DEFENDED FOR THE COURTS- CASES THROWN OUT -AIDS DRUGS CAUSE OF AIDS DEATHS link The Robert Scott Bell Show, wih Liam Scheff and Clark Baker |
| qz08927 23.09.2012 21:36 |
OMSJ is a licensed investigation agency. Since October 2009, it has helped defense attorneys successfully defend scores of HIV-related criminal cases. link |
| qz08927 23.09.2012 21:53 |
It was only by and through the fradulent HIV TEST That cannot stand the scrutiny of the courts even with expert witnessess to back it, that Freddie Mercury was exposed to the AIDS drug AZT a deadly poison (AZT) that kills is known cancer causing drug link that later caused him to die, after receiving chemotherapy treatment. THE HIV TEST TEST NOW PROVEN TO BE FRAUDULENT SET FREDDIE ON THE ROAD TO HIS DEATH |
| qz08927 23.09.2012 22:07 |
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARD ASSESSMENT SAFE DRINKING WATER AND TOXIC ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1986 CHEMICALS KNOWN TO THE STATE TO CAUSE CANCER OR REPRODUCTIVE TOXICITY 18-Dec-09 The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 requires that the Governor revise and republish at least once per year the list of chemicals known to the State to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. The identification number indicated in the following list is the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Registry Number. No CAS number is given when several substances are presented as a single listing. The date refers to the initial appearance of the chemical on the list. For easy reference, chemicals which are shown underlined are newly added. Chemicals or endpoints shown in strikeout were placed on the Proposition 65 list on the date noted, and have subsequently been removed. For those chemicals for which a no significant risk level (NSRL) for carcinogens or maximum allowable dose level (MADL) for reproductive toxicants has been adopted, it is denoted in the column, "NSRL or MADL." Zalcitabine cancer 7481-89-2 07-Aug-09 Zidovudine (AZT) cancer 30516-87-1 18-Dec-09 Zileuton cancer, developmental, female 111406-87-2 22-Dec-00 link link |
| qz08927 23.09.2012 22:11 |
Zidovudine (INN) or azidothymidine (AZT) (also called ZDV) is a nucleoside analog reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI), a type of antiretroviral drug Zalcitabine cancer 7481-89-2 07-Aug-09 Zidovudine (AZT) cancer 30516-87-1 18-Dec-09 Zileuton cancer, developmental, female 111406-87-2 22-Dec-00 link |
| waunakonor 23.09.2012 22:45 |
You should start a cult or something. That would be awesome. I'd be happy to manage that for you, for a fair percentage of the revenue fo course. You could say whatever the hell you feel like and we'd both make lots of monies of stupid people. Rush Limbaugh didn't get rich saying intelligent things. Seriously man, let's do this! Stop those Freddie killing bastards and make sure justice is served blahblahblah gimme all your money! |
| The Real Wizard 23.09.2012 23:32 |
This thread was great until the last post. I know you mean well, but... Trolls go away when nobody feeds them. |
| john bodega 24.09.2012 01:07 |
Nah - they go away when there's someone banning them each time they pop up under a new name. Unmoderated doesn't mean 'let the animals shit on the couch'. If someone is spamming, it's not moderation or censorship to yoink them out of the mix. |
| pittrek 24.09.2012 02:11 |
I have a couple of other interesting facts for you - CIA killed John F. Kennedy - mankind never landed on the moon, the landing was shot at a Hollywood soundstage - the Jews, the freemasons and the space reptilians are currently trying to take over the world Could you please start trolling with one of these topics ? Thanks |
| cmsdrums 24.09.2012 07:16 |
And don't forget that Elvis is alive and well and working in my local shoe shop... |
| thomasquinn 32989 24.09.2012 07:45 |
The Real Wizard wrote: This thread was great until the last post. I know you mean well, but... Trolls go away when nobody feeds them.This one doesn't. He has over a dozen topics that no one has responded to, yet he keeps posting in them. |
| Mr.QueenFan 24.09.2012 09:03 |
I wonder if the owner of this site really cares at all about Queenzone. I never witnessed anything like this in any forum on the internet. It's the only forum i know of that don't give a crap if people are being desrespectfull towards each other, towards band members, etc. There are absolutely no rules here! People can post whathever they want, anytime, anywhere.... and nothing happens! The Queenzone quality is almost non existent anymore because the ones who can bring something to the table don't care anymore - and even if they do, the topic is hijacked by some idiot who will bring the discussion down with the negativity, again! There's only so much people can do to help a forum with no moderation to stay clean, but if the owner doesn't care, there's nothing we can do. We either stay, or we leave. And this has been the most dificult thing to witness on this forum for the past years. Great posters don't post here anymore, and we are left with...the idiots! If this feels good to the owner of Queenzone, then it's good to me too, because i have the option to not come here. It's sad that this happens, but i'm not gonna lose my sleep over this. |
| inu-liger 24.09.2012 16:03 |
This type of shit is exactly WHY I was calling for solid moderation to be implemented as far back as 10 years ago. And now look what's happened thanks to the wonderful hands-off 'free speech' policy... |
| waunakonor 24.09.2012 17:55 |
thomasquinn 32989 wrote:Exactly. I originally had that line of thinking with this qz guy, but when I realized that he wasn't going away no matter how much he was ignored, I decided just to throw on a stupid joke for the hell of it.The Real Wizard wrote: This thread was great until the last post. I know you mean well, but... Trolls go away when nobody feeds them.This one doesn't. He has over a dozen topics that no one has responded to, yet he keeps posting in them. |
| waunakonor 24.09.2012 17:59 |
