 by Leonard G. Horowitz, D.M.D., M.A., M.P.H. from OriginOfAids Website
This article regards a
matter of global urgency transcending better known AIDS threats.
It
describes a universal challenge posed by ever increasing numbers of
plagues predicted to depopulate at least half of the world’s current
human inhabitants within two generations. This documented science
virtually proves, through the process of elimination and a review of
the most updated evidence, the origin of HIV/AIDS as an iatrogenic
(i.e., man-made) outcome of specific vaccination experiments.
Considered reflection on this AIDS science, along with the sociopolitical correlates and antecedents of this current catastrophe, reveals the likelihood that myriad other immune dysfunctions, autoimmune diseases, and cancers, including leukemias, lymphomas, sarcomas, and other ailments linked to viral infections, have resulted from previously engineered microbes that have by accident or intent found their way from cancer virus laboratories into humanity’s bloodstream by way of the most trusted public health preventative - vaccinations. If what you are about to read is true, and each point is precisely stated and meticulously documented, beyond extensive depopulation, humanity’s very survival may hinge on this recognition, its implications, and our considered response.
Especially relevant,
when reflecting on the following facts, is the wisdom addressed by
the late World Health Organization (WHO) AIDS czar, Dr.
Jonathan Mann, whose life ended tragically on Flight 111 enroute
to a European AIDS conference.
Background AIDS is undoubtedly “man-made.”
We can now assert this “very
apparent iatrogenic origin,” versus the “theoretic iatrogenic
origin” of HIV/AIDS because of the rapidly increasing, now
substantial, scientific support for this conclusion.
Currently, international
scientific consensus among leading investigators in this field, many
of whose works and words are excerpted below, holds that HIV/AIDS
originated from one or more extraordinary man-made, not natural,
events dating back to the early to mid-1970s. Especially implicated
in initiating the AIDS pandemic, according to many scientists and
scholars, was the hepatitis B vaccine as detailed below.
This may come as a surprise, or even quite a shock, to most people since the mainstream media and most respected medical journals have yet to herald the following knowledge.
As a result most
“authorities” still issue false and misleading claims such as:
As a pro bono consultant
contacted recently by Amnesty International (AI) members who desired
to advance a resolution for the global organization to investigate
this HB vaccine thesis, I was appalled by the amount of resistance
and politicking performed by members of AI’s so-called “HIV/AIDS
Task Force” which sought $1 billion of relief for human rights
violations associated with HIV/AIDS from the U.S. Government.
These funds, the Task
Force reported, were urgently needed to buy drug-cocktails for
persons with HIV/AIDS. Each of the five claims cited above were
issued by members of this Task Force completely ignorant of the
following science.
With regard to the first offensive claim, as the sole author of “Polio, hepatitis B and AIDS: an integrative theory on a possible vaccine induced pandemic” published by Harcourt Publishers, Ltd. of London in the esteemed international journal of Medical Hypothesis,2 this well-focused thesis has never been “discussed, debated,” nor “dismissed” by any consensus in any official capacity.
Although Black Americans
have been polled regarding the origin of HIV/AIDS being man-made,3
there has never been a published polling of the scientific community
in this regard, and certainly not one regarding the HB hypothesis
advanced below.
HIV/AIDS Origin Misconceptions Versus Science Opponents of iatrogenic (or “man-made”) theories of AIDS have routinely confused hearsay and sporadic media propaganda with hard science, such as that “discussed, debated” and not “dismissed” recently at the Royal Society of London’s inquiry into the origin of this pandemic.
They exclusively focused on the theory that
contaminated polio vaccines triggered the HIV/AIDS pandemic.4
These proceedings were
published in 2001. Quotes relevant to reasoned consideration of this
unique/yet-to-be-tested hepatitis B vaccine theory of HIV/AIDS
follow. These statements were made by featured presenters, all
recognized leaders in this multidisciplinary field discussing the
polio vaccine theory of AIDS origination.
The first of these
quotes is especially relevant to proposed investigations:
Despite studies that
have advanced evidence suggesting an earlier than 1970 origin of
HIV/AIDS
7-9,
I might interject at
this point that this conclusion by Drucker et al, although
seriously undermining natural evolution theorists, reflects a myopic
arrogance unbecoming to their otherwise reasonable hypothesis.
