AIDS- 25 years later

if your source PRE DATES mine..then wouldnt that mean NEW information must have been ucnovered since the information that you found?

you act like a virus cant be INTRODUCED to a "target group" under the cover of "reasearch", "cinical trials" or other masquerades. if the AIDS virus was administered to a large group of gay men in NYC under the cover of an "experimental hepatitis vaccine" then THAT is how it would "targeted" them because the THINKING was that gay men are so rampant in the promiscuity that they will destroy themselves with the virus.

and there's ENOUGH articles out there (if you do a selective search) to show that there was government knowledge of this if not outright involvement in the engineering of it. Not to mention an outright quote about how it wouldnt matter to MANY if blacks and gays were wiped out by the AIDS virus.

"cancer reasearch" has OFTEN been used as a FRONT for undercover human experimentation with viral weaponry/agressive biological agents.

"The Final Solution" is HARDLY the scope of what i was talking about with regards to the Nazi doctor's experimentation both on american soil and in germany. :rolleyes:
 
AIDS . . .wow, a terrible disease that takes lives everyday.

The reality of AIDS however are not often addresses. AIDS was primarily thought of a gay man's disease. Because it primarily spread like wildire through the gay male community due to their reckless sexual practices. The problems with AIDS are still due to personal choice.

Folks who take drugs through needles, folks who behave sexually reckless world wide are at a risk for getting AIDS. That's right.

That is something the advocates of AIDS never address, they just say, "Use a condom" have a nice day. That's not the case, if men weren't raping each other in prison, if men weren't having sex with men recklessly (the average gay man has around 150 to 300 sex partners), if men weren't then going back to women, giving them AIDS and passing AIDS on to the guys their messing with then the actual number of AIDS cases would be rather low and rather rare.

Yes some folks do get AIDS through bad blood tranfusions, but those numbers are rare and decreasing. In Africa AIDS is spreading because of many reasons. Some believe it's a "conspiracy" to kill of blacks.
But the reality is that the reckless sex, lack of protection, education and drugs for treatment are the reasons AIDS is reached such a high pandemic portion.

I also don't believe AIDS is the worse disease in human histroy, the bubonic plague wiped out probably much more folks than AIDS. But that's a historical debate not a medical one.

The wost victims of AIDS are the children. The children who get it from their parents behavior.

Why is this not discussed? For example, go to the AIDS unit at the DMC in Detroit, MI. Watch how many, "Down low brothers" you see in their. These same "down low brothers" are creeping back to their wives and girlfriends spreading HIV.

Also, men with hookers. I know some women who work for the Detroit police vice squad. They know of several hookers with HIV/AIDS and of many married men who engage in unprotected sex with them. Where are they bringing that virus back to? Back to their familes.

There does need to be a cure found for AIDS, however, when will human behavior change? The reality is, that if you don't have reckless sex, that if you aren't sexually assaulted, and if you aren't a homosexual male, your chance of getting AIDS/HIV is very, very low.
 
Spellbinder said:
if your source PRE DATES mine..then wouldnt that mean NEW information must have been ucnovered since the information that you found?

you act like a virus cant be INTRODUCED to a "target group" under the cover of "reasearch", "cinical trials" or other masquerades. if the AIDS virus was administered to a large group of gay men in NYC under the cover of an "experimental hepatitis vaccine" then THAT is how it would "targeted" them because the THINKING was that gay men are so rampant in the promiscuity that they will destroy themselves with the virus.

and there's ENOUGH articles out there (if you do a selective search) to show that there was government knowledge of this if not outright involvement in the engineering of it. Not to mention an outright quote about how it wouldnt matter to MANY if blacks and gays were wiped out by the AIDS virus.

"cancer reasearch" has OFTEN been used as a FRONT for undercover human experimentation with viral weaponry/agressive biological agents.

"The Final Solution" is HARDLY the scope of what i was talking about with regards to the Nazi doctor's experimentation both on american soil and in germany. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Binder, there is NO, NO credible research or evidence to support your theories and claims. For such claims to be substantiated they need real proof. It is dangerous to make such accuastations, without knowledge.
 
ZorCrow said:
Binder, there is NO, NO credible research or evidence to support your theories and claims. For such claims to be substantiated they need real proof. It is dangerous to make such accuastations, without knowledge.
Click to expand...