Mr.QueenFan wrote: I wonder if the owner of this site really cares at all about Queenzone. I never witnessed anything like this in any forum on the internet. It's the only forum i know of that don't give a crap if people are being desrespectfull towards each other, towards band members, etc. There are absolutely no rules here! People can post whathever they want, anytime, anywhere.... and nothing happens! The Queenzone quality is almost non existent anymore because the ones who can bring something to the table don't care anymore - and even if they do, the topic is hijacked by some idiot who will bring the discussion down with the negativity, again! There's only so much people can do to help a forum with no moderation to stay clean, but if the owner doesn't care, there's nothing we can do. We either stay, or we leave. And this has been the most dificult thing to witness on this forum for the past years. Great posters don't post here anymore, and we are left with...the idiots! If this feels good to the owner of Queenzone, then it's good to me too, because i have the option to not come here. It's sad that this happens, but i'm not gonna lose my sleep over this.Eh...this place isn't as plagued by trolls as other placed I've seen, though the lack of moderation is what's really killing this place. The biggest problem isn't people bogging down threads with negativity, because at least that negativity usually actually has to do with Queen. Trolls that post stuff that you would have to stretch to find the connection to Queen (or if they post stupid stuff in Personal that no one really cares about and is generally considered stupid sounding) are the real problem. Anyway, I like the overall atmosphere of this place better than the queenonline forum, so I'm sticking around here, at least for a little while. Maybe I'll get tired of it eventually, who knows? |
| tomchristie22 24.09.2012 18:01 |
Is it true that the 9/11 attacks were caused by the government? |
| john bodega 24.09.2012 23:54 |
RE: 9/11... I'll bite. No. But, there really ought to have been a proper inquiry. It wouldn't yield the answers that a lot of conspiracy nuts would expect or want it to, and likely they would just ignore any inquest that didn't mesh with their very firm (and flawed) opinions on the matter. These are people for whom science is an irrelevancy. I'd put money on a more far-reaching investigation resulting in some heads rolling for various reasons, and it's not at all surprising that people with various positions to uphold would be reluctant for that to happen. But no. There has never been a compelling argument for direct government involvement in 9/11. Some of the shoehorning that conspiracy theorists have done would actually be hilarious if it wasn't serious. It reminds me very strongly of the "Paul is Dead" folklore. |
| thomasquinn 32989 25.09.2012 00:24 |
@Zebonka: If there had been a proper inquiry, it would have shown that the Bush-administration ignored warnings by anti-terrorism officials of the Clinton-administration that "something big" was being planned by terrorists for the U.S. homeland, and that they were extremely lax in guarding national security (ironic, considering they are also the authors of the most anti-democratic law ever passed in the U.S. when there wasn't actually a war taking place on its soil (Patriot Act)). What I find the most interesting about 9/11 is that Bin Laden was named by commentators within two hours after the first plane struck, that the Clinton-adminstration had been keeping a close watch on him since at least 1996, but that the Bush-guys supposedly had no reason to suspect he was planning anything at all. The Bush-administration shares in the guilt for the 9/11 attacks. If they had been a private party, they'd have been guilty of criminal negligence. |
| tomchristie22 25.09.2012 01:58 |
I was joking, interesting insight anyway though |
| john bodega 25.09.2012 04:08 |
"What I find the most interesting about 9/11 is that Bin Laden was named by commentators within two hours after the first plane struck" I've never found this to be a particularly compelling aspect of the whole thing. Commentators might've said it in the first few hours - but my Mum (with whom I was watching it happen on the TV) said 'bin Laden' in the first few *minutes*. I was pretty ignorant of the whole thing back then, but in hindsight it's bleedingly obvious what was going to happen. But I don't think it's just hindsight that makes it all seem obvious - in a legal sense, I think there's definitely negligence to go around. Unfortunately, a lot of people have made a baseless leap in logic from 'negligence' to 'outright involvement'. Sad, but to be expected unfortunately. If people doubt the Moon Landings (established scientific fact) then they're going to have (and have had!) an enormous field day with something like 9/11. |
| Queenfred 25.09.2012 05:26 |
I watched a recent doco online about the "controlled demolition" theory (pertaining to 9/11). Not too sure I buy it all but the collapse of Building 7 is still interesting. Supposedly no modern building (up to that point and since) has collapsed as a result of fire (the theory being that fires don't spread easily in modern buildings due to fire-retarant materials in the furnishings etc). Building 7 was only hit by debis from the WTC. Anyways, won't go into too much detail- don't want to get into too much trouble for posting in the wrong forum, just found it vaguely interesting is all. |
| madmetaltom 25.09.2012 13:25 |
Queenzone not warzone! lol |
| brians wig 25.09.2012 17:00 |
Hang on. The ONLY test they have for HIV is to look for high levels on antibodies in the blood. The total stupidity of it all is that people have high levels of antibodies when they are ill and women have them when they are pregnant. They haven't even found the HIV virus yet: all 'pictures' that are publicised are just that: pictures/drawings/artists interpretations - call them what you will. So. If they can't find it, how the hell they can test for it or even cure it???? |
| Crazy LittleThing 25.09.2012 17:52 |
pittrek wrote: - mankind never landed on the moon, the landing was shot at a Hollywood soundstage - Could you please start trolling with one of these topics ? ThanksI think you mean a Culver City sound stage. :) |
| john bodega 26.09.2012 07:17 |
"Not too sure I buy it all but the collapse of Building 7 is still interesting" To put it very briefly - the only people who think that it was a controlled demolition are ones who are caught up in superficialities and are very willing to write off reality as a barrier to good DVD sales. It is so easy to just say 'the building wasn't that damaged, the fire wasn't that bad!' and completely ignore the fact that yes, it was. |