Their
conclusion neglects the risks inherent in the hepatitis B vaccine
manufacturing and testing process as detailed below consistent with
the analyses of Myers et al.10
Obviously, all of the above authoritative statements contradict
“common knowledge.”
The consensus of
scientists at this historic British AIDS origin conference favored
additional investigations into possible iatrogenic sources of the
HIVs.
The 1959 HIV Sequence Discovery In the interest of facilitating progress on this issue, much publicity has been given to the notion that HIV was discovered in a 1959 blood sample from Leopoldville, Zaire;8 and that scientific consensus holds 1931 as the approximate date of HIV origination.7
These superstitions have led to common, yet false, declarations that
HIV/AIDS originated well before the polio vaccination era and the
Special Virus Cancer Program (SVCP) that much evidence below links
to the “punctuated origin” of AIDS.
For the record, according to the authors of the 1959 discovery, they never found, nor alleged to have found, HIV, or anything like a full virus. According to these authors, even,
This is why Gao et al, referred to the 1959 sequences as,
Unfortunately, regarding
the 1959 sequences, Zhu et al., left much room for misinterpretation
if not wild speculation by stating that given the,
They speculated the
zoonosis might have occurred “considerably earlier than the late
1940s.” Obviously, this account is irrelevant to “the extraordinary
synchrony in the 1970s of ten or more distinguishable epidemics”
discovered by Myers et al. 10
Therefore, this later group of
researchers concluded that, with the exception of the 1959 sequences
suggesting viral ancestry,
As Myers et al., had
initially advanced, the early to mid-1970s “Big Bang” origin of
HIV/AIDS is further supported by most recent scientific evidence.10
As if repeating false assumptions would alter historic and scientific facts, many contemporary investigators, like those representing AI’s HIV/AIDS Task Force, continue to imply the SIV to HIV zoonosis occurred on or before 1959. Many natural evolution theory evangelists continue to cite the now disproven “cut hunter” theory to explain the origin of the pandemic.8, 22
Reflecting on Zhu et al’s position, however, they simply concluded that the major-group
viruses that dominate the global AIDS pandemic at present shared a
common ancestor in the 1940s or the early 1950s.
However, given
confounding factors, including the likelihood of viral gene
recombination during the manufacture and testing of the HB vaccine,
like Korber et al.’s speculation discussed in the next section, the
1959 “isolate” may hold little, if any, relevance in determining the
origin of HIV/AIDS.
10
Suffice it to say, no one has ever found a virus predating the SVCP and the late 1970s.11
At best they found fragments of what may have been the complete
virus, but more likely pieces of a progenitor virus they called “a
common ancestor” that dated back to “the 1940s or the early 1950s.”
These and other portions of this “common ancestor” may have existed
for centuries if not millennia. Again, this evidence is irrelevant
when considering the 1970s “punctuated [iatrogenic] event” recently
determined to be undisputable scientific fact.
More importantly, as Zhu and Ho et al., concluded,
The 1931 AIDS Origin Assumption and Viral Recombination Regarding the 1931 estimated date of HIV’s origin advanced by Korber et al.7 (i.e., “somewhere between 1910 and 1950”), a critical examination of these authors’ methods reveals problems.
Largely
speculative due to their use of a confounding-factor-liable computer
model, Korber and colleagues noted their limitations. They stated
their finding(s) regarding the 1931 genetic projection, that
precludes various vaccine-induced pandemic theories, might be wrong
if viral recombination(s) had occurred. They most certainly did in
the evolutionary process of SIV to HIV according to most cientists.10,
13
Yet, despite these
facts, iatrogenic theory opponents who have secured a gross burden
of proof” advantage in the AIDS origin debate,20
repeatedly reference this group’s work, along with the frequently
misrepresented work of Zhu, et al.9
concerning the 1959 sequence discovery.22
Again, the “punctuated origin” of HIV/AIDS determined by Myers et al., can only explain the nearly simultaneous emergence of ten separate, though related, AIDS epidemics in Africa during the early 1970s, that were well established by 1976.10 Lending further credence to the theory that early hepatitis B vaccine trials provided the “punctuated event,” Korber et al wrote of anticipated errors in their 1931 determination using linear or recombinant evolutionary models due to “unnatural” or iatrogenic events inciting viral recombination.