Zorcrow, learn how to READ A FUCKING THREAD before you start posting your retread religious bullshit. i have posted plenty of links to articles that i spent QUITE SOME TIME looking for. if you didnt read them, then you shouldnt have any thing to SAY on what is credible because goddess knows some of the off the wall shit YOU have said in the FEMINISM thread was HARDLY credible.
 
Not to anger you Binder, buy my reading comprehension is fine.

1. The sources you quoted are not credible, nor scholarly.

2. My sources and harsh reality in the feminism threads, are credible. In fact if you doubt how credible they are go to the U.S. Marshals lock up and ask how many of those guys had good relationships with their fathers. Seconldy, common science teaches and reality, and the weight room that on average men are stronger than women.

3. I made no religious points, your haterd for Christianity and bias toward the Christian faith are known but yet juvenile. If I said the same ignorant things about your false faith of worshipping a pagan diety to your own hurt, would that please you? I have no need to insult anyone's faith nor their intelligence. I respect you Binder and others of your faith too much for trhat.

4. If you can give me scholarly sources and science to support your outrageous claims then I will change my opinion.

Here is information on AIDS/HIV from the CDC, a reputuable source.

This page uses JavaScript for CSS Home|About CDC|Press Room|A-Z Index|Contact Us
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
CDC en Español
proxy.php
Search:
proxy.php
proxy.php

proxy.php
CDC Home > HIV/AIDS > HIV/AIDS Prevention > Topics > Statistics and Surveillance
Statistics and Surveillance
proxy.php
proxy.php
Overview
proxy.php
proxy.php
Basic Statistics
proxy.php
proxy.php
Guidelines
proxy.php
proxy.php
Reports
proxy.php
proxy.php
Slide Sets
proxy.php
proxy.php
Software
proxy.php
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]LEGEND:
proxy.php

