Debunking The Out Of Africa Origin Of HIV & AIDS: The Greatest Conspiracy Story

[Guest guest]

D

Mon, 3 Jan 2005 23:54:00 -0500

 

Debunking The Out Of Africa Origin Of HIV & AIDS

 

 

 

Debunking The Out Of Africa Origin Of HIV & AIDS

The Greatest Conspiracy

Story Ever Told

By Alan Cantwell © 2005

Alan Cantwell, M.D.

1-1-5

 

 

AIDS is now more than a quarter-century old. The disease has killed 20

million people worldwide, and it is estimated that 40 million more are

infected with HIV (human immunodeficiency virus), the virus that

causes AIDS.

 

Ask your physician where AIDS came from and he or she will probably

tell you the epidemic started when monkeys or chimps in the African

bush transferred the AIDS virus (HIV) to a person while butchering

primate meat for food or through an animal bite. For the first two

decades of the epidemic the green monkey theory of AIDS was widely

heralded in the major media, and was accepted without question by

leading AIDS experts and educators. The theory was so universally

popular (except in Africa) that it easily became fact in the minds of

most people.

 

Robert Gallo, M.D., and the Green Monkey Theory

The AIDS virus was first discovered by Robert Gallo at the National

Cancer Institute in April 1984. Shortly thereafter Luc Montagnier of

the Pasteur Institute in Paris claimed that he (and not Gallo) had

first discovered the AIDS virus. A bitter lawsuit followed, which was

finally settled privately in 1987 through the intervention of the

French Premier and President Ronald Reagan. To this day, the two

'co-discoverers' of HIV continue to disagree about the origin of HIV

and the birthplace of AIDS.

 

In Montagnier's book, Virus (2000), he states: " The origin of the

epidemic remains a mystery, and the virus seems older than the

epidemic " and " it is important to distinguish between the origins of

the virus and that of the (AIDS) epidemic. "

 

The scientific scandal provoked by Gallo's " stealing " the virus from

the French, as well as the ensuing government investigations into

allegations of scientific irregularities and falsification of data in

Gallo's lab, undoubtedly is the reason both scientists have never

received a Nobel Prize for their discovery of HIV. A highly

unsympathetic account of this scientific mess is provided by Pulitzer

prize-winning author John Crewdson in, Science Fictions; A Scientific

Mystery, A Massive Cover-Up, and the Dark Legacy of Robert Gallo (2002).

 

Because Gallo is the most powerful and influential AIDS scientist, his

views on the origin of HIV/AIDS have become gospel. He first called

his AIDS virus the " human T-cell leukemia/lymphoma virus " because he

believed it was closely related to newly discovered cancer-causing

retroviruses. The virus was quickly renamed human T-cell lymphotropic

virus-3 (HTLV-3), perhaps to obscure the connection of the AIDS virus

to laboratory cancer viruses, and to downplay any association between

cancer (which is thought to be non-contagious) and AIDS (which is

definitely a sexually-transmitted disease).

 

Cancer Bacteria in Kaposi's sarcoma. Arrows point to cancer microbes

magnified 1000 times in a skin tumor of AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma

in a 52 year-old, black, bisexual man. The tissue section is stained

with Giemsa stain. In the insert are bacteria cultured from the KS

tumor and identified as Staphylococcus epidermidis (same

magnification). Note how the size and shape of the variably-sized

round (coccus) forms of the bacteria are identical in size and shape

to the bacteria seen in the KS cancer tumor. These bacteria in

Kaposi's are similar to bacteria reported in enlarged lymph nodes in

AIDS, as well as in other AIDS-damaged tissue. Similar bacteria have

also been observed and reported in other forms of cancer, such as

lymphoma, breast cancer, prostate cancer, and others. The finding of

similar bacteria in both cancer and AIDS suggest a close relationship

between these two diseases. Robert Gallo, M.D. says AIDS is an

epidemic of cancer. In the 1970s the knowledge achieved by the study

of cancer retroviruses helped lead to the discovery of the AIDS virus

in 1984. Unfortunately, the presence of " cancer microbes " in cancer

and AIDS has been totally ignored by the medical establishment.

