FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
HIV Goes on Trial to prove it causes AIDS
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> AidsIsOver!
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 7958

PostPosted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:53 pm    Post subject: HIV Goes on Trial to prove it causes AIDS Reply with quote

Not a bad article for mainstream(ish) media.

Quote:
AIDS: World waits on SA verdict

Does AIDS exist? Is HIV actually a virus? Incredibly, not everyone says yes. But never before has a scientific theory on HIV been tested like this in a court of law. In this landmark SA case, the verdict will decide if a man convicted of infecting his girlfriend with the virus can walk free. Hendrik Gout reports.

TWENTY years ago Andre Chad Parenzee arrived in South Australia from Cape Town, South Africa. He was just 15 years old as he settled into his strange new country. He went to school. He grew up. He become a chef and settled in Port Pirie, the state's fourth-largest city, known less for its fine restaurants than its lead smelters and industrial plants. The future looked good -- until 1998, when he had a blood test.

He was told he carried the human immunodeficiency virus, commonly called HIV.

He told his fiancée he had cancer, and she believed him. They married. He often had sex with her, unprotected sex, knowing he had been diagnosed with the virus. And then he had sex with two other women.

Of course, he had a reason, which was good enough for him. "It was just the fact that I didn't know how she would react to me telling her. I thought she would leave me like everyone else," he said.

And leave him she eventually did, because Parenzee's secret stayed secret no more. It happened after one of the three women had her blood tested as well. To her horror, she found she now also carried signs of the virus. In came the Director of Public Prosecutions. In came the Supreme Court. And in came the jury's verdict: "Guilty, guilty, guilty!" to three counts of endangering lives. Fifteen years, went the judge's gavel.

That was last year. This year, Parenzee, 35, is arguing for leave to appeal on the grounds that AIDS doesn't exist, and that neither does HIV. So if it doesn't exist he should be free to walk and continue to have sex - without warning his partners. Parenzee sits impassively in the dock, staring into the middle distance, stroking his goatee. If the chef understands the scientific arguments raging around him -- and because of him - about retroviruses, blots, mathematical deviations, and statistics, then his face doesn't show it.

This is believed to be the first case in any jurisdiction, in any court, in any country, where AIDS itself is on trial.

That's why the eyes of the world are now on the handsome sandstone Court of Criminal Appeal in central Adelaide, where a red-robed, horsehair wigged-judge, His Honour John Sulan, is deciding whether there is enough scientific controversy about the existence of HIV and AIDS to give Parenzee another shot at freedom.

Now it may seem that 25 million dead are some sort of proof. That's how many people are alleged to have died of AIDS-related causes in the past 25 years. And the toll keeps rising exponentially. It's now three million a year, victims of what could be the greatest mass epidemic of all time. Could all these corpses really be lying?

Yes, say experts. Not all experts, of course, but enough to occupy the witness box at District Court for the past week. That's right -- experts arguing in a court of law that unprotected vaginal intercourse with a suspected HIV carrier is safe. In fact, the climax of Tuesday's testimony was an exchange between prosecutor Sandi McDonald and defence witness Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos. "Would you have unprotected vaginal sex with a HIV-positive man?" asked McDonald. "Any time," replied Papadopulos-Eleopulos.

Papadopulos-Eleopulos, a slight, middle-aged bachelor of science and medical physicist at Royal Perth Hospital, knows the importance of her evidence. Another witness for the defence is emergency doctor Val Turner from the same hospital.

The first the world knew of HIV was when a virologist at the world-renowned Pasteur Institute in Paris was trying to find the cause of a new disease then sweeping the western world. No-one knew what the disease actually did, and at that stage it did not even have a name. But its name was death. It was AIDS, a syndrome rather than a specific disease.

American doctors noticed it among gay men around the San Francisco area, and even then it seemed to be a collection of other diseases and infections. Healthy people have a healthy immune system so when a virus or bacteria invades, the body throws its formidable defenses at the intruder. But with AIDS, the body's natural defenses seem terminally, hopelessly damaged. People with AIDS can die of any number of diseases which most people would shake off. Many, in fact, die of candida, which everyone knows as the common fungal irritant thrush.

So what caused AIDS? No-one knew, but one Parisian researcher, Dr Willy Rozenbaum, thought it might be caused by a virus. He asked virologist Luc Montagnier for help. In 1983, Montaginer announced he had discovered the signature of a new virus. And he said it was the AIDS culprit.