proxy.php
= Link to a PDF document

proxy.php
= Link to non-CDC Web site[/FONT]
proxy.php
proxy.php
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Adobe Acrobat (TM) Reader needs to be installed on your computer in order to read documents in PDF format. Download the Reader.[/FONT]
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
Basic Statistics
proxy.php
proxy.php
Unless otherwise noted, the following data is from the CDC HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report: HIV Infection and AIDS in the United States, 2004. For a more complete understanding of the current surveillance trends, you may download the HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report or request a free copy by calling the CDC National Prevention Information Network at 1-800-458-5231.
HIV Estimate
AIDS Cases
AIDS Cases by Age
AIDS Cases by Race/Ethnicity
AIDS Cases by Exposure Category
Top 10 AIDS Cases by State/Territory
Deaths Due to AIDS
State HIV/AIDS Data
International Statistics
HIV Estimate
At the end of 2003, an estimated 1,039,000 to 1,185,000 persons in the United States were living with HIV/AIDS, with 24-27% undiagnosed and unaware of their HIV infection.1
For more information see "A Glance at the HIV/AIDS Epidemic".
1Glynn M, Rhodes P. Estimated HIV prevalence in the United States at the end of 2003. National HIV Prevention Conference; June 2005; Atlanta. Abstract 595.
AIDS Cases
In 2004, the estimated number of diagnoses of AIDS in the United States was 42,514. Adult and adolescent AIDS cases totaled 42,466 with 31,024 cases in males and 11,442 cases in females. Also in 2004, there were 48 AIDS cases estimated in children under age 13.
The cumulative estimated number of diagnoses of AIDS through 2004 in the United States is 944,305. Adult and adolescent AIDS cases total 934,862 with 756,399 cases in males and 178,463 cases in females. Through the same time period, 9,443 AIDS cases were estimated in children under age 13.
Please note: These totals include persons of unknown race or multiple races and person of unknown sex. Because totals were calculated independently of the values for the subpopulations, the totals in the tables below may not equal the totals above.
AIDS Cases by Age
Of the estimated number of AIDS cases, person’s age at time of diagnosis were distributed as follows:
AgeEstimated # of AIDS Cases in 2004Cumulative Estimated # of AIDS Cases, Through 2004*Under 13:489,443Ages 13 to 14:60959Ages 15 to 19:3264,936Ages 20 to 24:1,78834,164Ages 25 to 29:3,576114,642Ages 30 to 34:5,786195,404Ages 35 to 39:8,031208,199Ages 40 to 44:8,747161,964Ages 45 to 49:6,24599,644Ages 50 to 54:3,93254,869Ages 55 to 59:2,07929,553Ages 60 to 64:99616,119Ages 65 or older:90114,410
*Includes persons with a diagnosis of AIDS from the beginning of the epidemic through 2004.​
AIDS Cases by Race/Ethnicity
Estimated numbers of diagnoses of AIDS, by race or ethnicity:
Race or Ethnicity Estimated # of AIDS Cases in 2004Cumulative Estimated # of AIDS Cases, Through 2004*White, not Hispanic 12,013375,155Black, not Hispanic 20,965379,278Hispanic 8,672177,164Asian/Pacific Islander 4887,317American Indian/Alaska Native1933,084
*Includes persons with a diagnosis of AIDS from the beginning of the epidemic through 2004.​
AIDS Cases by Exposure Category
Following is the distribution of the estimated number of diagnoses of AIDS among adults and adolescents by exposure category. A breakdown by sex is provided where appropriate.
Exposure CategoryEstimated # of AIDS Cases, in 2004MaleFemaleTotalMale-to-male sexual contact17,691-17,691Injection Drug Use5,9683,1849,152Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use1,920-1,920Heterosexual contact5,1497,97913,128Other**298279577
Exposure CategoryEstimated # of AIDS Cases, Through 2004*MaleFemaleTotalMale-to-male sexual contact441,380-441,380Injection Drug Use176,16272,651248,813Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use64,833-64,833Heterosexual contact59,93999,175159,114Other**14,0856,63620,721
*Includes persons with a diagnosis of AIDS from the beginning of the epidemic through 2004.
** Includes hemophilia, blood transfusion, perinatal, and risk not reported or not identified.​
The distribution of the estimated number of diagnoses of AIDS, among children*** by exposure categories follows:
Exposure CategoryEstimated # of AIDS Cases in 2004Cumulative Estimated # of AIDS Cases Through 2004*Perinatal478,779Other**0664*Includes persons with a diagnosis of AIDS from the beginning of the epidemic through 2004.
** Includes hemophilia, blood transfusion, and risk not reported or not identified.
***The term "children" refers to persons under age 13 at the time of diagnosis. Top 10 AIDS Cases by State/Territory
The 10 states or territories reporting the highest number of AIDS cases are as follows:
State/Territory# of AIDS Cases in 2004New York7,641Florida5,822California4,679Texas3,298New Jersey1,848Illinois1,679Georgia1,640Pennsylvania1,629Maryland1,451North Carolina1,137
State/Territory# of Cumulative AIDS Cases Through 2004New York166,814California135,221Florida96,712Texas64,479New Jersey47,224Illinois31,020Pennsylvania30,526Georgia28,248Puerto Rico28,202Maryland27,550Deaths Due to AIDS
In 2004, the estimated number of deaths of persons with AIDS was 15,798, including 15,737 adults and adolescents, and 61 children under age 13.
The cumulative estimated number of deaths of persons with AIDS through 2004 is 529,113, including 523,598 adults and adolescents, and 5,515 children under age 13.
State-by-State HIV/AIDS Data
State-by-state information about new and cumulative AIDS cases, AIDS case rates, persons living with AIDS, AIDS deaths, HIV infections, HIV testing statistics and policies, additional AIDS-related state policies, Ryan White funding and funding for HIV prevention, and AIDS Drug Assistance Programs, including budget, client, and expenditure data from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
International Statistics
For the most up-to-date information in international HIV and AIDS statistics, visit the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS.
proxy.php

For current statistics on the number of reported AIDS cases in North, Central, and South America, please contact the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)
proxy.php
which is the regional office for the Americas of the World Health Organization at 525 23rd Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037, telephone: 202-861-4346.
Other international web sites available are the World Health Organization (WHO)
proxy.php
and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
proxy.php

proxy.php
proxy.php
This page last reviewed: Thursday, January 26, 2006
proxy.php
proxy.php
Printer-Friendly Version
proxy.php


proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php

proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
What's New in HIV/AIDS Prevention?
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
VIH/SIDA en español
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
HIV/AIDS Prevention at CDC
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
Where to Find Further Information
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
Get E-mail Updates
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
Media Resources
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
Conferences and Trainings
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
HIV/AIDS Links
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
The Web Site Redesign
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
Site Map
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php



proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
Home|Policies and Regulations|Disclaimer|e-Government|FOIA|Contact Us
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php
proxy.php

proxy.php

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA 30333, U.S.A
Tel: (404) 639-3311 / Public Inquiries: 1-800-CDC-INFO (232-4636)

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#exposure

Numbers don't lie . .
proxy.php
Department of Health
and Human Services
 
I was staying out of this conversation until this post because, yeah, I felt it needed to be replied to.

