5 Filters

HIV AIDS Covid 19 Vaccines

Hi everybody, I wanted to start a thread here about the HIV/AIDS connection to Covid 19.

As some of you may remember, the French Nobel winner Luc Montagnier made news at the very beginning of the covid psy op by asserting that the sars cov II was made in a lab and was a coronavirus spliced with some HIV virus.

Now we are suddenly seeing ads and information about HIV and a ‘new vaccine’ for HIV.

I taught an AIDS/HIV expert here in Montpellier and he told me that the concept of a ‘vaccine’ had been around for ages, never worked, but had a lot of money behind it. He was a proponent of ‘treatment’, which in the form of various cocktails have been proven to work.

I would be interested in any good articles, or your own comments, on this issue. It looks like we need to preemptively educate ourselves before the onslaught begins…


1 Like

Hi Everyman.
I don’t know much about this but some modest thoughts to maybe start the ball rolling.
Margo posted this The Lifeboat News: HIV
You’ll probably know Judy Mikovits has a lot of expertise on HIV going back a long way.
I saw somewhere that following the guaranteed ‘success’ (by hook or by crook) of the covid vaccines, mRNA products are going to be in vogue. Especially from Moderna.

" Moderna has 24 mRNA vaccines and therapeutics under investigation, and 14 have begun clinical studies, according to the company’s quarterly investment documents published in May. Moderna’s pipeline of mRNA treatments include a zika vaccine, HIV vaccine and a cancer vaccine, to name a few."

The idea seems to be this platform can be used for many things - it seems to be the raison d’etre of the DoD-sponsored Moderna (mode RNA) who as most will know had never previously got a vaccine on the market. In the most trusting interpretation, the mRNA technology will provide dazzling investor returns.
On the less trusting interpretation…Oh no we’re not having any of that here :frowning:


I’ve been talking about the AIDS HIV “gain of function” connection for ages (and recommend an NAVS document about same), please use the on-site search function in the Covid category for HIV, AIDS and NAVS…



Hi @Everyman . I’m currently reading Virus Mania by Torsten Englebrect. There is a very large section dealing with the whole issue of HIV and AIDS. While I wouldn’t be arrogant enough to try and precis this, it is clear that the whole issue of HIV causing aids, has been completely corrupted by the same drive for prestige, research positions and grants etc.

It is also clear to me, based on the evidence presented in the book, that germ versus terrain theory has only reinforced my belief in terrain theory, convinced me (not that I needed convincing) that “viruses” have never shown to be the cause of any disease although they may be associated with specific diseases. And finally science has been completely corrupted in persuit of glory.


ok, I’ll check it out.

Now there seems a ‘new twist’ on the HIV/AIDS thing and I’m wondering you’re opinion.

That is, does the mRNA vaccine cause AIDS? (not just, is the virus itself ‘made partially’ of HIV virus.

One thing I should have said is that the book also makes it clear that AIDS is such a broad and poorly defined ailment, that many of the jab adverse reactions could easily be classified as AIDS.


The wider view is that suddenly - courtesy of the pseudopandemic scam, LOL! :laughing: - the whole of virus theory has been hoicked back into fundamental question; where - quite obviously - it belongs: germs versus terrain?

And with the notion of beneficial-messenger exosomes, as an essential ecological component in evolution, waiting in the wings as the wiser alternative way of viewing the air/soil/water microbial planktons. Not at all vicious enemies always out to get us, but essential parts of the web of life: our kindred and our friends (so long as we live healthy and Gaia-harmonious lifestyles…)

The unfortunate, but oh-so-normal reality seems to be that virus theory is acutely handy as a justification for BPh shysters on the make. Private Eye once attributed to ‘their Publisher’, the legendary Lord Gnome, the ownership of a corporation called ‘Enormous Sums Of Money, Ltd.’ That’s the main foundation of our current enforced love affair with virus theory, I fear. Not any rational line of evidence that proves the soundness of virology. And of course, as with ice-water-steam, huge wealth is only one component of WPS: the WealthPowerStatus trilogy…

What could be more addictive to the psychopathic fraction of hom sap?

I’m fascinated by the intricate deep knowledge of molecular doctrine re. virology manifested by Judy Mikovits et al. They certainly seem to be veteran comprehenders of that whole nano-level scene. But how do they know about it all, so intricately? What’s the observable-evidence base, and - equally important - what is the logical-rationalisation chain that is erected on the actual observables? It seems to me that the chain is too long to be cast-iron-certain of the currently-orthodox conclusions. Something is wrong with the whole field of virology. Theorising, especially in-silico GIGO theorising, has gone berserk. Very much in tandem with BPh wealth-grubbing.

