>>15354405

>>15354359

>>15354365

>>15354349

George H. W. Bush & Fauci creators/origins of AIDS?

On January 30, 1976, George H.W. Bush was sworn in Director of Central Intelligence.

Carter accepted Bush’s resignation on January 10, 1977, the day of the Presidential Inauguration. A video has reemerged of former president George HW Bush hailing the doctor leading the current administration's response to the coronavirus pandemic as an inspiring national figure. Fauci already a researcher at NIH, became it's youngest NIH's Director in 1984.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/george-hw-bush-trump-anthony-fauci-coronavirus-aids-deep-state-twitter-a9416786.html

https://www.aaas.org/news/anthony-fauci-view-maelstrom-hivaids-research-and-policy

It was there, in the P4 (high-security) laboratory at Fort Detrick,

according to Segal, where the AIDS virus was actually created, between

the fall of 1977 and spring of 1978. Six months is precisely the time it

would have taken, using the techniques available then, to create the

AIDS virus from Visna and HTLV-I.

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Urgent_Action/AIDS_Contract.html

"It's hard to say what the biggest coverup up will turn out to be (if

anyone ever finds out). AIDS can never be as 'clear-cut' as JFK, in

terms of evidence ignored, suppressed, and distorted, because there are

not enough microbiologists around who are capable or willing to do the

private research. In terms of lives lost and money spent, though, AIDS

will be near the top. In another sense, too, this is as big as JFK, because if Segal is right it means that 'science' is just as corrupt and manipulable as the press and the government. This will come as a great shock to many who believe that questions of 'pure science' are immune to political manipulation.

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Urgent_Action/AIDS_Contract.html

>>15354405

>>15354359

>>15354365

>>15354349

George H. W. Bush & Fauci creators/origins of AIDS?

On January 30, 1976, George H.W. Bush was sworn in Director of Central Intelligence.

Fauci already a researcher at NIH, became it's youngest NIH's Director in 1984.

>>15354349

>>15354359

>>15354365

>>15354374

>>15354405

HIV ‘Created by Scientist’ for Biological Warfare, Nobel Peace Prize Winner Says

Kenyan ecologist Wangari Maathai who on Friday became the first African woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize on Saturday repeated her previous claims that HIV was "created by a scientist for biological warfare," AFP/Yahoo! News reports. In August, Kenya's East African Standard quoted Maathai as saying that HIV/AIDS was created by scientists "for the purpose of mass extermination,"

>https://khn.org/morning-breakout/dr00026171/

It was there, in the P4 (high-security) laboratory at Fort Detrick,

according to Segal, where the AIDS virus was actually created, between

the fall of 1977 and spring of 1978. Six months is precisely the time it

would have taken, using the techniques available then, to create the

AIDS virus from Visna and HTLV-I.

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Urgent_Action/AIDS_Contract.html

"It's hard to say what the biggest coverup up will turn out to be (if

anyone ever finds out). AIDS can never be as 'clear-cut' as JFK, in

terms of evidence ignored, suppressed, and distorted, because there are

not enough microbiologists around who are capable or willing to do the

private research. In terms of lives lost and money spent, though, AIDS

will be near the top. In another sense, too, this is as big as JFK, because if Segal is right it means that 'science' is just as corrupt and manipulable as the press and the government. This will come as a great shock to many who believe that questions of 'pure science' are immune to political manipulation.

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Urgent_Action/AIDS_Contract.html

https://www.rt.com/news/545737-veritas-fauci-funded-covid/

https://reschenthaler.house.gov/media/press-releases/reschenthaler-uncovers-11-million-taxpayer-funding-sent-wuhan-institute

Who gave the communist China's Military the basics & funding for the Research…Fauci & Obama!

WE'VE HAD ENOUGH OF THE BS CONGRESSIONAL POLITICAL THEATER!

IT'S TIME TO ARREST, CHARGE AND PROSECUTE THESE BASTARDS FOR TREASON AND MASS MURDER!

If the Republicans want to win in the midterms, they need to get off their asses, grow a pair, use their brains and get a freaking backbone and do it!