ZorCrow said:
AIDS . . .wow, a terrible disease that takes lives everyday.
Click to expand...

Starting off well enough. Yay.

ZorCrow said:
The reality of AIDS however are not often addresses. AIDS was primarily thought of a gay man's disease. Because it primarily spread like wildire through the gay male community due to their reckless sexual practices. The problems with AIDS are still due to personal choice.
Click to expand...

AIDs spread through the gay community not only because of "their" reckless sexual practices but also the higher drug intake, including those which include injected ones. The funny thing that I always find is people will say the gay community is sexual promiscuous, and, undoubtedly, there is a side to it that is. They will claim decadence in the form of drug use and so forth. Again, not going to argue it doesn't happen. But, see, now one has to wonder *why* this could be. Now there's a lot of sociological and psychological reasons for this. However, here's a biological fact, there is no pre-disposed gay gene which *makes* a gay person more suceptible to drug use and more rampent sexual freedom. Could it be that socially it's forced upon them? If you (oh and I do mean this in a general as well as specific "you") demonize a people for so long eventually it's gonna take effect. If you're going to judge them on a choice that isn't their's to make, then of course, there's going to be a backlash. But, of course, it's easier to judge them for their actions that what put them there. Which would be people like you, Zorcrow. Congrats!




ZorCrow said:
Folks who take drugs through needles, folks who behave sexually reckless world wide are at a risk for getting AIDS. That's right.
Click to expand...

Folks who have been injected with contaminated blood unknown by doctors and folks who make one bad choice when it comes to sex are at risk of getting AIDS. That's right.



ZorCrow said:
That is something the advocates of AIDS never address, they just say, "Use a condom" have a nice day. That's not the case, if men weren't raping each other in prison, if men weren't having sex with men recklessly (the average gay man has around 150 to 300 sex partners), if men weren't then going back to women, giving them AIDS and passing AIDS on to the guys their messing with then the actual number of AIDS cases would be rather low and rather rare
Click to expand...

I've went through a fair few condoms and never once have I ever read that it is 100% safe when it comes to transmitted diseases. HOWVER condoms are known to protect a large number of people and chances of getting AIDs are significantly lower when it comes to using one. That's why they're advocating the use of them. Not to get rid of the risk 100%, but to get rid of it as much as possible. Men raping each other in prison accounts for a TINY portion of the population with AIDs. That's why saying "if women weren't going around sleeping with strangers to give them it we wouldn't be in this problem" Yeah. Clever.

Cite your source for 150 - 300 sexual partners. Also, what the hell, there is 150 person gap in there. Averages are usually specific. Made up bullshit, though, I guess, is not. On a side note, does said source who told you this have the figures for how many sexual partners a heterosexual male has in a lifetime? Just for curiousity's sake.

Gay men also? Don't go back to women. That's why they're gay. They like penis. PENIS!

And yes, if those infected weren't passing on AIDs to those they're having sex with then we would have a lot lower count. Very good, Zorcrow. But now let's look at a different angle. What if they don't know they're passing it on? SHOCK! What if heterosexuals didn't pass it onto each other either? By fucking christ I'd think we'd have an almost exceptionally large drop in cases. Big fucking duh to that one.


ZorCrow said:
Yes some folks do get AIDS through bad blood tranfusions, but those numbers are rare and decreasing. In Africa AIDS is spreading because of many reasons. Some believe it's a "conspiracy" to kill of blacks.
But the reality is that the reckless sex, lack of protection, education and drugs for treatment are the reasons AIDS is reached such a high pandemic portion.
Click to expand...

And the gays. Don't forget the gays.

ZorCrow said:
The wost victims of AIDS are the children. The children who get it from their parents behavior.
Click to expand...

I like how you blamed it on guys passing it to guys and then turn around say its the parents' fault. Care to come up with an actual continuity in your points?