But incredibly, even to this day, neither Montaginer nor anyone has ever seen the virus even under the most powerful electron microscope, or isolated it in a petri dish. And there is as yet no "gold standard" test for HIV. Different countries interpret test results differently. It's possible to be diagnosed with HIV in Australia, and have the same test show you free of it in the United States.

Viruses, like humans, have protein in their DNA. Tests for HIV look not for the virus itself, but for evidence of its proteins. It's like identifying a tiger by its footprint or a dog by its fleas. And how to test if someone had 'full-blown AIDS'? Well, HIV is thought to attack the body's T-cells -- the ones which fight infection. The test for AIDS essentially counts your T-cells.

But Papadopulos-Eleopulos says that's not good enough. "I am a scientist, I look for science - I do not look for consensus," she said in evidence.

In that she is right - the number of people who believe something is no indication of its truth. After all, there was a time when most people believed the world was flat. So why isn't her minority scientific opinion more widely debated? Papadopulos-Eleopulos and her colleagues believe it's partly because of money.

American researcher Robert Gallo also claimed to have found evidence of the virus around the same time as the French team. The dispute about who "discovered" it was eventually settled at a meeting between, of all people, US President Ronald Reagan and French Prime Minister Jacques Chirac. At stake was not just honour. It was hundreds of billions of dollars.


The fight against HIV and AIDS is wallowing in money, brimming with it. Researchers might still be laboring in the scientific salt-mine were it not for AIDS money -- some are now fabulously rich and famously famous. The money available in the field is unimaginable. Australia shares some of the $1.4 billion which Bill Gates gave away for AIDS research.

And that's just one donation. After the historic Reagan- Chirac handshake, the US and France shared patent rights to mass-marketed blood screening tests for HIV, tests worth billions. Royalties fund the world's richest private research centers. Then there the are drug companies. Plus reputations, probably the most valuable of all.

Which is why it's not just the ordinary public in the gallery at the District Court. State, Federal, and international government health authorities as well as tens of thousands of medical researchers will be pouring over the transcripts. For the defence is Kevin Borick, one of South Australia's best-known and most expensive QC's (working pro bono on the appeal application). On the other side of the table is experienced Adelaide-educated prosecutor Sandi McDonald.

Seldom did Parenzee look at Papadopulos-Eleopulos as she was giving the evidence which he hopes will save him. He continued to stare at the opposite wall, and slowly stroke his beard.

And now the big guns have been brought in to fire for the Crown -- among them the director of the Australian National Centre for HIV, Professor David Cooper AO, his deputy Professor John Kaldor, Emeritus Professor Peter McDonald from Flinders University, the eminent medical virologist and infectious diseases physician at Westmead Hospital, Dominic Dwyer, and the biggest gun of all, Sir Gustav Nossal himself, who said outside the court this week that in his opinion people who claim HIV does not exist are "a considerable embarrassment to the scientific community".

People are in jails the world over because their fingerprints have been found at the scene of the crime. Courts regard fingerprints as incontrovertible proof. They are no longer in debate. As long as Parenzee's witnesses convince the court that there is legitimate scientific debate about the existence of HIV, he may be back on the streets.

There is still no cure for HIV, no magic inoculation as there is for polio or smallpox. And there is still no way of giving the body back its ability to fight common infections which most people shake off with a few days in bed, and which are fatal to AIDS sufferers. But if AIDS doesn't exist, what's killing them?

Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos says AIDS is a disease caused by the inside of the body becoming oxidised following repeated exposure to semen through passive anal intercourse. It cannot be transmitted from one person to another during vaginal sex.

And yet thousands of people have shown signs of the virus after receiving contaminated blood. So are the HIV doubters visionaries like Galileo or lunatics like the Flat Earthers?

Doubters of HIV and AIDS are distained by their opponents. Experts called by the Crown were emphatic -- HIV is a specific virus, and vaginal sex passes it on. From the public gallery, though, Parenzee's supporters -- his mother has reportedly spent $250,000 on the defence -- saw even professors make some concessions under Borick's penetrating cross-examination.

At least a few scientists are in the anti-HIV camp. "If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document," Nobel prize-winning chemist Dr. Kary Mullis said in 1993.

Even University of California's Dr. Harry Rubin, professor of Molecular and Cell Biology, has expressed doubts. "It is not proven that AIDS is caused by HIV infection, nor is it proven that it plays no role whatever in the syndrome," he said in 1994.

The judge can decide this case only on the evidence before him. The court cannot call on William of Ockham, the 14th century philosopher who said that in any question, the simplest answer which relies on the least supposition is probably the correct one. That principle is now known as Ockham's Razor, and in this case Ockham's razor suggests HIV will lead to AIDS.

