Email President Bush and confront him about his stand for homosexuals

Agape press ^ | 1/26/03 | Tony Horton

[TonyTheTigger]

To: president@whitehouse.gov; vice.president@whitehouse.gov Subject: Email President Bush and confront him about his stand for homosexuals

Dear Mr. President this is what the web page seen by millions will say. I also have a rather large size mailing list I will send this out to.

Email President Bush and confront him about his stand for homosexuals

To: president@whitehouse.gov, vice.president@whitehouse.gov

You will not receive my vote and I will make web pages after web pages exposing you for the fence straddling liar you have become. Ignore this if you want.... I will make good on what I promised you.

If this story is false I will not do what I have said. If I get no response I will take it to mean your guilty.

Bush White House, Clinton White House ... No Difference on Homosexuality

News from Agape Press

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/1/242003b.asp

A former voter for you,

Tony Horton

[editor-surveyor]

"Notice that there is no HIV test available in Africa,they use descriptions of the disease causing the death to diagnose it. Since most poverty related diseases have symptoms similar to those exhibited by AIDS patients you have a perfect situation to use for multiple purposes."

Yep, you're onto the truth. - That is covered in detail in chapter 8 of Peter Duesberg's book "Inventing the AIDS Virus."

"Emerging Viruses..." is a B.S. scare-mongering book that is closer to being part of the problem than part of the solution. I had difficulty even finishing it because their agenda was showing through so clearly.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

FWIW, I think AIDS is massively UNDER-REPORTED in Africa.

AIDS carries an incredible stigma there that taints the entire family. Unlike here, where we're told 25% of gays are seeking out the disease.

I've been in these debates on FR before so I'm compelled to brandish my conservative credentials. I vote straight Republican, attend a Presbyterian church regularly, read a lot of history, am a white, heterosexual parent and spouse, a well-paid professional who loathes affirmative action, politically correct stupidity, and Nancy Pelosi.

But I have friends, educated, intelligent, kind friends, whose brothers and sisters and fathers and mothers have died of AIDS in Africa. They are not all people of the bushes. They look like your next door neighbor, or your accountant or the kids your sons play basketball with.

And they're dying like knats in a bucket of bleach.

And the more you read about this, the more you're brought to the sickening, numbing conclusion that it will not end until Africa is devoid of black faces.

Like Stanley Kramer's line about Spielberg, "Six million Jews died, and he makes a movie about the 600 who lived."

[Dr. Eckleburg]

How can you quote Duesberg's book as supporting you? His book was just as conclusive as Horowitz's.

Perhaps you didn't finish Duesberg's book either.

[saradippity]

You might consider the fact that the only thing they are doing for AIDS in Africa is handing out condems if you really believe the objective of some people is to free Africa of black faces.

I think a group of people may have that intent,so blaming death on AIDS serves a whole lot of folks' evil intents.It also keeps the money rolling into the AIDS esperts. It takes a lot of money to have conferences like they recently held in Barcelona.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I agree. Money drives most of this, but ultimately covers even deeper intents.

Same as it ever was.

[editor-surveyor]

"Perhaps you didn't finish Duesberg's book either."

Perhaps you didn't understand his book. - Yes, I have more than finished it. I have typed in quotes from it ad infinitum, but most lack the desire to delve in and understand what is really happening.

Peter's conclusion is that most of the "AIDS deaths" in Africa never even happened; they were based on the assumption that empty houses were due to dead people, rather than the fact that they simply had to leave them due to drought and food shortage and move elsewhere.

Most inportantly, he demolishes the absurd idea that AIDS is contageous completely.

[malakhi]

Other than that, he was a fine freeper in the tradition of MOJO

Of course you realize there are only a handful of us left who know who you are talking about. ;o)

[editor-surveyor]

Heh, heh...

If you will remember, I was temporarily one of MOJO's victims. - Mojo is not something that I would wish for anyone to remember :o)

[xzins]

Something has dropped life expectancy from 70 to 45 in a decade.

Can I suggest starvation in Somalia, murder in Sudan (and many places), and war elsewhere as a question that I want answered? Are these deaths figured into the expectancy statistics?

Just a question.

[Clint N. Suhks]

How can you quote Duesberg's book as supporting you?

Richard Horton, editor of the medical journal The Lancet, reviewed three recent works by Peter Duesberg

To the Editors of The New York Review of Books: We would like to clarify three points in Richard Horton's superb essay, "Truth and Heresy about AIDS" (New York Review of Books May 23, 1996).

" The WHO estimates of AIDS cases are based instead on a list of clinical symptoms that include persistent coughing, high fever, weight loss, and chronic diarrhea. These criteria for AIDS diagnosis in African cohort studies overlap considerably with the symptoms of such endemic diseases as dysentery, tuberculosis, cholera and malaria. This is why a growing number of African scientists and researchers have criticized the WHO premise and insist that addressing structural poverty and unhealthy living conditions — not behavior modification schemes — constitutes an appropriate patient-centered approach to achieve better health care."

[George W. Bush]

Remember, my question about the black and white junkies pertains only to the U.S. We have all means of diagnostic testing available here. What's your explanation for the statistical discrepancy between control groups of black and white junkies?

Because, unlike you, I don't believe there is a substantial statistical sample large enough to establish the "fact" that a black junkie is 14 times more likely to contract AIDS-like illness.

Surely, you don't actually believe this?

[George W. Bush]

FWIW, I think AIDS is massively UNDER-REPORTED in Africa.

Well, surely I don't have to lecture you on the necessity of sound science in epidemiology. Opinions don't count for anything.