 

 

Where did Gallo's new virus come from? In the prestigious journal

Science (Jan 4, 1985) it was reported that Gallo's AIDS virus was most

closely related to " slow viruses " (lentiviruses) found in sheep and

goats, particularly the visna virus in sheep, which causes pneumonia,

neurologic changes, and wasting. However, Gallo declared that his

virus was not visna virus, but might be " another animal viruses coming

into man...and this means we have to look more closely at these

animals as models and these types of animal viruses. No one knows if

the viruses could have stemmed from a common viral ancestor hundreds

or thousands of years ago, or if a virus moved between species only

decades ago from human exposure to the virus of sheep or goats. "

The idea that HIV was " closely related " to the sheep visna virus did

not last long. The idea of a sheep virus infecting gay men would have

undoubtedly aroused suspicion because the only place one could find

visna was in research labs where visna virus had been seeded and

" adapted " into various animal species, as well as into human cells,

for the two decades prior to the " gay plague. "

Gallo, with the help of veterinarian Max Essex of Harvard, convinced

the AIDS experts and the adoring media that AIDS came from green

monkeys. In Gallo's book Virus Hunting [1991], he claims that in 1983

(a year before his discovery) Ann Giudici Fettner, a free-lance

journalist who had lived in Africa, told him that the virus came from

green monkeys in central Africa. In 1983 the African connection to

AIDS was tenuous, and in Fettner's 1984 book, The Truth About AIDS,

she never mentioned green monkeys and the African origin of AIDS. In

fact, on page 44, she emphatically states: " AIDS started as an

American disease. "

 

There are no scientific papers which uphold the green monkey theory.

The monkey out of Africa theory lasted until the late 1990s when

another group of American scientists claimed the virus definitely

originated in a specific species of chimpanzee found in Africa.

The green monkey theory was scientifically doomed from the very start,

although that apparently did not phase the scientists who undoubtedly

wanted to place the blame on the dark continent -- and take the origin

of HIV out of Manhattan, where the first cases were discovered in

1979, and push the origin to the other side of the world.

 

The Marriage of Cancer Research and Biowarfare in 1971

Whatever the theoretical origin of HIV/AIDS, there is no doubt that

the epidemic started a decade after scientists began " adapting "

massive numbers of cancer-causing and immunosuppressive animal viruses

and transferring them between various animal species in an attempt to

experimentally produce cancer in the laboratory. In the process of

these " species-jumping " experiments, the scientists mixed viruses

together, seeded them into the bodies of various animal species, and

planted them into animal and human cell cultures. In the process

myriads of new, laboratory-created mutant, hybrid and recombinant

viruses were created, some of which were exceedingly dangerous.

 

These engineered and deadly viruses were obviously of interest to

biowarfare scientists. Donald A MacArthur stated in Congressional

testimony in 1969 that " molecular biology is a field that is advancing

very rapidly and eminent biologists believe that within a period of 5

to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological

agent, an agent that does not exist naturally exist and for which no

natural immunity could have been acquired. "

 

The dangers provoked by all these laboratory-created new virus were

well known. At a symposium on leukemia research in 1973, Danish

pathologist J Clemmesen warned that the transmissibility of these

genetically -altered viral agents could cause a world epidemic of

cancer if they escaped from the laboratory. (Gallo has publicly stated

AIDS is an epidemic of cancer.) That same year cancer virologists

convened at a conference entitled " Biohazards in Biological Research "

at Asilomar, California. Despite the risks, it was decided to continue

perilous animal cancer virus experimentation.

 

People are often surprised to find there is a close relationship

between traditional cancer virus research and biological warfare

programs and experimentation. However, it is a fact that in 1971

President Richard Nixon, as part of his War On Cancer, combined the

U.S. Army's biowarfare department at Ft. Detrick, Maryland, with the

National Cancer Institute. The army's DNA and genetic engineering

programs were coordinated into anti-cancer research and molecular

biology programs. This marriage also cemented the governmental ties of

cancer research to the CIA, the CDC, the World Health Organization,

and private industry.

 

During this same period the Special Virus Cancer Program (1968-1980),

now largely and conveniently forgotten, was established to coordinate

the search for cancer-causing viruses. The U.S. biological warfare

program is highly secret. This secrecy also surrounds the many

scientists who directly or indirectly contribute to the program.

