The Mysterious Influence on the US of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus

Posted by Søren Renner on March 15, 2009, 11:26 PM | #

I’ll take “Brothas Be On The Down Low” for 1000, Alex!

Posted by q on March 15, 2009, 11:39 PM | #

“Brothas Be On The Down Low”

BINGO!

Posted by James Bowery on March 16, 2009, 01:05 AM | #

First of all, that doesn’t explain why HIV itself is so dominant a predictor of all other demographic variables.

Secondly, regarding the explanation for HIV’s spread:

US Blacks come in below Jews in correlation with HIV but Jews come in behind African and Carribian immigrants!

It seems there is more of a link to the specifically Jewish aspect of the slave trade than there is to the US slaves per se.

Posted by Valerian on March 16, 2009, 07:15 PM | #

The worst part about all this is that certain members of this Negro race rape white women and these Monkey rapists are already infected with HIV! Most White Americans don’t consider themselves as one unified organism which in turn stifles any collective outcry towards White Women getting infected with Aids or HIV. Our people are getting infected and the minds of most of our members are glued to television or profane means of self-fulfillment. Reality is fucking bizarre when you dig deeper like we all have. I think that if Francis Parker Yockey and the Baron Julius Evola were still alive they would be vomiting violently from seeing the society that exists in America today.

Posted by John on March 17, 2009, 09:54 AM | #

You assume that HIV exists, and is virulent/infectious.

http://www.garynull.com/dissidents_list.html

I consider the whole hype-laden AIDS scare the second biggest psyop that has ever been perpetrated.

Posted by HIV/AIDS on March 17, 2009, 01:21 PM | #

I consider the whole hype-laden AIDS scare the second biggest psyop that has ever been perpetrated.

I’m aware of this view.  But you need to be able to explain to what end the psy-op is being run. 

The list of supposedly eminent dissidents is telling.  Let’s see:

Sky Gilbert. PhD, University of Toronto (2005). University Research Chair in Creative Writing and Theatre Studies at Guelph University (2006). Actor/Playwright/Director, Columnist, Poet, Film Writer/Director/Producer, Novelist, Drag Queen. Received the Pauline McGibbon Award for directing (1985) and the Dora Award (1992).

Drag queen.  There’s your clue.  AIDS is mainly a fag disease.  The purpose of the hype was to make out like heteros are just as susceptible so that they wouldn’t see AIDS as just another reason to “discriminate”—that dread pratcise!—against the fags.

Most of the amateur dissidents I encountered while exploring this issue had HIV and didn’t want to seem to have to face reality.  A debate on a good blog run by a HIV-infected ex-dissident between a researcher and prominent denier Harvey Bially finally convinced me the HIV-deniers are wrong.  Bially just acted plain weird.  He was abrasive, arrogant, he stonewalled, while the researcher answered all his challenges and provided evidence to contradict Bially’s assertions.  I’ve never seen a holocaust revisionist act like that; if anyone is arrogant and runs away it’s the exterminationist.

Posted by Fr. John on March 17, 2009, 02:23 PM | #

““Our rates are higher than West Africa,” said Shannon L. Hader, director of the District’s HIV/AIDS Administration, who once led the Federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s work in Zimbabwe. “They’re on par with Uganda and some parts of Kenya.”

Well, I guess there IS a reason for the Obamugabe ruling his little fiefdom, after all.

LOL

Personally, I now can see why his rellies over ‘back home’ are waiting for him to allow the entire nation of Kenya to emigrate here! It’s just like home!

And Barack is nothing more than Emperor Jones.

http://thewhitechrist.wordpress.com/2009/02/21/a-race-of-cowards/

Posted by James Bowery on March 17, 2009, 02:36 PM | #

If HIV doesn’t exist, then how is it that this made-up statistic is the highest predictor of all other demographics?  Did the CDC go grab a bunch of demographic statistics and then concoct their HIV incidence statistics to maximally correlate with the lot of them?  If so, then it should be possible to uncover the fraud by the simple expedient of going to each of the states for which statistics were reported and verify that the number the CDC made up did not come from that state.

Posted by John on March 17, 2009, 04:24 PM | #

If HIV doesn’t exist, then how is it that this made-up statistic is the highest predictor of all other demographics?  Did the CDC go grab a bunch of demographic statistics and then concoct their HIV incidence statistics to maximally correlate with the lot of them?  If so, then it should be possible to uncover

the fraud by the simple expedient of going to each of the states for which statistics were reported and verify that the number the CDC made up did not come from that state.

Where has the virus been isolated according to these rules

1.Culture of putatively infected tissue.

2. Purification of specimens by density gradient ultracentrifugation.

3. Electron micrographs of particles exhibiting the morfological characteristics and dimensions (100-120 nm) of retroviral particles at the sucrose (or percoll) density of 1.16 gm/ml and containing nothing else, not even particles of other morphologies or dimensions.

4. Proof that the particles contain reverse transcriptase.

5. Analysis of the particles’ proteins and RNA and proof that these are unique.

6. Proof that 1-5 are a property only of putatively infected tissues and can not be induced in control cultures. These are identical cultures, that is, tissues obtained from matched, unhealthy subjects and cultured under identical conditions differing only in that they are not putatively infected with a retrovirus.

7. Proof that the particles are infectious, that is when PURE particles are introduced into an uninfected culture or animal, the identical particle is obtained as shown by repeating steps 1-5.

Antibody test =/= virus

Posted by James Bowery on March 17, 2009, 06:31 PM | #

Well, it is true that the HIV demographics are of the antibody test rather than actual detection of the virus.

The question remains:  What makes the antibody test demographic such a powerful predictor of other demographic measures that it beats out the other demographic measures in a predictive role?

Posted by Mark In Ark on March 21, 2009, 08:29 PM | #

Will AIDS ever rid us of the savages who are bringing down the USA?  Seriously, why isn’t it more deadly?