They wrote ,
Thus, if the “punctuated
origin event” advanced by Myers et al,10 had been the passage of HB
virus from polio vaccinated humans to chimpanzees then back to
humans, with the additional risk of recombination from pooling
hundreds of infected serum samples prior to additional viral
recombinant transfers via the HB vaccines given to human subjects in
New York City and sub-Saharan Africa, then this might best explain
the origin of HIV/AIDS and render Korber et al’s 1931 projection
inconsequential.
As detailed in the next section, this is precisely
the thesis advanced by Horowitz.2,
13
In summary, the determinations reached by Korber et al.,7 and Ho et al.,9 of possible dates for the origin of HIV-1, 1931 and 1959 respectively, have been adequately clarified elsewhere.10
Myers et al. further qualified:
Conversely, if PIV was
not in humans in the first half of the 20th century, then the Korber
et al analysis holds little, if any, value in-so-far-as determining
a date or origin of the HIVs and AIDS.
7, 10
The Earliest Hepatitis B Vaccines and The Origin of AIDS If early polio vaccines had not triggered the origin of HIV/AIDS as scientific consensus now holds,6 then some other, chimpanzee-related, “iatrogenic event” must be available to explain the staggering array of deadly recombinants that were proven by Myers et al to have arisen virtually simultaneously during the early to mid-1970s.10,21
In this regard, even more neglected, and perhaps
more relevant than the OPV theory of AIDS, is the hepatitis B (HB)
vaccine hypothesis.2,13,23
According to scientific records,2 African chimpanzees were used in the manufacture of the HB vaccines during the early 1970s. Additional documents prove that human HB viruses cultured in vivo in chimpanzees were returned to humans whose infected blood serum was then pooled to develop four different strains of experimental HB vaccine pilot tested between 1970 and 1975 in New York City and central Africa.
This HB vaccine theory
of HIV zoonosis proposes that endogenous, or more likely exogenous,
progenitor viruses were activated24
when serially transmitted from humans to chimpanzees, then back to
humans.
Subsequently, pooled blood serum containing HB surface
antigen and/or live virions, a milieu ripe for viral recombination,
was used to develop the four suspected vaccines administered to New
York’s gay population and simultaneously to sub-Saharan Africans.
Besides the phylogenetic evidence cited above, epidemiological
evidence also supports this HB vaccine theory of HIV/AIDS
origination.
Figure 1 is derived from
Higginson and Muir’s report on cancer studies conducted by the
International Agency for Research in Cancer (IARC) in collaboration
with the National Cancer Institute (NCI).25
Figure 2 derives from
this data superimposed on a map of HIV-1 seroprevalence in Africa
reported by the U.S. Department of Commerce in a publication
discussing desirable depopulation associated with HIV/AIDS.26
Additional evidence here
was supplied in the chronology of the early hepatitis B vaccine
trials compiled by Goodfield.27
The two maps, juxtaposed, show a striking correlation between
hepatitis B vaccine and liver cancer experiments conducted in Africa
during the early 1970s, and the countries in central and southern
Africa with the highest HIV-1 seroprevalence rates by 1994. The
black squares indicate areas participating in the HB cancer virus
research and vaccine trials.
It should also be noted that Mozambique has one of the highest rates of HIV-2, which was allegedly discovered by Essex et al.,28 in Senegalese female prostitutes years after the African hepatitis B vaccination pilot studies began. Due to their state-authorized employment and high risk for infection, Senegalese female prostitutes were required to receive hepatitis B vaccinations for relic ensure.
That Essex et al. found SIVagm, a documented vaccine
contaminant, in the blood of these human subject, is additionally
compelling evidence in support of the HB vaccine AIDS origination
theory.29
In brief, a well documented, theoretically viable, and generally neglected evolutionary route of SIVagm to HIV-1 zoonosis sequentially involves:
HIV-1 progenitor
contamination, recombination, and/or transmission risks were likely
increased during this process by:
This series of events
provides the best explanation for an early to mid-1970s
“punctuated origin event” most precisely fitting the
etiological determinations of the HIV-1/AIDS pandemic
10
Again, it should be
noted that the African “volunteers” inhabited a geographic area
consistent with the highest rates of HIV-1 seroprevalence. Among the
nations where rates are highest, HB studies were conducted in:
Senegal, Cote d’Ivoire, Uganda, Kenya, Swaziland, and the
northeastern part of South Africa.