Naturally, there is no complete record of what this Virus Cancer

Program has achieved or what cancer-causing and immunosuppressive

animal cancer viruses were adapted for biological warfare use and for

covert military testing on human populations.(For more details and

129,000 citations, go to www.google.com and type-in key words :

biological warfare human experimentation.)

 

A computer PUBMED search employing the key words " U.S. Army Biological

Warfare Program " yields only 44 citations. One entry (PMID: 11572136)

reads: " The United States began its BW program based on intelligence

information and a very thorough evaluation of that information by a

panel of scientists, engineers, medical personnel from a variety of

areas including the military, other government agencies, industry, and

the academic community. Initial efforts were directed toward defense

against BW, but it soon became clear defense required a knowledge of

offensive capabilities. The initial offensive studies started with a

definition of what infectious organisms were available, how they could

grow in quantities to support a munitions program, what kind of

facilities were required, and where they could be positioned. Further

studies were then initiated to design and evaluate testing sites and

methodologies to evaluate the weapons. During all of these phases,

concurrent medical and safety programs were studied, emphasized, and

implemented. These studies resulted in the development of a number of

vaccines, toxoids, treatments, therapies, and facility personnel

management. The overall conclusion was that BW, offensive and

defensive, was possible, and efficiencies could be obtained. The work

accomplished by this group of very dedicated military and civilian

personnel at military installations, universities, research

institutes, and industrial organizations presented truly a combined

operation with numerous achievements. Many of the detailed

achievements were published in the open scientific, peer-reviewed

journals, and many patents were obtained. The current defensive

program is breaking new scientific ground and there is evidence

indicating that very rapid detection and identification of BW agents

is possible and will be instrumented. "

Is it " conspiracy theory " to question whether a virus " closely

related " to HIV was created in any of the many laboratories

contributing to the Special Virus Cancer Program and its connection to

biowarfare research during the 1970s? Could covert human testing of

classified biowarfare agents explain the exclusive " introduction " of

HIV into gay men, the most hated minority in America, via the

government-sponsored experimental hepatitis B experiments that began

in Manhattan in New York City in 1978 -- the year before the onset of

the " gay plague. "

 

The American Origin of AIDS in 1979

In 1979 the first young white gay men to come down with " gay-related

immunodeficiency disease " was reported to the CDC. For the first year

of the epidemic all the men were from Manhattan. They were all defined

as young, predominantly white, previously healthy, well-educated and

promiscuous.

 

The Manhattan men were similar in profile to the 1,083 gay men who

signed up for the hepatitis B experiment conducted at the New York

Blood Center, also located in Manhattan. The experimental vaccine was

developed in chimpanzees. The injections began in November 1978, and

were concluded a year later. Similar vaccine experiments in gay men

were undertaken in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Denver, St. Louis and

Chicago, beginning in March 1980 and continued until October 1981, a

few months after the epidemic had become " official. " (For more

details, google: the hepatitis B vaccine experiment.)

AIDS became official in the U.S. in June 1981. At the time AIDS was

unknown in Africa, and the epidemic did not begin there until autumn

1982 at the earliest. After Gallo discovered HIV in April 1984, an HIV

blood test was developed and was used on the stored gay blood

specimens deposited at the Center as part of the ongoing experiment

and follow-up. In 1980, a year before the epidemic became official,

already 20% of the men's blood in the experiment were HIV-positive. By

1983, 30% of the men were positive; by 1984, 40%.

 

IDS scientists repeatedly claim HIV was lurking in Africa for decades,

centuries, even millennia, before the epidemic. But there was no

" incubation period " in America.

As soon as large numbers of gay people came out of the closet and

signed up for government experiments, the gay community was doomed.

 

Not only was one virus (HIV) " introduced " into the homosexual

population, but two additional " mycoplasma " bacteria-like agents and a

new herpes virus as well. In addition, I wrote in books and medical

journals that " cancer-causing bacteria " were also operative in AIDS,

but all my research linking AIDS to cancer remains ignored by the AIDS

establishment. (For full details and 458 citations: google: " alan

cantwell " +bacteria +AIDS.)