>>15354736

Honor from daddy, given by Georgie…all the pieces fit that Fraudci & George H. W. Bush was responsible for the creation of AIDS at Fort Detrick

(Fort Detrick, the US Army's

center for biological warfare research in Frederick, Maryland) was

renamed the Frederick Cancer Research Facilities and placed under the

supervision of the National Cancer Institute, Gallo's employer.

ThankQ for posting…what a tight web the corrupt weave.

Oh, the Fauci, Obama, Gates, GHW Bush are all so innocent shills are out today!!!

That there is no (HIV inserts in the Obama Fauci using tax payers money to fund and aid Communist China's Military bioweapons lab & the release of covid 19 and connections to the other bioweapons lab produced AIDs/HIV connection

>>15354927

Dr. Christina Lin?

George H. W. Bush & Fauci creators/origins of AIDS?

Better copy this article in it's entirety before it's gone off of the internet!

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Urgent_Action/AIDS_Contract.html

Was There an AIDS Contract? [Morrissey]

Was There an AIDS Contract?

I heard about Jakob Segal's theory that the AIDS virus originated in a

US government biological warfare research laboratory in early 1989.

After some preliminary research, I was amazed to find that this shocking

theory had received no attention whatsoever in the mainstream American

press, and almost none in Europe.

The questions this theory raised were a matter of pure science, or so it

seemed to me. There were only three possibilities: 1) Segal was wrong;

2) he was right; 3) it could not be determined either way. I resolved to

find out which of these was true.

1. Informing the press

My first thought was to notify the press. Perhaps, by some fluke, they

had not heard of Segal, just as I hadn't, though he had been publishing

his conclusions since 1986. Surely American journalists would be as

anxious as I was to find out and expose the truth.If Segal was wrong, it

would be one's patriotic duty to say so.If he was right, or even might

be right, the same principle would hold. In the land of the free and the

home of the brave, one does not shirk from the truth. Remember

Watergate! So I wrote the following article and sent it off in September

1989 to a couple of dozen US journals and newspapers:

__________

Is AIDS Man-Made?

The theory that AIDS originated in the laboratory has been circulating

in Europe, particularly in West Germany, since late 1986.

The theory hinges on the claim that the AIDS virus (HIV) is virtually

identical to two other viruses: Visna, which causes a fatal disease in

sheep but does not infect humans, and HTLV-I (Human T-Cell Leukemia

Virus), which infects humans but is seldom fatal.

Prof. Jakob Segal, the author of the theory, says that structural

analysis using genome mapping proves that HIV is more similar to Visna

than to any other retrovirus. The portion (about three percent) of the

HIV genome which does not correspond structurally to Visna corresponds

exactly to part of the HTLV-I genome.

This similarity, says Segal, cannot be explained by a natural process of

evolution and mutation. It can only have resulted from an artificial

combination of the two viruses.

He notes that the symptoms of AIDS are consistent with the complementary

effects of two different viruses. AIDS patients who do not die of the

consequences of immune deficiency show the same damage to the brain,

lungs, intestines, and kidneys that occurs in sheep affected with Visna.

Combining Visna with HTLV-I would allow the virus to enter not only the

macrophages of the inner organs but also the T4 lymphocytes and thus

cause immune deficiency, which is exactly what AIDS does.

As further evidence that HIV is a construct of Visna and HTLV- I, Segal

cites studies which show that the reverse transcription process in HIV

has two discrete points of peak activity which correspond, respectively,

to those of Visna and HTLV-I.

AIDS is thus, according to Segal, essentially a variety of Visna. This

has important implications for research, since a cure or vaccine might

be found sooner by studying Visna in sheep than by concentrating, as at

present, on monkeys.

The theory of the African origin of AIDS, that it developed in African

monkeys and was transferred to man, has been abandoned by most

researchers. All of the known varieties of SIV (Simian Immunodeficiency

Virus) are structurally so dissimilar to HIV (much less similar than HIV

and Visna) that a common origin is out of the question. Furthermore,

even if such a development by natural mutation were possible, it would

not explain the sudden outbreak of AIDS in the early 1980s, since

monkeys and men have been living together in Africa since the beginning

of human history.