According to
circumstantial evidence, eastern Zaire bordering the West Nile
region of northwest Uganda also hosted such trials.2,
25-27
Historic Precedence for the HB Vaccine Hypothesis There is historic precedence for this precise HB thesis. According to Beale, the risk of HB viruses contaminating human blood serum and subsequent vaccinations was determined as early as 1942. Then, more than 62 deaths and 28,500 cases resulted from serum HB contaminated yellow fever vaccines.31 According to Hilleman, early yellow fever vaccines also delivered leukemic retroviruses to human populations due to caged animal and laboratory contaminations and concomitant vaccine transmissions.13 Dr. Hilleman additionally reinforced this “punctuated origin” thesis by describing the risks he encountered by importing contaminated African sub-human primates for vaccine research and development at the Merck pharmaceutical company.
Between the late 1950s through the
1970s, Dr. Hilleman told Harvard medical historian Edward Shorter in
1987,
Given these statements
of fact, it is reasonable to suggest, as stated above, the earliest
HB vaccine pilot studies may have activated an endogenous or
exogenous HIV-related retroviral gene in one or more of the
primates,24
fulfilling the “starburst phylogeny” antecedents advanced by Myers
et al.10
During the Royal Society’s symposium on the origin of AIDS, Hooper’s 1950s OPV/AIDS hypothesis was largely rebuked because he failed to establish the use of chimpanzees by the Wistar Institute in the production of the suspected OPV.18 Moreover, this vaccine was not given selectively to New York’s gay male population.
Curiously, Merck’s early
1970s hepatitis B vaccine trials that did involve gay men in NYC,
and Blacks in central Africa, partially prepared in Litton Bionetics
(LB) exported/Merck imported African chimpanzees, ironically went
without mention.
“Burden of Proof” and the Origin of AIDS The most vocal opponent of the OPV and HB vaccine theories of HIV/AIDS origination is Dr. John Moore, affiliated with Rockefeller University’s Aaron Diamond Research Center in New York. As reported in Medical Hypothesis, following a presentation advancing the HB vaccine theory of HIV/AIDS at the XI International Conference on AIDS, in 1996, Dr. Moore flippantly rebuked this thesis in the Canadian press. A few years later, he did the same regarding the Edward Hooper’s book, The River, which he alleged was historically inaccurate, potentially damaging to the public’s trust in western medicine, and harmful to his colleagues “efforts to make AIDS vaccines for use in Africa.” 2 When this author personally contacted Dr . Moore in an effort to begin scientific discourse following his Canadian press interview, Moore refused any formal discussion.
Responding later to
prodding, he wrote me from the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center
saying,
In the Vancouver Sun,
Moore was further quoted as saying,
In fact, according to
scientific consensus, the defining zoonosis for the origin of HIV
occurred between chimpanzees and humans, not monkeys.2
It should be noted that Dr. Moore’s institutional benefactors include the Rockefeller family which, along with the Rockefeller Foundation and its institutional affiliate - the Sloan-Kettering Memorial Cancer Center in New York - has heavily invested in viral cancer research, vaccine developments, propaganda programs, population control efforts, and the Merck pharmaceutical company in particular. Thus, Moore’s bias is strongly suggested.2,13,14 Worse yet, history shows that soon after Dr. Gallo’s alleged “discovery” of the AIDS virus in 1984, Dr. Moore co-directed the only official effort to examine Merck’s HB vaccine for “fear of possible AIDS transmission.” 23 His principle co-investigator was Dr. B.J. Poiesz at the State University of New York.
Dr. Poiesz, their paper
noted, had worked closely with Dr. Gallo in isolating the “type-C”
cancer virus associated with lymphomas during the mid to late-1970s.
Their group of researchers included “anonymous CDC authors” who, for
unspecified reasons, omitted the centrally important New York City
and African HB vaccine recipients from their analysis.
