Minutus

Dear Tanya et al,

well, frankly, I have decided to keep as far away as I can from these controversies. Sorry for that. (Ignorance is bliss!!) I've heard/read most of the conspiracy theories in one version or another. I'm not discounting the possibility of any of them. But I haven't put myself into trying to sort it out. They all sound plausible in this world of multinational capitalist imperialism.

Well, something is out there killing people. If they get "it" (HIV, AIDS, whatever) then they have to keep lifelong vigilance on their immune system or die.

As for exciting, contributing causes- ??? my jury is still out.

As for why the rampant spread?- it seems to me that its just as they all say- blood exchange (sex, needles, etc).

poverty leads to poor living conditions, insanitation, poor nutrition, poor diet. so yes, it spreads quicker among the poor rather than the rich/educated. But the rich(er) or more conscientous don't escape it.

The sexual mores and customs of certain tribes has lead to rampant spread in those tribes. eg "wife inheritance" which is a custom where the man "inherits" his dead brother's wife.

IMO: another is the general destruction of social structure and culture here. EG. Before the Christian-Western colonialism, polygamy was part of the culture. Christianity forced monogamy on the righteous. What happened was that at church there was now 1 wife for a man, but away from the church doors, a man's proclivities still led him into -now forbidden- adultery, prostitution, and getting sex as much as he can. Well. With traditional polygamy, the social structure &mores and family structure was strict and in tact. Polygamy got broken but not a man's urges. Compounded with the poverty, etc of colonialism... left the social structure in tatters. So now life is a rampant soap opera, few are faithful to their spouse(s)..... well you get the picture. Not to mention rape, prostitution, etc. add to the hell of AIDS.

Then there are people here who have AIDS/HIV and sycotically think "what the hell, I'm dying so let me have my fun and infect as many as I can before I go". either by rape, prostitution or otherwise. Only this year did Kenya legislate against those who consciously infect others.

=========

IMO So considering infidelity and frequent change in sexual partners, I think if AIDS had come to USA via the heterosexual route in the 1970-80's we would be seeing it as rampant as in Africa. It would have spread far and wide before the awareness and treatments were available to slow it down.
I'm not much of scholar in this line. I keep to the practicals. I (as all hom's working in Africa) view the symptoms and treat what's in front of us with whatever's at hand. Soon enough most patients are back to health- even showing neg VL- but they can never let down their guard for long.

We've had some very successful protocols and medicines. More are being researched. I've written much on this subject in the past.
Sincerely,
Didi Ananda Ruchira
Director, Abha Light
visit: www.abhalight.org
tel: +254 20 445-0181 / cells: 0733-895466 / 0723-869133
skype: anandarucira
----------------------------------------------
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Jambo MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
---------------------------------------------
"easy access to the world"

i dont necessarily believe it is a virus, but some kind of plasma
type material that interferes with the immune system functioning.

yes, it is very sinister and i do believe that. and unfortunately,
it is not first nor last incidence of the impact of the powers that
be on the populace of the world. recall, the nature of slavery
that both of our countries promoted and indulged in. i dont
know the history of the UK during hitler's reign of terror on the
world, but USA corporations traded fuel with that country
despite the public policy of not supporting the 'enemy.' it was
ibm systems that made germany's trains run on time! etc, etc.
the whole business of vaccines is just as sinister. people in the
pharmaceutical industry care not at all about the health of people.
their concern is strictly about making more money and controlling
the marketplace to ensure ongoing sales. they weather episodes such as the
appalling debacle of vioxx with its 60,000 reported deaths without
flinching. the tobacco industry hid and denied the known toxicity of their
products for decades, including information that they added
addictive chemicals to ensure ongoing sales. the disgusting list
goes on longer and deeper than most humans can endure taking in.
so yes, i think there are people who are inherently evil in their
attitudes toward humanity and most of the rest of us have a hard
time fathoming such cold heartedness.

sorry for such negativity, but sometimes things just have to be
said bluntly.

tanya
and educational benefit of its members. It makes no representations
regarding the individual suitability of the information contained in any
document read or advice or recommendation offered which appears on this
website and/or email postings for any purpose. The entire risk arising out
of their use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the minutus site
or its individual members be liable for any direct, consequential,
incidental, special, punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
your setting at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus to receive a
single daily digest.

irene,

while i have enjoyed many of your posts, on this we will disagree
strongly. eugenics is not necessarily about destoying all the people
of a given group. corporate world will always keep enough alive
to provide the cheap labor that is needed. nothing you have said
in this post contradicts what i have written. racism is racism and
is alive and well. and classism is classism forever! people are
used and abused in the name of corporate profits. i recall in the
1960-7
and educational benefit of its members. It makes no representations
regarding the individual suitability of the information contained in any
document read or advice or recommendation offered which appears on this
website and/or email postings for any purpose. The entire risk arising out
of their use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the minutus site
or its individual members be liable for any direct, consequential,
incidental, special, punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
your setting at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus to receive a
single daily digest.

