Epidemic AIDS and Ebola Viruses Were "Man-Made"

NC Susan

Deceased
<center>[SIZE=+4]AIDS and Ebola Viruses[/SIZE] </center> <center>[SIZE=+4]Were "Man-Made:"[/SIZE] </center> <center>[SIZE=+3]Expert Shocks National Radio Audience[/SIZE]</center>
San Francisco - AIDS and Ebola viruses did not originate from monkeys left alone in the wild - they were bioengineered in American laboratories. So says an internationally known public health authority with Harvard credentials, Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, based on a review of more than 2,500 government documents and scientific reports, some gained through the Freedom of Information Act and never before revealed to the general public. "The Gary Null" show, originating in New York on WBAI radio, syndicated in 20 cities and heard by more than a million people, will air this information, and more, during a one hour interview with Dr. Horowitz beginning on Tuesday, April 23, from 12:00 to 1:00 PM e.s.t., and later in the week throughout the country. Listeners will learn that HIV-1, and its parent, HIV-2, have been traced to National Cancer Institute (NCI) and military funded cancer virus experiments which used infected African green monkeys to produce vaccines intended to prevent hepatitis, leukemia, and other cancers.
The documented evidence revealed in Dr. Horowitz's new book, Emerging Viruses: AIDS and Ebola - Nature, Accident or Genocide? (Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 1996), shows that NCI researchers, during the 1960's, mixed viral genes from different animals to produce leukemia, sarcoma, general wasting, and death. This provided the "cancer models" used to study human cancer and begin human vaccine trials. The book, described as the first in-depth exploration into the origins of AIDS and Ebola, and its controversial conclusions, have offended many top AIDS researchers, and been hailed by numerous others who have long questioned the green monkey theory, or feared disease outbreaks from viral vaccine experiments.
Reconciling the origin of AIDS and Ebola, as Dr. Horowitz has now done, is important for several reasons: First, many feel that victims of AIDS should not be blamed for starting the epidemic. With this evidence, those living with HIV/AIDS may now be freed from the stigma, shame, and guilt associated with the infection - a boost to their natural immunity. Second, new therapies might be developed from a better understanding of HIV's origin. third, the events precipitating such epidemics should never be allowed to happen again. It is ethically important to understand, and therefore prevent, future outbreaks. Finally, those directly implicated in HIV's development and transmission are the same individuals and institutions capitalizing on the epidemic and humanity's suffering. Though many might consider this preposterous, as one Emerging Viruses review recently cautioned, "withhold any out-of-hand dismissal until you read this book," or tune into Dr. Null's extraordinary program.


Copyright © 1996. The Light Party

http://www.lightparty.com/Health/AidsEbola.html
 

packyderms_wife

Neither here nor there.
ummmm maybe on the aids but I thought the first recorded cases of ebola were way back in the 1700's when the british, french, and dutch were busy colonizing Africa?
 

naturallysweet

Has No Life - Lives on TB
"With this evidence, those living with HIV/AIDS may now be freed from the stigma, shame, and guilt associated with the infection - a boost to their natural immunity."

No, if you spread AIDS to others through sex or drug use, you should feel ashamed and should not be freed from the stigma and shame. I know that there are many people who were infected by their spouses or blood transfusions. But by and large, this is a totally preventable disease. It's not airborne. All one has to do is avoid certain behavior, and 99.999% of people will totally avoid any chance of getting it.

If everyone on this planet suddenly developed morality, then AIDS would be gone in 1 generation.
 
ummmm maybe on the aids but I thought the first recorded cases of ebola were way back in the 1700's when the british, french, and dutch were busy colonizing Africa?

I would be interested in seeing sources for that because all the literature I have read on the subject cite the first recorded case of Ebola occuring in 1976 in the Congo/Zaire.
 

packyderms_wife

Neither here nor there.
I would be interested in seeing sources for that because all the literature I have read on the subject cite the first recorded case of Ebola occuring in 1976 in the Congo/Zaire.

You will have to do some heavy reading then, I suggest starting with plague accounts during the Boar War and earlier, much earlier. The descriptions given of the dying locals are that of ebola. NOW that said it may NOT have been until 1976 that they knew what it was they were dealing with, as with many versions of the plague most of what we know is realitively new in the grander scheme of things, but back in the day it was simply called the plague or the black plague, or what not.
 

cjoi

Veteran Member
Wouldn't be surprised if the newest antibiotic resistant bacteria reported in pigs in China and two other countries was created by the same tricksters who cooked up AIDS.
 
Top