The "Africa Legend," as it is called in a 1988 West German

(Westdeutscher Rundfunk) television documentary, is further debunked by

the epidemiological history of AIDS. There is no solid evidence of AIDS

in Africa before 1983. The earliest documented cases of AIDS date from

1979 in New York.

In addition to the WDR documentary and occasional mention in magazines

like Stern and Spiegel, Segal's work has been published in West Germany

(AIDS-Erreger aus dem Gen-Labor? [AIDS-Virus from the Gene Laboratory?],

Kuno Kruse, ed., Berlin: Simon & Leutner, 1987) and India (with Lilli

Segal, The Origin of AIDS, Trichur, India: Kerala Sastra Sahitya

Parishad, 1989). He has also been conducting lecture tours in West

Germany.

>>15355052

Scientific journals, Segal says, have refused to publish or discuss his

theory. This is difficult to understand. If he is wrong, he should

certainly be refuted. The cornerstone of the theory is that HIV is a

combination of Visna and HTLV-I. Segal claims that any trained

laboratory technician could produce AIDS from these components, today,

in less than two weeks. If this is true, it should be demonstrable by

experiment.

The next question is, if it is possible to produce HIV from Visna and

HTLV-I now, was it also possible in 1977, when Segal claims the AIDS

virus was created? He says it was, by use of the less precise "shotgun"

method of gene manipulation available then, though it would have taken

longer–about six months. If this is true, it should also be

demonstrable.

The final question would be: Was it produced in a laboratory? Segal

believes he has shown that it was, but he goes further than that. He

also believes he knows who produced it and why. Segal quotes from a

document presented by a Pentagon official named Donald MacArthur on June

9, 1969, to a Congressional committee, in which $10 million is requested

to develop, over the next 5 to 10 years, a new, contagious micro-

organism which would destroy the human immune system.

Whether such research is categorized as "offensive" or "defensive"is

immaterial: in order to defend oneself against apossible new virus, so

the reasoning goes, one must first develop the virus.

Since the Visna virus was already well known, Segal continues, the

problem was to find a human retrovirus that would enable it to infect

humans. Scrutiny of the technical literature, Segal says, reveals that

Dr. Robert Gallo isolated such a virus, HTLV-I, by 1975, though it was

not given this name until later.

1975 was also the year the virus section of Fort Detrick (the US Army's

center for biological warfare research in Frederick, Maryland) was

renamed the Frederick Cancer Research Facilities and placed under the

supervision of the National Cancer Institute, Gallo's employer.

It was there, in the P4 (high-security) laboratory at Fort Detrick,

according to Segal, where the AIDS virus was actually created, between

the fall of 1977 and spring of 1978. Six months is precisely the time it

would have taken, using the techniques available then, to create the

AIDS virus from Visna and HTLV-I.

Segal claims that the new virus was then tested on convicts who

volunteered for the experiment in return for their release from prison.

Failing to show any early symptoms of disease, the prisoners were

released after six months. Some were homosexual, and went to New York,

where the disease was first attested in 1979.

The researchers had not counted on creating a disease with such a long

incubation period. (One year is relatively short for AIDS, but would not

be unusual if the infection was induced by high- dosage injections.) If

the researchers had kept their human guinea pigs under observation for a

longer time, they would have detected the disease and been able to

contain it.

In other words, Segal claims that AIDS is the result of a germ warfare

research experiment gone awry.

In an interview on April 18, 1987, published in the Dutch newspaper De

Volkskrant, Dr. Gallo describes Segal's theory as KGB propaganda.

Segal, who is Russian (Lithuanian Jewish) but has been a professor of

biology (now emeritus) at Humboldt University in East Berlin since 1953,

is a bit old (78) to be starting a career as a propagandist. Soviet and

East German officials, for their part, have maintained a discreet

silence on the matter, for reasons of realpolitik, Segal believes.

The question of whether AIDS is man-made or not cannot be answered by

dismissing it as propaganda.

Segal believes he has answered the question. We do not have to believe

him, but we do have to believe that the following questions are

answerable:

1) Can HIV be produced by combining Visna and HTLV-I in the laboratory

now?

2) Can it be produced using the techniques available in 1977?