1 Like

Rhis, as a student of the History of Science, which we all are these days I suppose, I’m certainly open to questioning scientific dogma.

However nothing I’ve seen is very convincing in terms of the concept: ‘Viruses don’t exist’.

Is that your opinion, in fact, that ‘viruses don’t exist’?

or ‘viruses exist but they don’t cause disease’.?

E, my position at this moment is that I’m a lay person, simply not knowledgeable enough about current virology doctrine, and especially about current allegedly-experimental practices, to be able to judge where things stand.

Clearly, though, there are serious challenges to current orthodoxy by people whose knowledge and credibility seem persuasive. Cogent questions are being asked, to which the gocos (guardians of current orthodoxy) are not providing adequate answers.

The whole field seems also to be heavily contaminated with ‘scientific’ careersworths and money-grubbing shysters, the latter of whom I think - frankly - should be viewed as criminal gangsters; the people whom I characterise as the Big Pharma bourloids - after Bourla, the gic currently heading Pfizer. There are also avowed ‘scientists’ - people like Fauci, Daszak, etc. - who seem to me to belong also in the frankly-criminal category.

Thus, I have to take the stance for now of - as usual - open-minded scepticism: I’m not convinced that virus dogma holds up against serious, thoroughgoing scrutiny.

I suppose I should add too that, both temperamentally, and from past experience and study, I’m definitely inclined towards Zach Bush’s alternative description of what we’re taught to think of as dangerous-enemy micro-organisms, as in fact being benign and essential messenger-exosomes, inherent and necessary parts of the whole ecology of the evolutionary process.

These messengers don’t need to be treated with fear and avoidance, I suspect, by those who have taken care to maintain their full bodymindspirit health.

Instead, welcome the exosomes as carriers of useful information-with-samples which they bring to our personal immune systems, for their further refinement on how to deal with new evolutionary developments. It’s well observed that when ‘new pathogens’ are supposedly about, some get ill, but plenty don’t. I suspect this is all to do with the health of the individual’s terrain, rather than the supposed pathogenicity of the exosomes; the so-called ‘deadly germs’. If you’re robustly well, you can receive their messages and process them with no more than scarcely-noticed rufflings of your normal state of well-feeling.

This has certainly been my personal experience with alleged pathogenic microbes, over many years: I just don’t get ill; not with flus/colds, nor in previous more robust years with the supposed dangers - for example - of travelling in India, completely unvaxed against the supposed killer endemics there. Never caused me any bother, I believe because of the heterodox health regimen that I follow.

It’s important to note too, following my contention that health-maintenance pervades all aspects of our being, body, mind and immortal soul, that one should repudiate the constant urging to be afraid of ‘killer bugs’. My response to the deluge of fear-porn poured over us during the pseudopandemic has been one of scornful rejection. I just don’t buy it. I never felt any of the panic which so many around me were exhibiting during the first lie-tsunami in 2020. I occupy a subtly-different universe. :slight_smile: I am indeed pretty convinced, from long experience, both my own and that of similarly like-minded friends, that fear and panics are deleterious to health. Mind-state, particularly belief-systems, affects health substantially.

All this said, I still reckon that such things as basic hygiene and cleanliness are essential parts of prudent lifestyles, along with good food, good housing, good environments, decent, spirit-expanding life-prospects, and so on: the essential components of lives well lived.

These are the true sources of lifelong good health, I think - well indicated I suggest by the way that scourge illnesses of previous times were retreating substantively under their effects before the advent of the vaccines which were and still are alleged to have banished the scourges. Polio is a key indicator here: in fact already dying back becaused of improve public health provisions, and especially under the influence of the mega-dose vitC treatment that pioneer maverick doctors were demonstrating, before the Salk vaccines were available. (Andrew Saul’s ‘Doctoryourself.com’ website has the lowdown on all that.)

Thanks to such disciplines - and also in no small part to my genetic inheritance from my sturdy-peasant ancestors - I’ve enjoyed unfailingly good health all my long life.

These are the reasons why I’m inclined to doubt current virology theory.


Similar ground is covered in the RFK Jr book, highlighting Anthony Fauci’s decisive role even back then. It has been a Long Game.

He gives a good precis of the way AIDS came to enfold within it a wide range of other illnesses which de facto became AIDS symptoms (Kaposi’s Sarcoma is the example I always remember).

