AIDS/HIV forming 3 strains in 1959 Biologically Impossible

HIV/AIDS had infected nearly 1 million Americans before the U.S. government under the Reagan administration took any serious action against the disease. Many in the medical community attributed this negligence to sexual ignorance and prejudice against the gay community, as AIDS was largely viewed as a "gay disease." Were Americans effectively mind-controlled through "sex magic" devices of Mind Control to ignore a major epidemic for over 5 years? Information now coming to light paints a much more sinister picture. Actual military agents working in Africa became victims long before the 1980s epidemic and these cases co-incide with active biological warfare programs taken from Nazi German scientists and jointly re-initiated by British and U.S. intelligence services. Now we are being told that SIV, which existed for millions of years in monkeys, somehow mutated into three distinct forms of HIV during the short period of time our CIA was working in the Congo.

Under Republican administrations, the AIDS epidemic is repeatedly ignored and allowed to increase. Actual proven empowerment methods of sex education for children is actively repressed and even criminalized by Republicans. This link between AIDS and eugenics killing of millions is now a world-wide debate as there is considerable evidence that this plague required much more than just Republican negligence.

All evidence suggests that HIV is a recent disease of humanity. Most scientists now agree that HIV evolved from SIV (Simian Immunodeficiency Virus), a related virus of apes and monkeys, and that the first cases of human infection occurred somewhere in Africa. But crucial details of when, how and where the virus first crossed the species barrier from apes to humans are still hotly debated.

A sailor from Manchester called David Carr was thought to have been the first person to die from AIDS. He succumbed to an exotic AIDS-like illness in Britain in 1959 after spending time in West Africa and a posthumous analysis of his tissue revealed traces of HIV. However the results of this study were overturned in 1995 by a US medical team that concluded that David Carr had actually not been HIV-positive. One of the original researchers subsequently admitted that his samples had probably been contaminated. This means the first definite identification of HIV comes from a blood sample taken in 1959 from a patient in Kinshasa, then the capital of the Belgian Congo.

The date is important because it gives a clue as to what might have prompted HIV to emerge. Conventional scientific wisdom has been that HIV emerged when native hunters became infected with SIV, probably by killing and eating chimpanzees - a traditional and bloody practice that could easily spread viruses. However, there are flaws with this theory: Humans have hunted and killed chimps for thousands of years but HIV emerged only in the second half of the 20th Century. SIV is also not infectious to humans and the amount of mutation needed for SIV to reshape itself into a new human virus would almost certainly require repeated infections between people.

Most significantly, though, DNA analyses of modern-day strains of HIV show that the virus crossed the species barrier to humans not once but at least three times, forming the three main strains of HIV that infect people today. The probability that SIV coexisted in apes for thousands, perhaps millions, of years and then suddenly jumped to humans three times in a decade seems remote, unless something happened in Africa during that time that helped the natural evolutionary process along.

The first known case of HIV in a human occurs in a person who died in the Congo, seemingly later confirmed as having HIV infection from his preserved blood samples. However, according to the authors of the 1959 discovery, they never found, nor alleged to have found, HIV, or anything like a full virus. According to these authors, even "attempts to amplify HIV-1 fragments of >300 base pairs (bp) were unsuccessful, . . . However, after numerous attempts, four shorter sequences were obtained" that only represented small portions of two of the six genes of the complete AIDS virus.

In 1959 the Congo was the central staging area for the U.S. in cold war operations in Africa. The Belgian government gave independence to the Congo in that year as its president Lumumba opposed CIA operations there. US Documents released last August reveal that President Eisenhower directly ordered the CIA to assassinate Lumumba. Minutes of an August 1960 National Security Council meeting confirm that Eisenhower told CIA chief Allen Dulles to “eliminate” Lumumba. The official note taker, Robert H. Johnson, had told the Senate Intelligence Committee this in 1975, but no documentary evidence was previously available to back up his statement.