Adding insult
to this injury, the team’s conclusions were entirely inconsistent
with earlier epidemiological
determinations and serological measures.13
Reinforcing the observance of such political bias and tainted science in this field of inquiry is the conclusion reached by several featured speakers at the Royal Society’s meeting in London. They addressed the “burden of proof” required of iatrogenic versus natural AIDS origin theorists. 10, 19, 20 These experts protested the unfair unscientific advantage that has been historically given to outspoken natural evolution theorists, such as Dr. Moore, who have been curiously exempt from having to substantiate their obviously flawed claims and hypotheses.
Ironically, despite this, their unproven misguided theories remain
widely accepted as supposed fact.10,
19, 20
The only remedy such deception is updated knowledge regarding the advanced genetic analyses that have seriously undermined arguments for isolated viral leaps that cannot adequately explain the source of AIDS and the “sunburst phylogeny” of HIV’s earliest African strains.10
In the wake of the Royal
Society’s symposium, theories that now appear tenuous, if not
ludicrous, include isolated parenteral (i.e., skin piercing)
injuries (e.g., the “cut hunter theory”), nutritional exposures,
population movements, and climatic variations that are alleged to
have led to isolated zoonotic events followed years later,
evolutionarily, by the spreading plague.
Alternatively, many
participants at the conference concluded that,
Bionetics Evidence to be Reconciled What continues inadequately reported in the scientific literature, perhaps because researchers remain unaware, or because most investigators would certainly feel threatened by such disconcerting revelations, was that the precise scenario advanced by Myers et al.,10 to best account for the sunburst phylogeny and “punctuated origin” event was repeatedly engineered and studied during the Litton Bionetics (LB) administered SVCP, at precisely the time (1969-1974) required to produce the “Big Bang,” as Myers originally called it.
At this same time, LB’s
study of HB viral co-infections with viruses currently linked to
HIV-related immune suppression and AIDS symptomatology was ongoing,
as you will read below. This information comes directly from their
contract titled, “Investigations of Viral Carcinogenesis in
Primates” (NIH Grant Number 71-2025 beginning February 12, 1962).
This team, officiated by
NCI “Project Officer” Dr. Robert Gallo, the subsequent discoverer of
HTLV-1,2
(leukemia viruses) and HIV-1 (the AIDS virus) almost 15 years later,
stated:
Might this quoted
knowledge have impacted Dr. Gallo’s earliest declaration that the
origin of HIV-1 came from “African greens” (i.e., SIVagm), and/or
Dr. Hilleman’s confession that he brought the AIDS virus into North
America in African greens?
Furthermore, it is well known that HIV-2 sources from macaque monkeys from this same time period.8 Might this specific multiply-infected simian colony be the source of the original SIV to HIV zoonosis? There is much evidence to suggest this, and it is certainly worthy of an official inquiry. It is also curious that EBV was of major interest to the LB team of researchers. It is also well known that EBV is a potent co-carcinogen with HIV-1 and deadly co-factor in the development of AIDS. This 1971 report by Landon, Ting and Gallo et al., referenced the use of “colony-born” primates observed for seroconversion to “EB positive” immune suppressive status predisposing the animals for retroviral infections and cancers.
To summarize this work,
conducted almost a decade before Dr. Gallo “discovered” the first
leukemia retrovirus (HTLV-I), and later HIV-1, his Bionetics
coworkers disclosed that their:
This document, and
statement alone, considering its date, should be adequate impetus
for an independent investigation into the SVCP with regard to the
origin of AIDS.
Reflecting on the specific scenario advanced by Myers and co-workers regarding the phylogenetic, recombinant, and immunosuppressive correlates and antecedents of the “starburst” that reflects at least ten simultaneous HIV/AIDS African outbreaks, the Bionetics investigators stated the significance and “proposed course” of their vaccine research involving chimpanzees.
They wrote:
Inasmuch as humans were
not being directly infected with “candidate viruses” during this
program according to the contract summary, live viral vaccines
derived from retroviruses similar to the HIVs were being prepared
and tested in primate populations that apparently included humans as
well as chimpanzees.