ZorCrow said:
Also, men with hookers. I know some women who work for the Detroit police vice squad. They know of several hookers with HIV/AIDS and of many married men who engage in unprotected sex with them. Where are they bringing that virus back to? Back to their familes.
Click to expand...

Yes they are. This is what happens when you have sex with hookers. Very good. It's also why prostitution should be legalized and policed instead of the crap they have now.


ZorCrow said:
There does need to be a cure found for AIDS, however, when will human behavior change? The reality is, that if you don't have reckless sex, that if you aren't sexually assaulted, and if you aren't a homosexual male, your chance of getting AIDS/HIV is very, very low.
Click to expand...

... Actually. It's not. Get your facts straight.

God, the ignorance from that post. I think my IQ just dropped 10 fucking levels.



(Sorry bout the overabundant use of the word "fucking" in this post. I use it ala Catullus, a way to convey emotion and emphasis. :vamp: )
 
Zorcrow -- did you actually read my post?

P.s. Still haven't cited the source for the 150 - 300 figure, nor how many sexual partners a heterosexual male has.
 
S.A. I read your post and the apparent hostility in it.

Nice to know I am envoking passion and prejudices in members of SG.net

Here are some sources for you.

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/record/archives/vol20/vol20_iss6/record2006.24.html

  • Bell AP & Weinberg MS, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women. (New York: Simon & Schuster). 1978: p 308

  • 2. Ward JW & Duchin JS. The epidemiology of HIV and AIDS in the United States. AIDS Clin Rev. 1997-98: p. 1-45.

  • 3. Curran JW, Jaffe HW, Hardy AM, et al. Epidemiology of HIV infection and AIDS in the United States. Science 2/88: p 610-6

  • 4. Odets W, in report to the American Association of Physicians for Human Rights, Cited in Goldman EL, "Psychological Factors Generate HIV Resurgence in Young Gay Men." Clinical Psychiatry News. 10/94, p. 5

  • 5. Hogg RS, Strathdee SA, Craib KJ, et al. Modeling the impact of HIV disease on mortality in gay and bisexual men. Int J Epidemiology, 6/97: p. 657-61.

  • 6. Koblin BA, Hessol NA, Zauber AG, et al. Increased incidence of cancer among homosexual men, New York City and San Francisco 1978-1990. Am J Epidemiology 11/96, p. 916-23.

  • 7. Palefsky JM, Holly EA, Ralston ML, et al. Anal squamous intraepithelial lesions in HIV-positive and HIV-negative homosexual and bisexual men: prevalence and risk factors. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 4/98: p. 320-6.

  • 8. Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, Beautrais AL. Is sexual orientation related to mental health problems and suicidality in young people? Arch Gen Psychiatry. 10/99: p. 876-80.

  • 9. Herrell R, Goldberg J, True WR, et al. Sexual orientation and suicidality a co-twin study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 10/99: p. 867-74.

  • 10. Lettie L, Lockhart, et al. "Letting out the Secret: Violence in Lesbian Relationships," Journal of Interpersonal Violence 9 (December 1994): 469-492.

  • 11. Gwat Yong Lie and Sabrina Gentlewarrier, "Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships: Discussion of Survey Findings and Practice Implications." Journal of Social Service Research 15 (1991): 41-59.

  • 12. D. Island and P. Letellier, "Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them: Battered Gay Men and Domestic Violence." (New York: Haworth Press, 1991), p. 14.
  • A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), pp. 308-309, see also A.P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg, and S.K. Hammersmith, Sexual Preference (Bloomington, Ind. Indiana University Press, 1981).

  • 14. Paul Van de Ven, et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men,"
    Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997); 354.

  • 15. Lesbian Health: Current Associations and Directions for the Future. (Institute of Medicine, 1999), pp 62-67.

  • 16. (1) Mann, C. Genes and behavior. Science 264-1687 (1994).

  • 17. Billings, P. and Beckwith J. Technology Review, July, 1993. p. 60.

18. C. Mann, "Genes and Behavior," Science 264 (1994: 1687, Edward Stern, The Mismeasure of Desire: The science, Theory and Ethics of Sexual Orientation (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999)




If we disagree, let us disagree. Check the sources. Now the number 150 to 300 was given to me by Sociology Teacher Lance Abney. His numbers may be off.
 
Yeah, see, anyone can rip a bibliography from an essay on the internet. I'm presuming you went to college, if not then it's probably best to explain that when you make a point you give the exact source of where you got that information.. not a vague collection of books that sound like they might hold it. But good work on that, it would have probably worked on a highschooler.