Tanya Marquette wrote:

Why do yoju believe this, when the actual mechanism with the actual
virus involved, is documented with photos doing actual damage to T-CD8+
cells in the immune system, by scientists who are *not* biased in any way?

The only sinister things is the way drug companies peddle their wares -
not how the virus or immune system behaves:-)
Bear in mind where the money is- drug compnaies - not unbiased scientists:-)

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

Tanya Marquette wrote:

What you believe is up to you.
Since I was personally in charge of developing this corporate strategy
you speak of, at Shell oil and BP oil - in South Africa where racism is
supposedly worst - I guess I know *first* hand what the truth is:-)

By the way - some more positive thoughts might be a good idea. What we
think about expands

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

irene,

who do you think the drug companies hire? scientists to
do their dirty work. why do you think so much of our
information is from whistle blowers? do you not know
that there are several thousand scientists that quit the
FDA, the american agency responsible for testing all
drugs, specifically in protest for the bogus science they
are being required to support? and what about the
biased studies that are printed in Lancet and JAMA, etc?
Have you not paid attention to the scandel surrounding
this? and even when the drug companies bastardize
a scientifc study, these super well paid scientists do not
raise their voices in protest over how their work is being
used? and what about all those alleged 'pure' scientists
who buy into the drug company bs
scientists:-)
and educational benefit of its members. It makes no representations
regarding the individual suitability of the information contained in any
document read or advice or recommendation offered which appears on this
website and/or email postings for any purpose. The entire risk arising out
of their use remains with the recipient. In no event shall the minutus site
or its individual members be liable for any direct, consequential,
incidental, special, punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever
caused.
your setting at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus to receive a
single daily digest.

once again, my apologies for the incomplete previous post due to
computor jumpiness.
who is one of those true blue well paid people. he works
for Bayer and goes into a rage if you mention unethical
scientific behavior. he is so closed and downright tyrranical.
in the midst of his acting out, there was Bayer in the news for
releasing GMO rice into the world without testing and without
approval. so the next thing we hear is that the FDA is
fast tracking this rice for approval. I am sure there was a
neat fine to the FDA--the big payola.

i am not saying all scientists are corrupt, but many become
so for the prestige they gain. history is full of them. sheri
has provided much information on various incidents in our
modern history. hahneman, himself, sufferred from the
battle of mainstream, political powers and money people
waging battles over scientific evidence. this battles is as
old as the hills, as they say.

here are a few items you can look up. the first is a pretty
mild summary of the situation with some additional links.
the second is the order page from boyd graves who has
tackled the establishment over this issue. he discovered
a flow chart by the govenment that documents the development
of aids. the third is a book that discusses this issue. i must say
that the author, gary blum, feels a bit paranoid about putting his
name on this book and does not give an organized bibliography
which bothered me. but his information has come to me from
other sources as well. the research is called a special virus
program which supports the idea of a virus, but it also is
very clear that this is man made, intentional and is being used
as a biological weapon against people who, in particular, are
being considered 'excess' population; ie, people who are living
in areas of desire for control by the big corporations. again,
not a new concept.

http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/20 ... genocide_u
s_special_virus_program_chart_vindicates_maathai.htm

http://www.boydgraves.com/order/order.html

Full Disclosure by Dr. Gary Glum

i would suggest letting your fingers do the walking on the internet
and look up the numerous sources that support this thinking.

tanya
way?
scientists:-)
Homoeopathy and educational benefit of its members. It makes no
representations regarding the individual suitability of the information
contained in any document read or advice or recommendation offered which
appears on this website and/or email postings for any purpose. The entire
risk arising out of their use remains with the recipient. In no event shall
the minutus site or its individual members be liable for any direct,
consequential, incidental, special, punitive or other damages whatsoever
and howsoever caused.
your setting at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/minutus to receive a
single daily digest.