This at the precise time that the Australian
antigen - the HB highly infectious and easily transmissible cancer
virus - and related HB vaccines were being injected into both
chimpanzees and humans in New York and Sub-Saharan Africa by LB
collaborators.33
At the XI International Conference on AIDS in 1996, when questioned regarding his involvement in these Bionetics studies, Dr. Gallo angrily replied to this author,
If the HB vaccine theory might be the focus of a reputable
independent inquiry, such as the one urged by Cribb,19
and now AI members, Dr. Gallo might be obliged to formally discuss
his contract with Bionetics wherein the,
If he still contends
this HB vaccine/origin of AIDS theory has no merit, as he argued
forcefully at that time, then perhaps he would be willing to publish
an alternative account reflecting more recent scientific
revelations.
Huebner et al, referred to in Bionetics’s SVCP contract (NIH-71-2025), might also be persuaded to divulge valuable insights regarding this HB vaccine/origin of AIDS thesis.34
At that time, 1969, Dr. Robert Huebner was also a leader in this
field on the esteemed National Academy of Sciences–National Research
Council (NAS–NRC), that is, at precisely the time the Congressional
Appropriations Committee heard testimony concerning the technical
expertise available through the NAS–NRC for the U.S. Army’s
development of AIDS-like viruses.
At that time these
viruses were referred to by military personnel in the Congressional
Record as “synthetic biological agents.” However, the scientific
community referred to them as “type-C” RNA tumor viruses. Huebner
was exquisitely aware of these developments and various retroviral
species that were routinely being generated using crude early
methods of recombination in SVCP labs. Again, these viruses were
descriptively and functionally identical to HIV-1.2,
3, 13, 14
According to the
Bionetics contract summary report from 1972, Dr. Huebner’s group
isolated and tested a cat/human hybrid oncornavirus, RD-114, from a
human sarcoma by 1971. Sarcomas, associated with leukemias and
lymphomas in AIDS patients were, at that time, unheard of in gay
men.
Later, in 1981, HB virus and vaccine expert, Dr. Don Francis,
relayed his opinion as to the source of the first GRID (AIDS) cases
in New York,
The following SVCP contract excerpt34
discusses the testing of effective treatments for HIV/AIDS-like
infections at that early date:
Might this be a cure for
HIV/AIDS? Unless further investigations into this matter are
conducted, we may never know.
Reflecting on these revelations in-so-far-as the myriad viral recombinants potentially contaminating LB’s labs and caged animals, and the determinations of Myers et al,10 a most appropriate question is,
It would seem likely
that many of the SIVs originated from these investigations as well
as other pandemics such as herpes that exploded during the mid to
late 1970s along with immune suppressive disorders associated with
EBV infections and related cancers.
Obviously, it would be helpful
to investigate the possibility of other plagues that may have
derived from vaccine contaminations and transmissions during the SVCP.
Many researchers, in fact, issued forewarnings about the grave risks posed by recombinant cancer virology.13 Others cited similar risks from public health’s “sacred cow” vaccinations.31
It is sobering to
reflect on this knowledge in the wake of the Royal Society’s
publications and official evaluations.19
Considering The Genocidal Theory of AIDS The 1998 report of Zhu et al.9 was well timed to help promote co-author Edward Hooper’s book, The River, which substantially reinforced a previously advanced OPV theory of AIDS’s origin,12 and gave only superficial consideration to possible hepatitis B vaccine contaminations as the zoonotic vector for transferring/transforming SIVcpz into the human AIDS virus by 1976.4
Hooper referenced
Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola - Nature, Accident or Intentional?
among the texts that explore the genocidal theory of AIDS which he
credited for his background on the hepatitis B theory.13
He cautioned against blanket acceptance of the intentional theory of
HIV/AIDS, which is consistent with the proposed AI investigation of
the SVCP, but he did not rule out the possibility that HIV was
released intentionally.4
As Weiss stated, theories involving the CIA in the origin of AIDS have gained wide acceptance.6 Investigations by Horowitz et al.2, 3, 13 focused on the CIA and the 1969 appropriations hearings in which the NAS–NRC was credited as the source of technical expertise for the U.S. Army’s development of AIDS-like viruses.
At that time,
biological weapons were of great interest to Nelson Rockefeller’s
protégé, and Nixon administration National Security Advisor (NSA),
Dr.
Henry Kissinger.