Larry Devlin, the CIA's man in the Congo at the time, told BBC filmmakers how he had been told to meet “Joe from Paris”, who turned out to be the CIA's chief technical officer, Dr Sidney Gottlieb. “I recognised him as he walked towards my car,” recalled Devlin, “but when he told me what they wanted done I was totally, totally taken aback.” Gottlieb gave him a tube of poisoned toothpaste, which Devlin was to smuggle into Lumumba's bathroom.

He claims he never did so, because “I had never suggested assassination, nor did I believe it was advisable.” Instead, “I threw it in the Congo River when its usefulness had expired.”

The “usefulness” of the poison expired rather quickly because Lumumba was murdered very soon afterwards, at the hands of Belgian agents. The Congo's importance in CIA operations in 1959 cannot be overstated.

View the YouTube video: Origins of HIV/AIDS

1960s
HIV-2, a viral variant found in West Africa, is thought to have transferred to people from sooty mangabey monkeys in Guinea-Bissau during this period.

1966
Genetic studies of the virus indicate that, in or about 1966, HIV first left Africa, infecting a single person in US. At this time, many Americans were working in Congo, providing the opportunity for infection.

1968
A 2003 analysis of HIV types found in the United States, compared to known mutation rates, suggests that the virus may have first arrived in the United States in this year. The disease spread from the 1966 American strand, but remained unrecognized for another 12 years.

1969
A St. Louis teenager, identified only as Robert R., dies of an illness that baffles his doctors. Eighteen years later, molecular biologists at Tulane University in New Orleans test samples of his remains and find the virus that causes AIDS.

Nixon's compassion for the gay culture: "I won't shake hands with them." Why?.

View the YouTube video: Nixon, Kissinger and the real AIDS Story

If AIDS was presented to the U.S. military for possible use as a biological weapons agent requiring a new human strain, this disease would have found plenty of federal funding as is now available in this 1970 funding statement:

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1970

HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NINETY-FIRST CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS

H.B. 15090

PART 5
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Department of the Army
Statement of Director, Advanced Research Project Agency
Statement of Director, Defense Research and Engineering

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1969
UNITED STATES SENATE LIBRARY

[pg.] 129 TUESDAY, JULY 1, 1969

SYNTHETIC BIOLOGICAL AGENTS

There are two things about the biological agent field I would like to mention. One is the possibility of technological surprise. Molecular biology is a field that is advancing very rapidly and eminent biologists believe that within a period of 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.
MR. SIKES. Are we doing any work in that field?
DR. MACARTHUR. We are not.
MR. SIKES. Why not? Lack of money or lack of interest?
DR. MACARTHUR. Certainly not lack of interest.
MR. SIKES. Would you provide for our records information on what would be required, what the advantages of such a program would be, the time and the cost involved?
DR. MACARTHUR. We will be very happy to.
(The information follows:)

The dramatic progress being made in the field of molecular biology led us to investigate the relevance of this field of science to biological warfare. A small group of experts considered this matter and provided the following observations:
1. All biological agents up the the present time are representatives of naturally occurring disease, and are thus known by scientists throughout the world. They are easily available to qualified scientists for research, either for offensive or defensive purposes.
2. Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.
3. A research program to explore the feasibility of this could be completed in approximately 5 years at a total cost of $10 million.
4. It would be very difficult to establish such a program. Molecular biology is a relatively new science. There are not many highly competent scientists in the field. Almost all are in university laboratories, and they are generally adequately supported from sources other than DOD. However, it was considered possible to initiate an adequate program through the National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council (NAS-NRC).
The matter was discussed with the NAS-NRC, and tentative plans were plans were made to initiate the program. However decreasing funds in CB, growing criticism of the CB program, and our reluctance to involve the NAS-NRC in such a controversial endeavor have led us to postpone it for the past 2 years.
It is a highly controversial issue and there are many who believe such research should not be undertaken lest it lead to yet another method of massive killing of large populations. On the other hand, without the sure scientific knowledge that such a weapon is possible, and an understanding of the ways it could be done, there is little that can be done to devise defensive measures. Should an enemy develop it, there is little doubt that this is an important area of potential military technological inferiority in which there is no adequate research program.