AIDS carries an incredible stigma there that taints the entire family. Unlike here, where we're told 25% of gays are seeking out the disease.

As worthwhile as that story is, even I don't accept their estimate of 25%. But I'm quite sure it isn't 0% either.

I've been in these debates on FR before so I'm compelled to brandish my conservative credentials. I vote straight Republican, attend a Presbyterian church regularly, read a lot of history, am a white, heterosexual parent and spouse, a well-paid professional who loathes affirmative action, politically correct stupidity, and Nancy Pelosi.

No one is questioning your conservative stance or your personal integrity. By the same token, your personal qualities do not automatically transfer to any victim group for whom you have sympathy or whose illness you don't find adequately explained by current theories.

And the more you read about this, the more you're brought to the sickening, numbing conclusion that it will not end until Africa is devoid of black faces.

Or until a once-burgeoning population finds leaders who will attend to sanitation and disease-prevention. You should read Quigley's Tragedy and Hope for a historical perspective on how these issues influence the development and longterm prospects of civilizations and individual countries.

[George W. Bush]

Peter's conclusion is that most of the "AIDS deaths" in Africa never even happened; they were based on the assumption that empty houses were due to dead people, rather than the fact that they simply had to leave them due to drought and food shortage and move elsewhere.

Like some of the African doctors and researchers say: "If all these millions of people have died, where are the graves because we don't cremate our dead?"

Where are the graves?

Most inportantly, he demolishes the absurd idea that AIDS is contageous completely.

I've been aware of Duesberg's work since the mid-Eighties. As the original discoverer of retroviruses, his work has been studiously ignored because it calls into question the entire AIDS industry and all the money associated with it.

But I don't consider that he has proved his case either. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he is proven pretty much correct in the end. I think his position has only gotten stronger over the years but has not yet reached the level of an undeniable proof. So the current AIDS charade continues.

[editor-surveyor]

But then, the only reason that his contention is not 'proven' is that the fed gov and the AIDS establishment have closed ranks to prevent any statistical testing from happening (because it would end the fed gravy train) so it remains officially unproven, even though it is the only conclusion that fully fits all of the available information.

[Clint N. Suhks]

As worthwhile as that story is, even I don't accept their estimate of 25%.

So you don’t think having unprotected homosexual intercourse counts as actively seeking the bug? I liken it to Russian roulette, if you didn’t have a death wish you wouldn’t even think about playing…so called “bug chasers” are no different.

25% of new AIDS cases should easily fall into that category.

[George W. Bush]

But then, the only reason that his contention is not 'proven' is that the fed gov and the AIDS establishment have closed ranks to prevent any statistical testing from happening (because it would end the fed gravy train) so it remains officially unproven, even though it is the only conclusion that fully fits all of the available information.

You may be right. I'm not saying he's wrong. Just that he doesn't have the irrefutable evidence. And we are talking about science here. Even if it's junk science with a lot of big money and sodomite politics involved in it you still have to prove in a way that can be duplicated independently.

I have followed Duesberg all along. Recall his early appearances explaining his theory on the old PBS Tony Brown's Journal? I think he appeared there 3 times for an hour each, somewhere around '87. He still lacks absolute proof. But his case is pretty strong compared to the rest of what passes for scientific inquiry into AIDS.

[George W. Bush]

So you don’t think having unprotected homosexual intercourse counts as actively seeking the bug? I liken it to Russian roulette, if you didn’t have a death wish you wouldn’t even think about playing…so called “bug chasers” are no different. 25% of new AIDS cases should easily fall into that category.

I'd call it criminal carelessness or suicidal behavior. But that is not the same thing as actively seeking it out like real 'bugchasers'. In the same way, you could say that a person who drinks a quart of gin is 'chasing' a hangover. That's not really true, is it? So, I'll confine the term 'bugchasers' to those who actually engage in bugchasing orgies and bloodsharing and other undeniably AIDS-seeking behavior.

[Commander8]

AMEN, AMEN, AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!!!!!

I've known all olong that he is a fence straddling liar. When it comes to appeasing the sodomite lobby, there is not ONE PESO'S WORTH OF DIFFERENCE between Bush or Clinton.

NOT ONE!!!

[editor-surveyor]

" He still lacks absolute proof..."

You keep saying this, but I suspect that you simply are not aware of the degree of proof that exists. Government sponsored studies are not the only way of proving something.

Have you ever read Christine Maggiore's book "What if everything you thought you knew about AIDS was wrong?" - The last 1/4 of the book consists of 36 pages of individual case testimonials that together are far beyond reasonable proof as such is defined in law. Only a complete moron would continue to believe that HIV has anything to do with AIDS after reading that information.

[George W. Bush]

Have you ever read Christine Maggiore's book "What if everything you thought you knew about AIDS was wrong?"

I don't have the book but her work and personal history is very interesting.

Christine Maggiore - 2 short articles and and interview at VirusMyth.Net
AliveAndWell.org - her excellent website

Thanks for the mention. It's been a while since I went through some of these sites. If you put her ideas together with Duesberg, you can derive a certain picture. But I'm still not quite ready to dismiss AIDS/HIV altogether. But it's clear we don't know as much as we pretend to with AIDS. What I find most objectionable is that anyone like Duesberg is automatically excluded because he won't tow the party line. It's more like old-time Red front organizations, like American Communists in the Thirties and Forties, than it is like normal science. Certainly Duesberg, the man who discovered retroviruses, deserves serious consideration rather than to be dismissed by the entire AIDS industry merely because he casts some serious doubts upon that which sustains their revenue stream.