Elizabeth Ely #conspiracy reducetheburden.org

This is a great summary, and wonderful PR for the movement for sanity in diagnoses and treatments.

I would only add the sexual dimension: Please cite the number of sexual contacts with a supposedly “infected” person that the CDC itself claims are necessary for “transmission” of the “virus.”

And then ask people to think about that. That number: 1,000? 3,000? This is usually with multiple partners, once each, a kind of Russian Roulette where you have sex with a person who is “infected” on that 1,000th or 3,000th time or whatever that they are actually “transmitting” the “virus.”

What kind of drugs, with what kind of immunological side effects, are necessary to sustain that kind of activity? What kind of psychological woundedness would a person carry into such an experience? How many other infections, viruses better documented, would a person pick up, and what would be the long-term effects on their immune systems of that level of constant onslaught? How would those things be risk factors in themselves?

And if somebody is objecting that this is Puritanism, ask them: What is their “ick” number? What level of sexual activity is too much? What level of detachment is a sign of psychosis? If not 3,000, how about 10,000? Because that’s how many sexual partners some of the original “AIDS” patients had.

This has nothing to do with the “HIV test,” because, as Neville Hodgkinson documented, the test was set at an artificially low threshold of “positive” to test blood supplies. Nobody minded if they threw out a lot of bags of blood, erring on the safe side — but if they’re labeling people as doomed with that test, they’re throwing out people who never even came close to that level of sexual activity or infection or malnutrition. Healthy people, caused to worry needlessly.

Sacrificing people.

And who are these people? Anyone important to us? People with issues, problems, drug addictions, sexual habits most folks don’t want to talk about? Human beings worth saving?

Is it OK to sacrifice certain people, or not? Avoiding the question is key to keeping “AIDS” alive.

I believe the answer, for most mainstream AIDS activists, is yes. Certain people are to be sacrificed, but we’re supposed to pretend we care. We’re not supposed to look too deeply within ourselves.

But if I really care . . . what then? Won’t I object to this labeling of people? Killing of people? Using a bogus test, an unreal label. Yes, I do care about the “stigma of HIV.” Stop labeling people with “HIV,” and the “stigma” is no longer a problem.

Start diagnosing people with their true immune deficiencies, and the source of these, and you begin to actually help them.

Thanks, Liam. On a clear day, you can see forever. You can see the truth.

1 comments

Confused?

So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!

To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register. Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.