As for the crisis in virology which @Rhis referred to it is a very small sample of one but A Certain Campus has the ailing Biosciences dept only a stone’s throw away from the spanking new Medical School. One wonders how long it will be until the former becomes an annex to the latter? Successful departments have this funny way of running out of office space and being forced to colonise other buildings, you see.


I couldn’t find what you mention, could you possibly repost the links? thanks

1 Like

Here’s some of the current marketing

Wonder what Mr. Hewitt was paid for this ad? He and Meghan having been cast adrift by Henry’s foster family, to earn their own living. Some PR schmucks somewhere presumably thought that he has enough clout with the public as an ersatz Windsor to be worth running this ad. Christ, the fakeness of it all!

And yes of course, Henry Hewitt may really believe what he’s saying, but as Chomsky famously said to the oaf Marr, if he didn’t believe what he does, he wouldn’t be where is - huckstering for the pharma gangsters.

That Chomsky quote is indeed famous, but frankly it could be applied to Chomsky also:

If Chomsky didn’t believe in the official theories about the Kennedy Assassination or 911 he wouldn’t have become the most ‘respected’ dissident in the USA, with an occasional appearance in state/corporate news sources. Compare for example with Michael Parenti.

Also, more importantly, note that Chomsky does NOT say ‘or maybe you’re just working for the CIA’, as Operation Mockingbird revelations showed was very possible for any major figure in the media.

Ask yourselves what is more demeaning, to be accused of being a dupe or be accused of being a paid marketing employee?

What the incident shows to me is Chomsky’s attempt at a psychological game of ‘Let me tell you why you’re REALLY xyz’. That is ‘You don’t realize why you are sitting there, but I’m very smart and I can tell you why you’re sitting there’.

I think this is why the Chomsky clip with Marr is so famous, it allows people to think of themselves as having superior knowledge of another person’s motivations. It’s a form of psychoanalyzing.

By not including the Mockingbird Possibility, Chomsky diverts attention from the Mockingbird operation. This was perhaps the primary reason for writing Manufacturing Consent: to divert attention from the revelations of the Church committee about the CIA and Mockingbird. It was quite successful. It gave left media critics a way of criticizing the media without being accused of being ‘conspiracy theorists’, and so in effect it shielded the CIA AND it shielded the media, because, if you think about it, the Manufactured Consent approach cannot be proven except circumstantially. The journalists can always laugh it off, or be insulted that someone considers themselves a non self aware dupe.

I’d say both the journalistic establishments and the deep state/CIA love the Manufacturing Consent approach, it has no teeth, threatens nobody, but is a good pacifier for crusading leftists who want to feel superior and smarter than the journalists. Not talking about you Rhis of course! I’m thinking about the passive agression of the Media Lens crowd.

1 Like

Admin. Objects on the Lifeboat & https://forum.5filters.info/t/biohazard-the-silent-threat-from-biomedical-research-and-the-creation-of-aids-a-report-by-the-national-anti-vivisection-society-hiv/1233/5

Hi @Everyman I can’t speak for Rhis, however those in the “virus don’t cause disease” camp, generally do not deny the existance of “viruses”. However, what they do posit, is that “viruses” (if they exist) are inert (they cannot replicate or produce proteins) and may well be the detritis resulting from the body repairing itself. I’ve probably put that very badly, but hey ho.!

In case you are interested the NAVS publication mentioned deals extensively with the species barrier crossing of lentiviruses, quote; “Lentivirus is a genus of retroviruses that cause chronic and deadly diseases characterized by long incubation periods, in humans and other mammalian species. The genus includes the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), which causes AIDS.” Retroviruses (esp.);“A retrovirus is a virus that uses RNA as its genetic material. When a retrovirus infects a cell, it makes a DNA copy of its genome that is inserted into the DNA of the host cell. There are a variety of different retroviruses that cause human diseases such as some forms of cancer and AIDS” Which is far, far more easily achieved in the laboratory than in nature, also the movement of monkeys from labs known to be studying same from the Americas to Africa in the late 70s early 80s. If you are interested in the truth I suggest you purchase a copy! Nb. I am social scientist not a virologist!

See this debate on the Lifeboat: https://members5.boardhost.com/xxxxx/thread/1644428688.html

I agree with much of that but you are in danger of letting the baby out with the bath-water, AIDS has killed millions R (and it was meant to).

Like viruses?

1 Like

Hey E! Could you categorise this for us please?