Malaria was once thought to be caused by ''bad air''. Leeches were once the preferred treatment for a dozen ailments -- in the 1800s French and English hospitals used 13 million a year. Ulcers were believed even a few years ago to have been caused by stress or spicy foods. Will a virus-caused immune deficiency go the same way? Or will Ockham's razor slice through the dissenters?

The case continues.

http://independentweekly.com.au/?article_id=10223958
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 7958

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 11:18 am    Post subject: Bob Gallo to Testify in HIV Existence Case Reply with quote

Bob Gallo to Testify in HIV Existence Case

Talk about wheeling out the heavy guns!
Now Robert Gallo is to testify in the case!
Boy are Big Pharma worried about this one... Laughing

It's important to realize that the Perth Group doctors are not saying that
HIV does not exist -despite the headlines saying this is their position.

They are saying that it has not been proven to exist according to the
accepted standards of viral isolation. On which point they are 100%
correct. Existence is inferred from the generality of evidence.

In other words it's existence is an opinion - not a scientific fact.

Personally, I believe that a retroviral particle called 'HIV' is found to be
expressed from within the DNA of people with certain metabolic disorders
--usually caused by legal or illegal drug comsumption.

But it is neither immunosuppressive nor infectious.

The existence issue is only part of the defense case. The rest is that
the reputed virus had never been proven to cause AIDS.

Again they are right. It hasn't.

Great to se the sloppy science of AIDS Inc. on show to the world.

Quote:
AIDS pioneer new star witness

COLIN JAMES, LEGAL AFFAIRS EDITOR
February 06, 2007

ONE of the scientists who discovered AIDS will give evidence in the Supreme Court against self-professed experts who believe the disease does not exist.

Professor Robert Gallo has agreed to provide video evidence to rebut claims by two Perth researchers, Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos and Dr Valendar Turner, that the HIV virus does not exist and cannot be sexually transmitted.

Professor Gallo will replace prominent scientist Professor Gustav Nossal as a key prosecution witness in an appeal by a former Port Pirie man, Andre Parenzee, 35, against his conviction for knowingly having unprotected sex while he was HIV-positive.

Prosecutor Sandi McDonald will tomorrow question Professor Gallo over his work in the 1980s which led to the identification of the HIV virus.

Professor Gallo and a French virologist, Dr Luc Montagnier, clashed when both claimed they had discovered the virus before finally agreeing in the late 1990s to share the credit.

The use of Professor Gallo as an expert witness is part of a concerted attempt by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to refute claims made by Mrs Papadopulos-Eleopulos and Dr Turner during earlier hearings.

The attack on the pair's credibility continued yesterday when a leading HIV physicist joined other experts in rejecting their controversial theory.

Associate Professor Elizabeth Dax told the Supreme Court there was no doubt in her mind that HIV existed.

An HIV researcher for 20 years, Professor Dax said it was "a travesty, quite frankly, to say it doesn't exist".

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,21177623-5006301,00.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1716
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The attack on the pair's credibility continued yesterday when a leading HIV physicist joined other experts in rejecting their controversial theory.

WTF is an 'HIV physicist'?

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MichaelC



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 2151

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

""Personally, I believe that a retroviral particle called 'HIV' is found to be
expressed from within the DNA of people with certain metabolic disorders
--usually caused by legal or illegal drug comsumption.""

This is exactly what I have believed for at least the past 15 years, based on extensive personal observation. Everyone I knew who was declared "HIV+" was either a recreational drug user, or had a history of same, or was somebody who was not healthy from birth and thus had to take many many antibiotics throughout his life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MichaelC



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 2151

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

""says AIDS is a disease caused by the inside of the body becoming oxidised following repeated exposure to semen through passive anal intercourse""

LOL - which side is she on, anyway? Better to remove this off-the-wall 'witness'.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1716
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 2:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
AIDS is a disease caused by the inside of the body becoming oxidised following repeated exposure to semen through passive anal intercourse.

I'm no doctor, but that quote does seem like a wack-job to me - maybe she's been deliberately planted amongst the defense witnesses to 'poison the well' - and with comments like that, she's doing a good job.

If semen oxidised mucous membranes, I think that there would be a hell of a lot of ppl walking around with very sore, chapped mouths, if you see what I mean...