" Gay Cancer " : A mystery wrapped in an enigma

 

Three years before HIV was discovered, my research uncovering bacteria

in Kaposi's sarcoma was published. KS became widely known as the " gay

cancer " associated with AIDS. In the late 1970s, as a dermatologist, I

studied the cancerous tissue of three elderly, presumably straight

married men with KS, a very rare skin cancer that few physicians had

ever seen. I identified bacteria in the cancerous tissue; and bacteria

were cultured from skin biopsies. When the first gay men with KS

appeared in my office, I studied their skin tumors for bacteria. A

PUBMED computer search lists 7 of my research papers published in

medical journals between the years 1981-1986 showing bacteria in the

KS lesions of straight and gay men with KS and AIDS, in the enlarged

lymph nodes of " AIDS-related complex " , and in two autopsy studies

showing bacteria in the internal organs of a straight man who died of

KS before the epidemic, and a gay man who died of KS and AIDS.

 

My bacterial research showed a close relationship of AIDS to cancer.

This research is included in my books, AIDS:The Mystery & the Solution

(1984), and The Cancer Microbe (1990). When Gallo was asked about my

KS research in a published interview by James D'Eramo in 1984, he

ignored the question. When asked why only homosexuals were the first

victims of AIDS, he replied: " Because they were exposed. " To this day

Gallo and Montagnier refuse to acknowledge any aspect of this research.

 

In 1993, Shyh-Ching Lo of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology

reported the finding of 2 different infectious agents in the blood,

urine and KS tumors of AIDS patients. At first, he thought the

microbes were viruses, but later determined they were actually very

small forms of bacteria called " mycoplasmas. " After Lo's discovery,

the Army quickly took out patents on his infectious agents, which he

calls Mycoplasma fermentens and M. penetrans. My KS research was never

mentioned in any of his papers.

 

In 1994, a new infectious and sexually-transmitted herpes virus called

" human herpes virus-8 " was proclaimed to be the agent causing all

pre-AIDS and AIDS-related KS. This virus is now widely accepted as the

sole cause. I thought it rather strange that there was never any

evidence that KS was transmissible before AIDS, and that a " new " virus

could cause a rare cancerous disease that has been around since the 1870s.

 

Montagnier thinks mycoplasmas might be a necessary " co-factor " which

accelerates the progression of HIV infection in AIDS patients. He also

believes antibiotic therapy along with antiviral therapy is better

treatment for AIDS. Where did these new mycoplasmas come from? Where

did HIV come from? Offering homophobic explanations and no evidence in

his Virus book, the French virologist theorizes that American gay

tourists brought back these agents from Africa to the U.S.

Evidence of blood infection with the new KS human herpes virus-8 is

now present in as many as 40% of men with prostate cancer. In Texas,

15% of normal blood donors now test positive for the virus. This means

the virus is in the American blood supply; and blood is not screened

for the virus. Where did the " new " herpes virus come from? A " close

relative " is the Herpes saimiri virus of squirrel monkeys, a virus

that was extensively passed around in the Special Virus Cancer Program.

 

Chimpanzees and the Polio Vaccine Theory of AIDS

In 1999 the publication of The River: A Journey to the Source of HIV

and AIDS, by journalist Edward Hooper, received widespread media

attention. Hooper theorizes that HIV was introduced into Africans via

chimp virus-contaminated polio vaccine programs in the late 1950s. His

massive book does not adequately explain why it took 30 years for the

epidemic to appear in Africa, nor how a sexually-transmitted disease

in black Africans in the early 1980s could have transformed itself

into a white gay man's disease in New York City in the late 1970s.

Furthermore, there are no HIV-positive tissue or blood specimens from

Africa from the 1960s and 1970s, and no proven cases of AIDS either,

to indicate HIV was " incubating " in the African population. Hooper

quickly dismisses the claims of Robert Strecker, the first physician

whistle-blower of man-made AIDS, as well as the man-made research in

my own two books on the man-made origin: AIDS & The Doctors of Death,

and Queer Blood.

