Virus fakery: my conversation with a White House policy analyst
By Jon Rappoport
There are a number of cases in which a virus is said to be the cause of a disease---but the evidence doesn't stand up.
I first realized this in 1987. I was writing my book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century.
Robert Gallo, who claimed he had found the cause of AIDS,
hadn't done proper work. From everything I read, he claimed to have
discovered HIV in a low percentage of AIDS patients he had studied.
He should have been able to isolate HIV in virtually every patient.
Then there was the fact that the most popular tests for HIV,
the Elisa and Western Blot, were fatally flawed. They could register
positive for a whole host of reasons that had nothing to do with HIV.
And no one had found sufficient quantities of HIV in humans to justify claiming it caused any kind of illness.
My own research into the so-called high-risk groups revealed
that the "AIDS" immune suppression in those groups could be explained by
factors other than a virus.
(Note: All my research at that time assumed HIV existed.
Since then, several researchers, including the Perth Group, have made
compelling arguments that the existence of HIV was never demonstrated.)
As I was winding up the final draft of AIDS INC., I spoke,
off the record, with a well-known and well-respected mainstream
virologist at a large US university. I expressed my conclusions about
HIV.
He spoke, first, about the difficulties in making an absolute decision about a virus as the cause of a disease.
I brought the conversation back to HIV.
He paused. Then he repeated that he couldn't go on the record. I asked him why.
He said HIV was a subject fraught with problems. Politics were involved.
He said he and his colleagues were taking a pass on getting
into a dispute about the virus. They were aware that the science was
shaky. They just didn't want to go near it. They might enter into other
arguments about other kinds of research, but as far as they were
concerned, HIV was off-limits.
His obvious implication was: careers were on the line.
Attacking HIV as the cause of AIDS could result in blacklisting.
He stopped short of saying HIV wasn't the cause of AIDS, but
it was clear he had seen enough to know there were major holes in HIV
science.
This was a man who had no interest in unconventional points
of view. He was an orthodox researcher from A to Z. He wasn't a rebel of
any kind. And yet he readily admitted to me that the whole AIDS
research establishment was proceeding on a lack of proof.
Exposing this fact would go far beyond the usual definition
of a scandal. The result would be a volcanic eruption, if, say, a dozen
respected virologists told the truth.
After we finished our conversation, I understood something
about consensus reality. It contains elements about which people can
argue in public---but then there are other elements which are completely
out of bounds, which can never be refuted in a mainstream setting.
Why? Because if certain lies are exposed, they initiate a
contagion of doubt and insight that spreads to the whole complex
inter-structure of what people take to be reality.
Great curtains are torn away. Pillars are cracked, and fall.
Images which are taken to be absolute and unchanging distort, dissolve,
and blow away in the wind.
A week after AIDS INC. was shipped to bookstores, in 1988, my
friend and colleague, hypnotherapist Jack True, told me a copy of the
book was on its way to Russia in a diplomatic pouch.
I asked him how he knew. He shrugged and said he had a few connections.
Of course, I've never heard anything back about the Russian
response to the book, but I find it interesting that, in America, my
publisher and I never made any headway in connecting with government
officials.
There was one exception. In 1987, I had a conversation with
James Warner, a White House policy analyst. The interview was published
in the LA Weekly.
Warner had serious doubts about the HIV theory of AIDS, and
would arrange a White House conference on the issue. Pro and anti HIV
scientists would be permitted to speak at length.
At the last minute, the conference was cancelled.
Here are a few brief excerpts from my conversation with Warner. As a White House analyst, his comments are explosive:
Warner: The government really hasn't fulfilled its role in
providing good information [on AIDS]. We just may not know enough. With
AIDS, we're dealing with a syndrome, not a disease. We may see a patient
who has a genetic defect that's causing his immune deficiency [instead
of HIV being the causative agent]. I'm not satisfied we know all we
think we do, by any means.
Rappoport: Robert Gallo, Max Essex, people like that, were
the field commanders in the NIH [National Institutes of Health] war on
cancer in the 70's. They lost that war. So why are they in charge of
AIDS research now? It seems odd that we don't have other people running
the show.
Warner: If ever I've been tempted to believe in socialism,
science has disabused me of that. These guys [at NIH] assume that it's
their show. They just assume it.
Rappoport: Peter Duesberg, a distinguished molecular
biologist at Berkeley, has said that HIV does not cause AIDS. Have you
asked people at NIH what they think, specifically, of his arguments?
Warner: Yes. I've been told that Peter Duesberg's refutation
of HIV has been discounted by the scientific community. I was given no
explanation as to why. I was very offended. No evidence was presented to
me. Just that Duesberg had been 'discounted.' That's absurd. It's not a
scientific response to dismiss Duesberg as a crank.
Rappoport: The definition of AIDS in Africa is now becoming
synonymous with starvation. They're saying the three major symptoms are
chronic diarrhea, fever, and wasting-away. Weight-loss. It certainly
makes a perfect smokescreen for the
aspect of hunger which is political [and intentionally maintained] - just call it AIDS.
Warner: I had not considered that. There is a program to make
Africa self-sufficient by the year 2000. This could certainly hinder
that activity. You know, I was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. I
experienced weight-loss of eighty pounds. And when I came home, I was
suffering from a form of dysentery that you could call opportunistic. A
number of us were. We didn't have AIDS.
---end of interview excerpt---
In this current political atmosphere, a White House analyst wouldn't dare go on the record with comments like these.
Rigid consensus must be maintained, at any cost.
Truth is beside the point.
No comments:
Post a Comment