Email President Bush and confront him about his stand for homosexuals

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

[George W. Bush]

For a realistic survey on the situation in Africa, you might want to read this from Christine Maggiore's website. It is a reprint of an investigative article written a few years ago for Rolling Stone. The writer started out to prove one thing and changed his mind when he couldn't find any coffins:

AIDS in Africa: In Search of the Truth by Rian Malan 11/2001

[Dr. Eckleburg]

During the 14th century, the Black Plague killed 25 million people.

More than seven centuries of progress later, over 30 million people have died of AIDS, with 70 million currently infected with no cure in sight.

But I was wrong about one thing.

During the past five years, life expectancy in Zambia has dropped from 45 to 30.

No disease (or army, for that matter) has destroyed a population like AIDS has.

According to a friend of mine who visits Africa often, there are graves everywhere.

And often bodies are burned surreptitiously because of the shame and fear.

But it's only when you do the math regarding the exponential nature of aids do you realize that places like Botswana and parts of South Africa where over 35% of the population are infected, will not to make it into the next decade.

I'd be happy to be wrong. But I think we're all going to wake up 10 years from now and be oh-so-surprised at the lack of melantonin worldwide.

Like Chris Rock says, "They ain't NEVER gonna cure aids!"

[George W. Bush]

Like Chris Rock says, "They ain't NEVER gonna cure aids!"

Then, regardless of where you stand on HIV=AIDS, Africa would be well-served to promote abstinence and public health and proper sanitation. If a person has AIDS, they're going to die even quicker in a more lethal environment. They'll simply succumb more quickly.

[George W. Bush]

According to a friend of mine who visits Africa often, there are graves everywhere. And often bodies are burned surreptitiously because of the shame and fear.

I'm sure you don't expect us to accept anecdotal evidence. Those statements are pretty vague. What kind of graves? Certified cause of death? If AIDS, was it the six-test Western battery of tests? How many graves? Were they in heavily populated areas with poor sanitation? Were tests conducted to evaluate the presence of other possibly fatal and drug-resistant diseases like malaria, tuberculosis, and other drugs which have been the major killers in Africa for a long time.

Well, I don't really expect you to answer all of that. Just to recognize that for the most part, we only know what we read. And there are some people out there that have been living with HIV for many years without cocktails and in good health. The standard medical explanations of AIDS have severe problems. The predictions from Geneva by WHO have very serious shortcomings. And a lot of anecdotal evidence is missing that should be present if you are correct.

The evidence for an African AIDS epidemic of biblical proportions is simply lacking and does not provide an adequate and unambiguous explanation for the existing evidence we do have.

[editor-surveyor]

Dr.E, surely you must realize that the major cause of death in Africa is U.N. lead genocide through military action, such as the U.N. supported Hutus killing 800,000 Tutsis in a little over a week back in '96.

And then there is the Islamic lead genocide in The Sudan, that has slaughtered millions, and sent 100's of thousands off to slavery in the Arab countries.

To assert any statistics as to infection levels of HIV in Africa is disingenuous at best since there is no testing program whatsoever in Africa.

Anyway, there is not one shred of evidence that HIV causes anything but stress (due to false declarations Re:AIDS)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Of course I agree with that. Who wouldn't?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

The 800,000 hacked-to-death Tutsis is another story that got more coverage on Free Republic than on network news.

But if the AIDS debate has now degenerated into disbelieving the death totals, what point is there to any further discussion?

Everything's cool in Capetown; swell in Swaziland; nifty in Nairobi.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I'm sure you don't expect us to accept anecdotal evidence.

Well, then why do you write...

A lot of anecdotal evidence is missing that should be present if you are correct.

Say what???

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Bump to the last three posts.

[George W. Bush]

I should have said "a lot of accompanying evidence is missing that should be present if the AIDS industry is correct".

I think a lot of people have a lot of emotional investment in the AIDS industry's explanations for AIDS causes and treatments. I know I'm certainly no believer in heterosexual AIDS transmission. And supposedly 15%-20% of the U.S. population was supposed to have died from that by now. So many of these predictions just turn out to be false. And so much evidence exists that contradicts the conventional explanations. And that's the real problem.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

And that's the real problem.

If only that were true.

[George W. Bush]

If only that were true.

By resorting only to measurable means, it is true.

No one can find all these bodies or determine anyone who died of AIDS in Africa.