 

By predating his polio vaccine theory back to the late 1950s, Hooper

greatly simplified his theory of AIDS origin. He ignores all the

primate/simian viruses that were placed into human tissue in the 60s

and 70s, and all those genetically altered viruses for cancer

research, vaccine research, and secret biological warfare.

 

The chimp in the freezer at Fort Detrick

On February 1, 1999 Lawrence K Altman, M.D, longtime AIDS-writer for

The New York Times, dutifully reported " the riddle of the origin of

the AIDS virus has apparently been solved. " A team of researchers,

headed by Beatrice Hahn at the University of Alabama, performed viral

studies on three chimps in the African wild and studied the frozen

remains of a chimp, discovered by accident in a freezer at the Army's

biowarfare center at Fort Detrick. The chimp had tested positive for

HIV in 1985. On the basis of this research, Hahn declared that a

common subspecies of chimp (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) was the

animal source of the virus " most closely " related to HIV. In a media

blitz U.S. government scientists presented a phylogenetic ancestral

" family tree " of primate viruses (which few people could understand)

to prove that HIV was genetically descended from a chimp virus in the

African bush.

 

Hahn theorizes the epidemic could have started when a hunter became

infected by cutting himself while butchering chimp meat. Back in the

1980s Hahn worked in Gallo's lab, and like Gallo she ignores the

entire history of animal cancer virus laboratory transfers in the

decades preceding AIDS, as well as the fact that chimp kidneys were

transplanted into humans back in the 1960s in New York City. Another

big problem is that after scientists pump viruses into captive lab

chimps in laboratories in the U.S. and Africa, they sometimes release

them back into the wild. Obviously, the mix of lab animal viruses with

viruses in the wild make the determination of viral " ancestry "

somewhat iffy.

 

AIDS scientists totally accepted Hahn's notion that HIV jumped species

from chimps to humans back in the 1930s to start the epidemic. The

media again explained this was the first time that primate viruses had

jumped species " naturally, " again failing to mention all the millions

of people around the world who had the primate/simian SV40 virus

injected into them along with their polio shot.

 

How accurate and meaningful is the ancestry of all these animal

retroviruses? Do words used by scientists to compare different

viruses, such as " closely related " and " distally related " (meaning

related far from the point of origin) really tell us how a suspected

primate virus like HIV got into the human population? For example, it

is widely reported in scientific circles that no two HIV viruses are

exactly alike. This is because HIV mutates readily and takes on some

of the molecular components of the cells it invades. When it comes to

viral " relationships " the only absolutely identical HIV viruses in

scientific history was the virus presented by Gallo as his discovery,

and the virus presented by Montagnier as his discovery. The genetic

evidence indicated it was impossible for these two scientists to have

discovered identical viruses on two different continents, even though

Gallo insisted his virus was not the same as Montagnier's. Thus, the

lawsuit.

 

The moral of this story is: If the two most highly respected AIDS

scientists cannot agree on the ancestry of identical twin viruses,

then how can we be sure when they tell us which virus is related to

which virus -- particularly when many engineered laboratory viruses

are not even recorded and entered into so-called virus banks or

registries which are used to compare the genetic make-up of " known "

viruses. Let's face it, if your old ancestors are not recorded in a

book somewhere, you will never find them as ancestors.

 

The Origin of AIDS Conference, London, 2000

In October 2000 the Royal Society of London held a two-day conference

on the origins of HIV. Needless to say, the man-made theory was not

discussed. One professor emphatically declared: " All human infectious

diseases have an animal origin. " Hooper's polio theory was totally

discredited; and Hahn's new chimp theory, dating HIV back to the

1930s, was acclaimed.

 

The " Last Word " at the conference was that " all human viral infections

were initially zoonotic (animal) in origin. Animals will always

provide a reservoir for viruses that could threaten human populations

in the future. " The scientists predicted: " There is still a myriad of

current unknown viruses in animal populations on land, sea, and air

with the potential to cause human disease. " But what about the

millions of dangerous virus created in animal laboratories? That was

never considered.