According to his biographer, and two previous
CIA directors - William Colby and Richard Helms - Kissinger oversaw the
CIA’s top secret biological weapons program called
MK:NAOMI. Soon
after becoming NSA, he ordered a review of such weapons
capabilities.13-15
Furthermore, in the early 1970s, in keeping with U.S. Government and global industrialists’ initiatives reflecting Rockefeller-directed Population Council urgings for Third World depopulation, Kissinger requested and received National Special Security Memorandum 200 articulating the urgency of dramatically reducing African populations.16
At that time Kissinger and associates were leading advisors to the
Merck pharmaceutical company whose president, George W. Merck, was
America’s biological weapons industry director, as he had been since
World War II.17
According to Hooper, the genocidal hypothesis of HIV/AIDS should be “taken with a grain of salt.” 4 It is clear, however, that compelling evidence exits, albeit circumstantial, that U.S. Government officials, including Henry Kissinger, may have had something to do with the initial HIV/AIDS outbreak.
At the precise time
corresponding to the earliest
transmissions of HIV/AIDS, Kissinger directed a national security
cryptocracy that included corporate affiliates at the biological
weapons contractor /vaccine maker Merck, as well as the traditional
weapons contractor Litton Industries.
Litton’s president, Roy
Ash, also served in the Nixon administration overseeing American
industry. Litton’s medical subsidiary, Bionetics, as detailed above,
largely directed the NCI’s SVCP, administered America’s premier
biological weapons testing center at Fort Detrick, Maryland, and
supplied the chimpanzees, monkeys, monkey viruses, primate cell
lines, and other resources for cancer research, biological weapons
development, and vaccine manufacture.
Thus, Kissinger certainly maintained the means, through his official channels at Merck, Litton Bionetics, and the CIA, as well as the motive, to deploy AIDS-like viruses by 1974 in Merck’s HB vaccine. What is unconscionable to most people, Kissinger, a staunch advocate of African depopulation, would have considered it convenient that the emergence of HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa coincided synchronously with the massive depopulation policy institutionalized with primary funding from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Merck Fund.2, 3, 13, 14 Most recently, Kissinger’s direction of foreign genocidal operations has been heralded by even mainstream periodicals.36
In light of these revelations, it is stunning that Kissinger wrote
his own genocide indemnification policy on behalf of the United
States Government in Foreign Affairs published by the
Council on
Foreign Relations in 2001.37
The Challenge Before Us
He summarized before the
esteemed Royal Society gathering.
Determining the origin
of HIV/AIDS is vital for the following reasons according to Cribb:
Furthermore, Cribb
argued,
To the extent that
the HB vaccine theory of AIDS is officially neglected, as Hamilton
foretold:
But if the HB vaccine
theory on the origin of AIDS, as current science overwhelmingly
supports and the “process of elimination” has virtually proven, is
ultimately accepted, then Cribb’s forgivable “honest mistake”
conjecture might need to be reexamined against more unnerving
possibilities.
At the time of this writing, the U.S. Homeland Security Act passed the Senate virtually unanimously. Mysteriously incorporated in its text was a vaccine injury indemnity clause that freed drug companies from liabilities associated with specific vaccine ingredients, such as HIV precursors in the HB vaccines. With this gross violation of U.S. constitutional, civil, and human rights, hundreds of thousands of Americans have been forced to care, without compensation, for vaccine injured family members.
If the U.S. Government
is able to get away with this most blatant breach of public faith,
what is it capable of doing covertly? Clearly, this current vaccine
policy is a form of institutionalized genocide - defined as “the mass
enslaving (pharmaceutically and otherwise) and killing of people for
economics, politics, and/or ideology?”
So long as the above scientific facts and AIDS issues remain unaddressed by medicine’s mainstream, the implications are that AIDS science and vaccination policies, and likely all of science, has evolved in a vacuum devoid of ethics to serve political, economic, and/or ideological motives. Thus, by strict definition, genocide and iatrogenesis have much.
So much so that regardless of whether
HIV/AIDS originated by accident or intentionally, with this data,
there is sufficient justification to coin a new most appropriate
term - “iatrogenocide.”
Further research to test this hypothesis should include:
References
|
No comments:
Post a Comment