In 1948, Uganda's British rulers attempted a rough census in the Masaka area and concluded that the annual death rate was "a minimum of twenty-five to thirty per thousand." A second census, in 1959, put the figure at twenty-one deaths per thousand. By 1991, it had fallen to sixteen per thousand. Enter Daan Mulder with his blood tests, massive funding and armies of field workers. He counted every death over two years, and then five, and here is his conclusion: The crude annual death rate in Masaka, in the midst of a horrifying AIDS plague, was 14.6 per thousand - the lowest ever measured.

That is from census sources. Where are the dead? Where is the plague?

Nunn's explanation may be so, but the same can't apply to neighboring Tanzania, which embarked in 1992 on an even larger mortality study. Like Mulder's, it was funded by the British government and supported by scientists from the British universities. The Adult Morbidity and Mortality Project recruited 307,912 participants, each of whom was visited at least once a year in the next three years and questioned about recent deaths or disease. The final results were rather like Masaka's: AIDS was the leading reported cause of adult mortality, but the average death rate in the communities studied was 13.6 per thousand - ten percent lower than the death rate measured in the census of 1988, which was rated "close to 100 percent" complete by Dr. Timaeus, the UNAIDS consultant. Timaeus is a leading authority on African mortality in th AIDS era, and it was to him that my difficult question ultimately fell.

Again, where are the measurable deaths? Where is the plague?

Good grief, the actual U.S. death toll attributed to AIDS started to decline about three years before the newer drug cocktail regimens even became available.

These warnings were backed backed up by estimates such as the one issued by the CDC in 1985, stating that 1.5 million Americans were already HIV-infected, and the disease was spreading rapidly. Dr Anthony Fauci, now head of the National Institute of Allergic and Infectious diseases, prophesied that "2 to 3 million Americans" would be HIV-positive within a decade. Newsweek's figures in a 1986 article were at least twice as high. That same year, Oprah Winfrey told the nation that "by 1990 one in five" heterosexuals would be dead of AIDS. As the hysteria intensified, challenging such certainties came to be dangerous. In 1988 New York City Health Commissioner Stephen C. Joseph reviewed the city's estimate of HIV infections, concluded that the number was inaccurate and halved it, from 400,000 to 200,000. His office was invaded by protesters, his life threatened. Demonstrators tailed him to meetings, chanting, "Resign, resign!"

In hindsight, Dr. Joseph's reduced figure of 200,000 might itself be an exaggeration, given that New York City has recorded a total of around 120,000 AIDS cases since the start of the epidemic two decades ago. In 1997, a federal health official told the Washington Post that by his calculation, the true number of HIV infections in the United States back in the mid-Eighties must have been around 450,000 - less than one-third of the figure put forth at the time by the CDC.

If the numbers could be gotten so wrong in America, what are we to make of the infinitely more dire death spells cast upon the developing world? In 1993, Laurie Garrett wrote in her book The Coming Plague that Thailand's AIDS epidemic was "moving at super-sonic speed." It has stalled at just below two percent, according to UNAIDS. In 1991 All India Institute of Medical Sciences official Vulmiri Ramalingaswami said AIDS in India "was sitting on top of a volcano," but infection levels there have yet to crest one percent. The only place where the AIDS apocalypse has materialized in its full and ghastly glory is in Geneva's computer models of the African pandemic, which show millions dead and far worse coming.

Even with the testing and medical standards we have in America, we've obviously had it wrong all along. The AIDS industry doesn't know what it's talking about. At the very least, it knows far far less than it claims or some of these predictions would have borne out over the years. It indicates a seriously flawed model.

What's interesting is that the predictions of a vast American pandemic failed to materialize even though condom use has declined. But now, the same hysterical projections are made for Africa. Why should we believe them when death counts there have declined over the decades. And where are the bodies of the evidence of mass cremations? When you say hundreds of thousands or millions of people are dying or have died of this disease, there must be some sort of actual evidence that demonstrates it. Like a dead body in a grave or counts of cremations. Or skeletons laying around on the ground. But the Africans normally bury their dead just like we do. Cremation is not popular there.

Something simply does not add up. Most of what we know is junk science.

[George W. Bush]

Everything's cool in Capetown; swell in Swaziland; nifty in Nairobi.

I didn't say that and I'm surprised you would resort to such a debate tactic. Africa most certainly does face serious public health problems, like any tropical country does.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Africa accounts for 13% of the world's population and 74% of the world's AIDS cases.

[George W. Bush]

Africa accounts for 13% of the world's population and 74% of the world's AIDS cases.

I'm perfectly willing to accept that when you show me that each and every one of those cases was diagnosed with the 6-way confirmation tests that we use in America. 3 ELISAs and 3 Western blots. And establish a false positives rate that is consistent from study to study and eliminates the possibility of misdiagnosis using these tests due to TB, malaria, etc.