 

A person cannot contract AIDS from a monkey or chimp

In the July 2000 issue of Lancet, virologist and primatologist Preston

Marx states: " There is no evidence that a person can contract AIDS

from a monkey or chimpanzee " . According to Marx, research shows humans

were infected with SIV (simian immunodeficiency virus) in Africa and

that these SIV infections were the root origin of HIV. Therefore SIV

is the monkey ancestor virus of HIV. And Marx has no doubt that HIV

originated from SIV in African non-human primates.

AIDS educators often claim that AIDS is a " zoonosis " , meaning a

disease of animals that can be transmitted to humans, but Marx says

this assumption is incorrect. AIDS as a zoonosis would mean that

humans had contracted not only an SIV infection from a monkey or a

chimp, but that they also eventually became sick with AIDS from the

monkey virus infection. We have not established that AIDS is a

zoonosis (meaning a disease people catch from monkeys). He further

declares " We do not know what launches animal viruses to become

epidemic in humans. There may be a social, viral-genetic or

immunologic basis for new epidemics. We do not have this answer for

the AIDS epidemic, but we do know that HIV originated from simian

species. "

 

In a more recent October 2004 article " AIDS as a zoonosis? Confusion

over the origin of the virus and the origin of the epidemic " , Marx and

his colleagues further speculate that HIV (derived from a primate) in

the 1950s in Africa could have been made more dangerous and

transmissible by dirty needles used in vaccine programs, as well as

contaminated blood transfusions. The repeated passage from

human-to-human (so called " serial passage " ) via SIV virus-contaminated

needles could have transformed a harmless SIV in humans to the deadly

and genetically-changed HIV virus causing AIDS.

Human exposure to SIV is thousands of years old, but AIDS merged only

in the 20th century. Marx never suggests that contaminated vaccines,

rather than needles, could have initiated the African epidemic.

However, if AIDS does not qualify as a zoonosis, I interpret this to

mean that Hahn's " cut hunter theory " could not account for the

explosion of HIV/AIDS in Africa in the 1980s. Finally, Marx's team

suggests that more " research is needed to understand the processes by

which animal viruses cause sustained human-to-human transmission,

epidemics and even pandemics. Much is known about emerging viruses,

but almost nothing is known about emerging viral diseases. "

 

WHO Murdered Africa?

Apparently forgotten, ignored, or unknown by Marx was a similar

vaccine and needle scenario reported on May 11, 1987, on the

front-page of The London Times, entitled " Smallpox vaccine triggered

AIDS virus. " Science editor Pierce Wright suggested that African AIDS

was a direct result of the World Health Organization's smallpox

eradication program conducted in the 1970s. The smallpox vaccine

allegedly awakened a " dormant " AIDS virus infection in the black

population. Gallo was quoted as saying, " The link between the WHO

program and the epidemic is an interesting and important hypothesis. I

cannot say that it actually happened, but I have been saying for some

years that the use of live vaccines such as that used for smallpox can

activate a dormant infection such as HIV (the AIDS virus). "

 

The Times report is one of the most important stories ever printed on

the AIDS epidemic; yet the story was killed and never appeared in any

major U.S. newspaper or magazine. However, the report is widely

circulated on the internet as evidence to suggest that AIDS appeared

in Africa via accidental or deliberate vaccine contamination with the

AIDS virus. (Google: WHO murdered Africa).

Kenyan ecologist and biologist Wangari Maathai was obviously aware of

this vaccine connection when she won the Nobel Peace Prize in October

2004, and shocked reporters by claiming the AIDS virus was a

deliberately created biological agent developed by evil-minded

scientists and released in Africa to cause mass extermination of blacks.

 

In Magic Shots [1982], Allan Chase claims that during the years

1966-1977, the WHO utilized " 200,000 people in forty countries -- most

of them non-doctors trained by seven hundred doctors and health

professionals from over seventy participating countries -- spent $300

million, and used forty million bifurcated vaccinating needles to

administer 24,000 million (2.4 billion) doses of smallpox vaccine. "

This is also proof of extensive needle re-use.

There is absolutely no evidence to show that large numbers of African

blacks were " incubating " HIV, or any other primate/simian virus before

the outbreak. This is why the out of Africa idea is theory and not fact.