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nat



Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 840
Location: minime-rica

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i got beaten to it

i was going to say that this witness might be about setting up the 'aid$ is a scam' thing for a big fall

Papadopulos-Eleopulos claims that the (we should probably assume) heterosexual defendant, while hiv or aids positive, can safely have intercourse with women because it's not infectious, but then, how did the defendant get it based on her evidence ?

how does anyone who isn't receiving lovejuice there - based on her testimony ?

but then again, the fact that doubts are being raised at all to my mind signals that it is becoming more widely understood that aids is bullshit

and we all have some idea how these attempts to shut down the questioning go...badly, if this is an op, like all such ops it's from the 'do something - anything' school of thought

and assuming that it is such an effort, similar to others in other arenas, it does let slip some of the real questions that rarely get aired

could Papadopulos-Eleopulos be meat for the alex jones table ?...'cos she's got 'aj flaws' written all over her
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jeroen



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Personally, I believe that a retroviral particle called 'HIV' is found to be expressed from within the DNA of people with certain metabolic disorders--usually caused by legal or illegal drug comsumption.

To say *a* particle is misleading since:
Quote:
In 1990 the HIV genome was said to consist of ten genes. This year [1996] Montagnier reported that HIV possesses eight genes and according to Barr‚-Sinoussi, HIV has nine genes. Neither is there constancy of the number of nucleotides in the "HIV genome". Also, to date, only 11 full length "HIV genomes" have been sequenced and accordingly, HIV genotype consignments are derived from sequence analysis of subgenomes measuring 2% to 30% of the total. The data is that such "genomes" vary between 3-40%. (If 30% of the HIV genome varies as much as 40%, how much does 100% of the HIV genome vary?
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/epcomreplypd.htm

Quote:
This is exactly what I have believed for at least the past 15 years, based on extensive personal observation. Everyone I knew who was declared "HIV+" was either a recreational drug user, or had a history of same, or was somebody who was not healthy from birth and thus had to take many many antibiotics throughout his life.

An hiv test is positive when antibodies, supposedly against hiv, are present, not when retroviral particles are expressed.
Quote:
I'm no doctor, but that quote does seem like a wack-job to me - maybe she's been deliberately planted amongst the defense witnesses to 'poison the well' - and with comments like that, she's doing a good job If semen oxidised mucous membranes, I think that there would be a hell of a lot of ppl walking around with very sore, chapped mouths, if you see what I mean...

I don't doubt her integrity and expertise.
Quote:
In contrast the semen in the rectum is separated from blood vessels and lymphatics by a single layer of cells which is easily penetrated and ulcerated during anal intercourse. In addition to lymphoma and KS the homosexuals have two other malignancies, cancer of the tongue and rectum (51). The increased incidence of these two cancers like carcinoma of the cervix in women, may be related to periods of high local concentration of sperm.
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/epmedhypo.htm

Semen, according to Papadopoulos, is only one of the oxidative factors she believes contribute to the onset aids:
Quote:
Nitrites are oxidising agents and by this property they play a significant role in many biological functions (33,34,35). [...] Gonorrhoea, syphilis, hepatitis B, herpes and amoebiasis are much more common among homosexual males than among heterosexuals. They also have a number of bowel infections which cause persistent and recurrent diarrhoea (30,51). Many of the agents used for the treatment of these conditions are oxidising agents, mitogenic and immunosuppressive (52,53,54). Furthermore, viruses, like all other cells, require SH for division and growth (54) which they obtain from the host, thus oxidising its tissues.
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/epmedhypo.htm

Quote:
[H]ow did the defendant get it based on her evidence ?

There are many things that can make you test positive. Flu is one of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nat



Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 840
Location: minime-rica

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jeroen wrote:
Quote:
[H]ow did the defendant get it based on her evidence ?

There are many things that can make you test positive. Flu is one of them.

Jeroen, according to her testimony aids is caused by oxidisation of cells as a result of arse sex, so how, according to her testimony, did the defendant get aids ?

i am commenting on the flaws in her testimony, not asking how you test positive for aids
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jeroen



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Jeroen, according to her testimony aids is caused by oxidisation of cells as a result of arse sex, so how, according to her testimony, did the defendant get aids ?

According to the article
Quote:
Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos says AIDS is a disease caused by the inside of the body becoming oxidised following repeated exposure to semen through passive anal intercourse. It cannot be transmitted from one person to another during vaginal sex.