The companies who make them don't have such faith in their accuracy as you must have. And if we require that many tests to "accurately" determine the presence of HIV in the blood and we've always had lots of false positives, why should we accept a lower standard of medical proof in Africa?

Most of the figures you're relying on are mere estimates. No tests were given. When they do some actual testing in Africa, it's very rare to use the Western blot outside of wealthy people in South Africa. Generally, if any test is done, it's a single ELISA. Would you take something as lethally toxic as AZT on the basis of a single ELISA test? If you won't, why should you want Africans to?

By the medical standards we use in this country, there is no AIDS crisis in Africa. Period.

Can you explain the vast difference between American and African demographics in the epidemiology? In America, it's been sodomites (anal sex) and intravenous abusers and hemophiliacs (blood products exposure). In Africa, we are told we must believe that it is spread by heterosexual contact even though there is no corresponding heterosexual plague here in the West, yet another failed prediction of the AIDS industry. And when this is questioned, we're told some lurid anecdotal fairy tale about the satyriasis of African truck drivers, which is a nasty racist stereotype in itself and, if untrue, a vicious libel against the character of traditional African culture.

What if you're wrong? What if the AIDS industry, in influencing Bush to lobby Congress to fund AIDS drugs for Africa, is actually prescribing drugs with known deadly effects to a population which is merely suffering the tropical diseases they've suffered for centuries and a population which will be prescribed incredibly toxic drugs on the basis of a single unreliable ELISA test or a mere list of symptoms which happen to match a half-dozen endemic diseases in Africa? What if the AIDS drug companies and the researchers are running to Africa because they need another crisis to sustain the AIDS revenue stream? I hope you don't consider Glaxo and Burroughs-Wellcome and all those researchers to be without personal financial interests here.

No one has established meaningful evidence of a heterosexual AIDS epidemic in Africa by American medical standards, a paper epidemic that relies upon the computer model in the WHO's Geneva computer. And those estimates have failed miserably in predicting an American heterosexual AIDS epidemic. Where are the graves of the millions who are supposed to have died?

[Clint N. Suhks]

6-way confirmation tests that we use in America. 3 ELISAs and 3 Western blots.

I’ll settle for the new OraQuick test for HIV that Tommy Thomson says is 99% accurate. It’s quick, inexpensive and needs no refrigeration, specialized tools, or traditional laboratory and clinical settings. The test does not detect virus. Instead, it detects antibodies that the immune system dispatches to fight HIV and doesn’t react to the antibodies related to TB. I suspect we’ll be seeing, when the smoke and propaganda clears, is that Africa is raging from a tuberculosis epidemic so large and out of control that it accounts for the mass death predicted.

What I don’t understand is why “in the West, AIDS consists of a person's having one or more of approximately 27 relatively rare diseases. In Africa, AIDS as defined by the World Health Organization 1986/87 Bangui African AIDS definition is no more than a collage of common non-specific symptoms.” This seems to fly in the face of scientific method and the tenets of replication. Why does the WHO have a different methodology than the West, it just doesn’t make sense? Further, I heard today that AIDS activists are complaining that the US is going to act unilaterally concerning GWB’s African AIDS initiative and NOT going to work with the WHO. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I’d say the WHO is getting nervous because the truth is going to be found, rats always scurry when the lights are turned on. .

[xzins]

Bush is in line to look great if he goes in and the AIDS rate disappears. (But then he'll have to deal with what IS killing people.)

DrE has a point. In ADDITION TO wars something is killing people big time if life expectancy has dropped from 65 to 30. You need more than war to account for that. I think we'll discover a combination of things.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I'd say the WHO is getting nervous...

Got that right, although I remain baffled as to the real reason for the carnage.

It's always interesting to note who was where when something was happening. Africa was a busy place in the mid '70's.

Good for GWB.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I wonder when the patents run out on these aids cocktails. Soon?

[xzins]

I'm perfectly willing to accept that when you show me that each and every one of those cases was diagnosed with the 6-way confirmation tests that we use in America. 3 ELISAs and 3 Western blots. And establish a false positives rate that is consistent from study to study and eliminates the possibility of misdiagnosis using these tests due to TB, malaria, etc.

For what its worth, the US Army puts a soldier on non-deployable status on the basis of a single positive elisa.

They do do the followups, of course, to rule out false positives, but by the time they go through the process (significant waiting between tests if done accurately), a first term soldier is getting out and has been absolutely useless.

I don't know how the above relates, but I felt like throwing it out.