I read the article you posted. It had no bearing, whatsoever, on your point. It was talking about AIDs in the gay community. That means it wasn't dealing with it as a whole in both heterosexual and homosexual contexts like you were. I don't doubt that AIDs was high in the gay community, I'm not disagreeing with that at all. I'm disagreeing it's a "Gay Man's Problem" and spread by gay sex only.

And the 150 - 300 makes no sense whatsoever because it's far too broad in scope. There is a 150 margin of error which is half the peak. If it were accurate then it would average out both figures and say somewhere in the region of 225. The fact that the difference is *so* large, means that there isn't sufficent research to backup either figure. -- As a sociology student.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
and yet NONE of that has ANYTHING to do with what I was talking about..which is the HISTORY and ORIGIN of AIDS which is LARGELY shrouded in mystery and unlike some of you who choose to just GO ALONG with what the government tells you.

the CDC article zorcrow posted doesnt do anything but provide statistics (something i provided early on in the thread if you bothered to read) . and the article he posted only addresses the problem of TRANSMISSION of AIDS ..NOT how it came to exist in the first place or what its intended "target" was.

try getting on the same page that i'm on before you try to "school me".

any idiot can post an article with statistics and tout it as FACT.

what i was TRYING to do was provoke a discussion about a DIFFERENT aspect of this disease...something most people have not given much thought to. ALL YOUVE DONE is PROOVE that the so called christians and social conservatives who were PRAISING this disease as "god's punishment against gays" are still walking around with that IGNORANT mind set.
 
Well from my limited knowledge about the disease, the only real opinion I have would be that is against that it was created as a means to destroy gay/black community. The only reason I have for this is because the disease was found to have been infecting one (or at least, strongly thought to have been..) in the 18th century, before biochemical weapons really came into fruitation. That said, the disease, for all I know, could have been used to try and cull said population. I'll try and read up on it soon, and give a more indepth opinion on the matter.
 
Sebastian'sArrow said:
Well from my limited knowledge about the disease, the only real opinion I have would be that is against that it was created as a means to destroy gay/black community. The only reason I have for this is because the disease was found to have been infecting one (or at least, strongly thought to have been..) in the 18th century, before biochemical weapons really came into fruitation. That said, the disease, for all I know, could have been used to try and cull said population. I'll try and read up on it soon, and give a more indepth opinion on the matter.
Click to expand...

its funny you phrased it that way Sebastian because that is precisely the language used in some of the excerpts from the article i posted a page back. read the quoted portion of one of my posts (and then further back are the actual links)..

it is suggested there were overseas meetings between the US and some other governments specifically reguarding "population control" and the the initiative to "cull the black population" or "cull the black race".

people act like things like this HAVENT BEEN ENTERTAINED by groups before...whether or not these people have the power to DO IT is immaterial.
it's monstrous but it just goes to show you what you will find if you search for it.
 
Spellbinder said:
if your source PRE DATES mine..then wouldnt that mean NEW information must have been ucnovered since the information that you found?
Click to expand...

Ok GOOD Point.

BUT

I'm not acting like the virus couldn't have been introduced to a "target group". Your NOT reading into what I am saying.

If the Virus was Man made then OBVIOUSLY it would have to have been artificially introduced to some human/s at some point. I thought that my admission that it WAS MAN MADE would have made that point clear. Not to mention the fact that I basically said that they must have tested it on Humans.

What I haven't tried to do is speculate on why it was engineered which is what your doing. I also haven't dismissed the possiblity of any of the implied avenues.

All I have stated is that a virus that affect's ALL is hardly the smartest choice for a virus intended to kill off a specific group of people. The HIV virus has never shown that it was ever selective.

I fully believe that there was human test subjects, they could have been gay, they could have been anything.

But until someone can give me a sensible reason as to why anyone would think HIV, a virus that is so easily transferrable to ALL kinds of Humans would be a sensible choice as a virus to kill off a specific group I will continue to question your claim.

I am not however denying that the Virus was referred to as a 'Gay Man's Disease' I just cannot believe that it was purposefully engineered that way.