3) What did go on at Ft. Detrick between 1969 and 1978? What were the

results of the $10 million Pentagon research project announced on June

9, 1969?

______

>>15355059

>>15355052

I didn't get a single reply–not even a form-letter rejection. Later I

rewrote the article, concentrating on the MacArthur testimony and the

fact that neither it nor Segal had ever been discussed in the press.

This much was certain. The MacArthur testimony was authentic, and part

of the public record. I had seen and photocopied it myself in the

Library of Congress. On June 9, 1969, Dr. D. M. MacArthur, then Deputy

Director of Research and Technology for the Dept. of Defense, told the

House Subcommittee on Appropriations:

"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…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 [resistant] to the

immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to

maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease…A

research program to explore the feasibility of this could be

completed in approximately 5 years at a total cost of $10

million."

This was scandal enough. It does not mean that Segal is right, but it

does mean the US government wanted, and considered it feasible, to

create an AIDS-like virus as early as 1969.

It would not be surprising if the government wanted to keep this quiet,

but what about the press? I could find only two references to

MacArthur's testimony, in a book by Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman (_A

Higher Form of Killing: The Secret Story of Chemical & Biological

Warfare_, NY: Hill & Wang, 1982), and in a couple of articles by Robert

Lederer and Nathaniel S. Lehrman in Covert Action Information Bulletin

(28, summer 1987, and 29, winter 1988).

Segal had been similarly ignored. Through the Amerika Haus library in

Frankfurt I ran a DIALOGUE search of the indexes of major US newspapers,

magazines and journals for the name Jakob Segal, and it came up

negative. At least he had been mentioned a couple of times in _Der

Spiegel_. In America he was apparently completely unknown.

I found this intolerable.I did not agree with Segal; I only wanted to

see his arguments discussed by people competent to make a judgement.

Then I and the rest of the reading public could decide which arguments

were more convincing. I thought that was the way free speech worked.

Here was a guy saying the US government created AIDS, and claiming to

have proved itscientifically, and he was being ignored.

By contrast, I had read about the storm of controversy that Peter

Duesberg's theory had caused. He suggested in 1987 that AIDS is not

caused by a virus at all–certainly at least as speculative a thesis as

Segal's. But there is a significant difference. If Duesberg is right

and HIV does not cause the disease, the question of whether the virus

originated in the laboratory is irrelevant. In that sense, it is the

antithesis of Segal's theory. Was that why it received so much

attention, while Segal was completely ignored?

I also wanted to call attention to Segal's new book (_AIDS: Die Spur

fuehrt ins Pentagon_, Essen: Neuer Weg, 1990), which had not (and still

has not) appeared in English.

I sent the revised version of my article out to a number of journals,

but the only reply I received was from a "radical" leftist editor, who

wrote:

"We have real problems with the Segal material….There was a logical

fallacy in Lehrman's reliance [on Segal's theory], too, because he used

Segal's theories to bolster his notion that the release of AIDS was

deliberate, even though Segal believes that it was accidentally

released….The issue is further complicated by the recent retraction of

the current Soviet government of the allegations of CBW connections they

had made, undoubtedly another of Bush's little quid pro quos. A further

difficulty is that the most credible critic in this country of the

standard medical establishment line is Dr. Peter Duesberg, who argues

(and Lehrman agrees) that AIDS is caused toxically, not simply virally.

The synthesis of all this might be that if AIDS is toxically triggered,

even if it requires some viral precondition, the trigger could be caused

either environmentally or deliberately or both.

"In any event, although we believe that the issue of the cause of AIDS

is an incredibly significant one (and certainly do not think you or any

other the other critics of the Establishment) are lone nuts, we don't

think that the issue is anything near so clear-cut that the failure to

give significant coverage to Segal is "the biggest coverup since JFK.

>>15355065

>>15355059

>>15355052

"In any event, although we believe that the issue of the cause of AIDS

is an incredibly significant one (and certainly do not think you or any

other the other critics of the Establishment) are lone nuts, we don't

think that the issue is anything near so clear-cut that the failure to

give significant coverage to Segal is "the biggest coverup since JFK.