 

Despite this lack of evidence, the monkey/chimp and primate/simian

origin of HIV/AIDS is a well-accepted scientific theory. In contrast,

the man-made " introduction " of HIV in the late 1970s is condemned as

" conspiracy theory " . Although taboo, the man-made theory refuses to go

away, and is alive and well on the internet. A google search, using

the key words " man made origin of AIDS, " will elicit 1,220,000

citations to various web sites.

 

HIV: Out of Africa? Or out of a virus laboratory?

Precise answers to how AIDS originated depends on which " expert " you

ask. Montagnier points to the United States and gay men as the source

of the virus. Could the virus have been transmitted from chimpanzees

to humans? Montagnier says yes. But, he adds, humans could have

transmitted the virus to the chimpanzees! How could humans have

transmitted the virus to chimps? Unfortunately, the Frenchman did not

elaborate on this.

 

Could HIV be a primate/simian virus originating in a virus laboratory

? Such questions are never seriously proposed or answered by

virologists. However, well-known to insiders are the embarrassing

contamination problems with primate viruses which have plagued Gallo's

lab at the NCI and Essex's lab at Harvard.

A case in point is Gallo's reported 1975 " discovery " of a " new " and

" human " virus reported in scientific journals as " HL-23. " This virus

was eventually proven to be not one, but three different ape viruses

(gibbon-ape virus, simian sarcoma virus and baboon endogenous virus).

Gallo claims he has no idea how these viruses contaminated his research.

 

Essex, who along with Gallo heavily promoted the erroneous green

monkey theory, had similar woes. In 1986 he announced the discovery of

a " new " human AIDS virus (HTLV-4). This " human " virus bore a striking

similarity to a monkey retrovirus known as STLV-3. In February 1988,

the mystery was solved. Essex's new " human " HTLV-4 virus turned out to

be a monkey virus that accidentally contaminated Essex's human blood

samples. The source of the monkey contamination was traced back to

blood samples from a monkey that was experimentally infected by an

AIDS-like virus at the New England Regional Primate Research Center in

Southborough, Massachusetts. Carol Mulder of the University of

Massachusetts Medical School cautioned: " This episode should serve as

a strong warning for all virologists to check any newly discovered

viruses against viruses present in the laboratory. "

 

In the decade before AIDS broke out in gay men, Essex created " cat

AIDS " in a series of experiments. In 1974, chimpanzee AIDS was also

created deliberately by feeding heavily virus-contaminated cows' milk

to newborn chimps. For the very first time, veterinarians were able to

produce leukemia in chimps, as well as a lung infection, later known

as the " gay pneumonia " of AIDS. As Montagnier should be aware, human

cancerous tissue and blood was routinely injected into primates as

part of the Special Virus Cancer Program. Mysterious AIDS-like

illnesses also occurred in primate laboratories a few years before

AIDS. And chimp viruses also jumped species back in the 1960s when

chimp kidneys were experimentally transplanted into humans.

We are informed that the AIDS epidemic is the result of a primate

virus jumping species for the first time. However, polio vaccines

given to millions of people in the 50s and 60s were heavily

contaminated with a cancer-causing monkey virus called SV-40 (simian

virus 40). Over the decades various studies indicate this virus is

implicated in several forms of human cancer, although government

scientists continue to deny any association. For a complete analysis

of this polio vaccine contamination, read (or google) The Virus and

the Vaccine [2004].

 

The man-made theory of AIDS proclaims that HIV was introduced into

American gays and African blacks via vaccine programs. Why is this

theory deemed paranoia by the media and the AIDS establishment? Why is

discussionnot allowed? Why have scientists suppressed the extensive

history of animal cancer virus transfer in the decade before AIDS?

Is there a scientific conspiracy to get scientists off the hook by

blaming monkeys in the bush, and gays and Africans, for the millions

of death brought about by the " introduction " of HIV into the world

population? Of course there is. That's why it's The Greatest

Conspiracy Story Ever Told.

 

- Alan Cantwell has writing extensively on the origin of AIDS and

cancer for the past two decades. He is the author of AIDS: The Mystery

and the Solution; AIDS and the Doctors of Death; Queer Blood, and The

Cancer Microbe, all published by Aries Rising Press, Los Angeles, CA,

and available through internet sources. Email:alancantwell

 

 

 

Disclaimer