But that's almost certainly a misrepresentation of her testimony. Generally, she chooses her words carefully:
Quote:
The epidemiological finding that AIDS development in homosexual men is directly related to the number of homosexual partners and frequency of receptive anal intercourse can be equally well or even better accounted for if sperm is considered an etiological factor.
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/epmedhypo.htm

So aids in gays correlates with arse sex and sperm may be one of the reasons for it. Arse sex probably correlates as well with nitrites (aka poppers, a drug that facilitates arse sex), STDs, antibiotics, bowel problems and treatment for it (eg corticosteroids), which covers about all the factors that are likely to play a role in causing aids (except other illicit drugs). Note also that the burden of proof for the cause of aids should be on mainstream scientists.

No one says the defendant has aids. The defendant is hiv+. Aids is defined as being hiv+ *and* having one or more existing diseases. Aids is *not* a new disease; in fact it's not a disease but a concept. All people with aids are simply supposed to be "immunodeficient". The theory is that hiv causes immunodeficiency, which in turn causes one or more aids defining diseases. However, the aids defining cancer kaposi's sarcoma for example, is most likely caused by a direct effect of drugs on the future tumor cells.
Quote:
They are saying that it has not been proven to exist according to the accepted standards of viral isolation.

Moreover, these standards were defined at the very same institute where Montagnier "discovered" hiv. But even if you accept that hiv exists:
Quote:
"If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document," Nobel prize-winning chemist Dr. Kary Mullis said in 1993.
(from the first article in this topic)

If the undisputed truth of that statement does not convince you that the hiv/aids theory is complete bullshit, then probably nothing will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nat



Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 840
Location: minime-rica

PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jeroen wrote:
No one says the defendant has aids. The defendant is hiv+.

hiv...aids...it's as good as the same serious deadly infectious disease unless you want to get picky

Jeroen wrote:
Quote:
"If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document," Nobel prize-winning chemist Dr. Kary Mullis said in 1993.
(from the first article in this topic)

If the undisputed truth of that statement does not convince you that the hiv/aids theory is complete bullshit, then probably nothing will.

you talking to me ? Laughing 'cos i don't need convincing, i always had my doubts

Jeroen wrote:
Generally, she chooses her words carefully:
Quote:
The epidemiological finding that AIDS development in homosexual men is directly related to the number of homosexual partners and frequency of receptive anal intercourse can be equally well or even better accounted for if sperm is considered an etiological factor.
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/epmedhypo.htm

i'd agree that she does choose those words very carefully indeed, but her reasoning is specious at best

i read it this way
what it seems that between the lines she really wrote:
just by coincidence, AIDS development in homosexual men, directly correlates to the number of homosexual partners, and frequency of receptive anal intercourse that the patient admits to in genito urinary clinic interviews, prior to testing and results...and especially when the 'hiv quota' is not being met.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Toto



Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 348

PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos is currently testifying in the criminal
case of Andre Parenzee, charged with endangering three women by
having unprotected sex while being HIV-positive:

http://www.news.com.au:80/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20953506-5005961,00.html


I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the 10 people who donated
a total of over AUS$9000 towards the defense of this case. This paid
for the travel of the Perth Group to Adelaide to continue
participating in the trial, and many other of the expenses in this
case. In the future the funds will probably also cover the expense
getting transcripts of other court cases from other countries (which
can be very expensive when they need to be transcribed from audio to
text) and paying expert witnesses who may be less inclined to give
their time without charge. The money is being spent carefully and it
will last some time into the new year. I don't want to give too many
details to risk strategic information leaking out.

Even with the top defense lawyer Kevin Borick working for free, and
the Perth Group testifying without charge, there are still many
expenses, and it's great to see that the relatives of Andre Parenzee
do not have to give up on this case due to lack of funds (which is
where this was heading).

I would like to also thank those of you who offered to give money
even though it was clear that you couldn't afford it. I do note that
there are many more dissidents out there who probably could have
given a little, but so far haven't. You will be hearing from me in
the new year if this case continues, as we expect it to, and
regarding other important legal cases.

If we are to knock AID$ Inc. down a few notches, we need to work
together and focus on cases where we see that we can make a real
difference. Everyone needs to understand that a legal case might be
about one person, but every HIV+ person will benefit if the shackles
of AIDS are broken. Money's not the only thing we need, awareness
raising is also important. Share this current press article with
people who might be interested. Let them know this debate is alive
and well.

I wish everyone Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year,
Happy Hanukah, a most Druid Solstice or whatever you might celebrate
at this time of year.

I think we all know what we'd like under the tree ... a "Get out of
AIDS Free" card. We are getting closer. Maybe not this year, but next
perhaps.

- David Crowe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> AidsIsOver! All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.