"We would be interested in a general piece on the failure of the media

(U.S. and Western Europe) to cover alternative theories in general,

which would not have to accept any particular theory, but would show how

conferences which take the establishment line get considerable coverage

whereas those which do not are barely, if at all, covered. Ditto for

the personalities involved.

"Anyway, these are some of the reasons why we do not feel like running

with the ball right now."

I replied:

"I wanted to focus on the 1969 MacArthur testimony–a scandal in

itself–and what Segal makes of that. You probably have Segal's English

monograph of 1986, which he wrote before he knew about the MacArthur

testimony. (He got it from Rifkin). Since then he has been much more

specific about tracing what he considers to be the exact course of

development of the virus, i.e. Gallo's execution of that 1969 contract.

"ThisGallo's rolemay not be provable, but the heart of Segal's

thesis, namely that VISNA + HTLV-I = HIV-I, is testable, as I pointed

out. There is no scientific explanation for why it has not been tested,

which leaves the political one. The theory is very clear and precise.

If Segal is wrong, he could easily be proved wrong.

"This is not the case with Duesberg or any of the other theories. The

effect of the Duesberg theory, as I pointed out in the article, is to

remove the entire question of the origin of the virus from the debate,

which then becomes dissipated in the probably unresolvable question of

environmental triggers, susceptibility, etc.

"The question we should ask is this: Why has Duesberg's theory, which

is not testable, been given so much attention, while Segal's theory,

which is testable, has been completely ignored? I did a national (US)

magazine and newspaper database search (DIALOGUE), and if it is

accurate, the name Jakob Segal has never appeared in a major US

newspaper or any scientific journal.

"If Duesberg is the most credible critic in the US of the medical

establishment, as you say, he serves (willy nilly) the coverup

admirably, for the reason I have described. As we well know, mind

control involves control of the offense as well as the defense (Gallo,

Essex). The parallel here with the JFK case is the Blakey Mafia theory.

That, as Garrison says, is a red herring. It doesn't matter who pulled

the triggers, and it doesn't matter what 'triggers' AIDS, if we are

trying to find out the whole truth. Blakey will have us tracking down

Mafiosi for the next hundred years, and Duesberg will have us searching

for non-viral AIDS 'triggers' for another hundred.

"It's hard to say what the biggest coverup up will turn out to be (if

anyone ever finds out). AIDS can never be as 'clear-cut' as JFK, in

terms of evidence ignored, suppressed, and distorted, because there are

not enough microbiologists around who are capable or willing to do the

private research. In terms of lives lost and money spent, though, AIDS

will be near the top. In another sense, too, this is as big as JFK,

because if Segal is right it means that 'science' is just as corrupt and

manipulable as the press and the government. This will come as a great

shock to many who believe that questions of 'pure science' are immune to

political manipulation.

"You are probably right about a deal with the Russians. In fact, Segal

says they talked about AIDS at Reykjavik. Maybe that's what Reagan was

really upset about, rather than SDI. I wouldn't be surprised if he heard

the truth about AIDS at that conference for the first time. In any case,

Segal was told subsequently by East German and Soviet authorities that

he could continue to publish and speak on the subject (mainly in West

Germany–the East Germans gave him no opportunities), as long as he did

not explicitly associate himself with the East German or Soviet

governments. Now there is the question. They could have stopped him

whenever they wanted to, but they didn't. Do you think they would have

allowed him to continue to publish and give lectures in the West if they

thought he was wrong? If he was a KGB agent, as some people have said,

would they have been stupid enough to let him make such monstrous

allegations if there was nothing to them, and if they could easily be

proved false?

>>15355070

>>15355065

>>15355059

>>15355052

"I will think about your suggestion for a more general approach, but are

you sure that another consideration of alternative theories would be

productive? CAIB did a good job on that. To make the analogy with JFK

again, what good is rehash of the 'alternative' assassination theories?

It just perpetuates the confusion and plays right into the hands of

those who want to avoid, most of all, clear questions and clear answers.

I tried to word my article so as not to imply acceptance of Segal's

theory. I do not accept it. I think it should be discussed. My point

was that Segal has posed a clear, testable hypothesis which, despite the

importance of its implications, has been completely ignored. That point

would be considerably diluted if Segal's theory were treated as just

another crazy (and untestable) theory, like Duesberg's.