At 08:11 PM 1/25/2007 -0800, you wrote:

Not true

You have a so-called virus and you have lots of money for research and
drugs and vaccines
The whole premise of viruses is very suspect.

http://www.duesberg.com/books/pjthinking.html
"The HIV theory was immediately triumphant because it was the kind of
solution to the AIDS mystery that all the major players wanted to see.
Virologists like Dr. Gallo, who had been unsuccessful in the search for
cancer-causing viruses, had found years of guaranteed funding for their
very expensive laboratories. Epidemiologists at the Centers for Disease
Control gained new importance and prestige. Political officials in the
Reagan administration, pummelled for their alleged inaction in the face of
the "pandemic," could point to a smashing success and predict speedy
development of a vaccine. Organizations of AIDS patients had cause to hope
for a cure, and they were assured also that, since "everyone is at risk"
for what would eventually be called "HIV disease," an unpredictable new
virus and not their own conduct was to blame for their condition. Drug
companies -- especially the influential Burroughs Wellcome, manufacturer of
AZT -- stood to make a fortune. No one had a motive to doubt, and so no one
doubted."

"If the HIV theory was wrong, these people were being poisoned. Those
responsible for approving and prescribing the drug were not eager to
consider whether they might be guilty of such irresponsibility."

"He pointed out that retroviruses by their very nature do not kill the
cells they infect, and would become extinct if they did. That they must
cooperate with the cells in order to reproduce explained why they were
suspected as possible cancer causes -- cancer being a matter of the
pathological growth and multiplication of cells rather than their
disappearance. How could the research community be certain that HIV was the
cause of AIDS if no mechanism of cell-killing could be found, and if cell-
destruction seemed inconsistent with what was known about the nature of the
virus?"
http://www.duesberg.com/
Prof. Duesberg's findings have been a thorn in the side of the medical
establishment and drug companies since 1987. Instead of engaging in
scientific debate, however, the only response has been to cut-off funding
to further test Professor's Duesberg's hypothesis.

" Duesberg fought together with Dr. Robert Gallo in the war on cancer. An
introduction for Duesberg, by Gallo, can be found here.

Duesberg started questioning HIV in 1987. He claims there is no
virological, nor epidemiological, evidence to back-up the HIV-AIDS
hypothesis. Instead, the virus is biochemically inactive and harmless, and
AIDS is not behaving as a contagious disease, he says. "
http://www.duesberg.com/papers/continu2.html
" In order to "isolate" a given infectious agent, one needs no more than to
isolate it from all other, possibly contaminating, infectious agents ­ this
is in fact Koch"s second postulate."

" It seems tragic that over 99% of AIDS researchers study a virus that does
not cause AIDS and that the few who don"t are now engaged in a debate over
the existence of a virus that doesn"t cause AIDS. "

and more
http://www.duesberg.com/papers/index.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
Well Within & Earth Mysteries & Sacred Site Tours (worldwide)
Vaccination Information & Choice Network
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm
homeopathycures@tesco.net
ONLINE Introduction to Homeopathy Classes - next ones January 2007
ONLINE Introduction to Vaccine Dangers Classes - next ones January 2007
ONLINE Intro to Diseases - Risk, Reality & Alternative Treatment next ones
January 2007
Voicemail US 530-740-0561 UK phone from US 011-44-1874-624-936

Remind me why he thinks gays, needle sharers, and children and sexual
partners of people with that syndrome, are developing the syndrome too?
I remember he feels that drug use accounts for some of it, but what
about the other cases where it clearly doesn't?
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

BUT I think Irene's point, and wonderful illustration, are very good
too--
in some cases the study itself is fine, it's the *interpretation*
that's bogus. And sometimes the disconnect between what the study says
and what the interpretation says, is just that clear--but only if one
reads the study itself, and understand what is written there.

Sometimes you just need to read what's there;
Other times you need to know enough about the subject to understand
where the problems are, e.g. knowing that not all protein is created
equal, and cats are not made to eat soy! E.g. knowing whether the
product used in the study was an appropriate one (powdered eggs versus
fresh; or "proving" that a nutrient is non-therapeutic by simply doing
the study with a far-less-than-therapeutic dose size (e.g. a vitamin E
study I noticed); or "proving" that a nutrient is ineffective by using
it in a study on something for which *no one* ever considered it
effective (e.g.some arnica study--anyone remember? Proving that it
didn't help nerve pain or something?).

Studies can go astray at various points, *and* some no doubt are just
fine. I think her point is very well taken, that if the results of the
study actually *matter* to us, it pays to read the study itself. Just
think how much more efficient it is to *correctly interpret* a study
that was already done!
Shannon
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]