In other words if they wanted to create a virus to kill Gay people only then surely they would have attempted to design a virus to do just that instead of unleashing a virus that can infect and destroy ALL of humanity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
thats where POPULATION CONTROL comes into play. it has happened before in other places.

if you cant believe that people would have WANTED to see gay people destroyed at a time when they were the object of EXTREME revile (as Buddy pointed out) that is on you. But if you READ the articles i posted you will see that there is DEFINATE AND CLEAR implication that the u.s. government had knowledge of AND PERSONAL INTEREST IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS VIRUS and that gay people were deliberately targeted as test subjects because they were felt to be expendable AND that the move to "cull the black race" is something that was considered to be a goal of the "special virus" (an early "ancestor" of the AIDS virus) from decades back. just because YOU dont believe it doesnt mean its not something that has been documented.

its not ME who has speculated, it is simply that i AGREE with this idea/speculation based on what i've read over the years and the INTERNET (along with the freedom of information act) has opened up MANY doors for article research and exploration on this theory.
 
I dont understand how people can call most of this stuff fact when generally people say it started in a monkey but came to humans? Its all specualation and the speculation leads more on the side of the idea that it was man made. I doubt one person or even a group of people fucked monkeys or transfered blood from monkeys in a target group large enough to cause the spread that it has come too now. If they dont know how the diesease went from monkeys who have different genetic structures than humans to be mutated enough to work perfectly in our blood streams. Medicine will tell you that viruses dont work that way naturally, its very difficult to transfer a working virus to another species, the host species with the virus is generally immune to the virus it transmits anyway which monkeys werent. Since we have no clue how it got to humans who can say its fact that it wasnt engineered? If it was engineered than it wasnt for our well being because the world just doesnt work that way, I doubt they thought aids would cure cancer. It was made to be a weapon against who ever was most likley to pass it on. Think about AID's and thay it works, its designed for people who pass blood during thier actions.

The country with the most diseases is africa thus the most blood transfusions needed.

The most chance of Blood exchange during intercouse is done anally which is practice by the gay community.

Needles shared by drug users transfer diseases as well.

Wow did this virus accidentally work out to eliminate what the state and church have been trying to eliminate for years or what? NO it didnt, its man made from the strain taken from the monkeys after it effectlivly whiped out many monkeys.
 
Spellbinder said:
if you cant believe that people would have WANTED to see gay people destroyed at a time when they were the object of EXTREME revile (as Buddy pointed out) that is on you.
Click to expand...

no NO NO! I can SEE how somne may have wanted Gay People destroyed WHAT I CANNOT SEE is how anyone could have thought that inflicting HIV on them was going to be effective and NOT run the risk of becoming what it is today.

Once AGAIN I have read some articles, I've read how the virus works, mutated and could entered Human biology, I've cross referenced THAT with its other mammal counterparts I have posted all of that. I have stated that I am of the thought that it was a government engineerd virus.

What I disagree with is that it was designed to kill gays only.

Maybe Homosexuals were experimented on. It would have been shortsighted on the Governments part to ever believe HIV, given the ease of how it spreads, could ever be contained within the Gay community.

Right now there is more evidence to suggest that it was intended to kill of African's, than that the virus was intended to kill Gay's. Especially given that HIV-2 (the virus that couldn't have evolved naturally in my opinion-if you read my first post) is completely found in only Africa. That to me sounds like population control through virual infection.....

At this point it could be suggested that Aid's was created by the Church to end all promiscuous sex and drug taking and as an attempt to force Humanity to follow the doctrines of religion. Only sleep with one partner, no sharing blood, no drug taking... that sort of thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DDD the risk was to them is called collaterall damage they knew what would happen and if it was the church who did it or helped with it than chances are it was rationalized as if you get it and you didnt sin than all will be ok for you in the afterlife.
 
Buddy said:
DDD the risk was to them is called collaterall damage they knew what would happen and if it was the church who did it or helped with it than chances are it was rationalized as if you get it and you didnt sin than all will be ok for you in the afterlife.
Click to expand...

As I said before I think there is more evidence that HIV was used to kill off black people in Africa than it was designed to kill off Gay People in the western World.

There is a whole strain of HIV (HIV-2) contained in just West Africa. How it is contained has yet to be explained.

Putting the entire Human Race at risk and then claiming collateral damage sounds preposterous to me for SO many reasons I won't list them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
oh and like it hasnt happened before? what youve just said is basically the same thing as having your head in the sand.

but of course youre entitled to your own opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top