There was no response. I was getting nowhere.

1. Talking to the experts

My next tack was to try to pursue the science of the matter. This was

difficult, since my last foray into the natural sciences was in 1968,

when I took the general biology course at college which was also

required for humanities majors. Still, as a linguist I felt I was a

scientist of a sort, and I felt that with a reasonable effort I should

at least be able to inform myself enough to answer my basic question:

Was Segal right, wrong, or is it impossible to know?

In the summer of 1989 I had seen a reference in Time magazine to someone

I had known as a teenager who had become a well-known cancer and AIDS

researcher–a virologist and a viral surgeon. If anybody could answer my

questions it would be Tony. (The name is fictitious; I see no reason to

personalize the issue.) I found his address in Who's Who and wrote to

him, enclosing a copy of my unpublished article and a longer article

written by Segal that had been published by a left-wing (Marxist) West

German newspaper. An exchange of letters followed, which I reproduce

here.

Pass this on if you like. RSVP ,

because I don't read all the newsgroups it may appear on.

Sept. 14, 1989

Dear Tony,

…My main reason for writing is to ask what you think of the enclosed. My article has not been published. Segal's article is from the Rote Fahne, a Marxist weekly, which I know doesn't exactly enhance its credibility, but nobody else will publish him. That shouldn't affect the science of the matter. I hope your German is up to it. I think you'll find Segal's style clear and non-convoluted, which is more than I can say for most German academicians–or American ones, for that matter.

Let me be honest. I'm quite aware that you might be the last person who might tell me anything, even if you could, about this,but the thing really bothers me, and a lot of other people too, at least in this country. If Segal is wrong, he sure as hell ought to be proved wrong. Would be great to hear from you, in any case.

Best,

Mike Morrissey

*

September 21, 1989

Dear Mike,

Your question is one that has come up many times before. The answer is simple. The virus is not man-made. Segal gives us too much credit since this is the most complex virus we have seen. We can't even make a simple one. If it were as he says we would also have the technology to eliminate it and we do not, as yet.

We don't know where it actually comes from but the best guess is from a non-human primate from Africa. This is because very similar viruses cause AIDS-like diseases in these animals. However, the "missing link" has not been found, but it may turn up at any time as more studies are done.

You may also have heard that AIDS is not caused by the virus HIV. More nonsense. The evidence that it does is overwhelming and this will become clearer to the public as specific drugs and vaccines are developed. To get a better view of all of this let me refer you to the October 1988 issue of Scientific American.

Yours sincerely,

Antonio L. DiAngelo

*

Oct. 6, 1989

Dear Tony, I'm afraid I don't understand your comments on AIDS. Of course we cannot make a horse or a donkey, but if we put them together we can "make" a mule. Segal says the horse and the donkey were Visna and HTLV- 1. Nor do I see why, if this is what happened, the virus should be any more defeatable than any other.

I don't know if you have actually read Segal's work, but it is very convincing and simply cannot be dismissed out of hand. He has countered every even halfway "scientific" argumentit would appearwith success. What the public cannot understand or accept is why, if he is wrong, he cannot be refuted with scientific arguments, and why his arguments are simply ignored. If he is right, of course, everything is all too clear.

>>15355086

>>15355070

>>15355065

>>15355059

>>15355052

I don't know if you have actually read Segal's work, but it is very convincing and simply cannot be dismissed out of hand. He has countered every even halfway "scientific" argumentit would appearwith success. What the public cannot understand or accept is why, if he is wrong, he cannot be refuted with scientific arguments, and why his arguments are simply ignored. If he is right, of course, everything is all too clear.

Segal deals at length with Essex's Africa hypothesis, and points out that even he (Essex) has retracted it, although it continues to be propagated in the media. Nor can I understand why researchers seem to be ignoring the possibility that AIDS is a Visna variety and might be more amenable to prevention or cure if treated as such. That means that they should be working with sheep, not monkeys.

Sincerely,

Mike

*

Oct. 17, 1989

Dear Mike,

This is hard to do by letter, but here goes. Visna + HTLV-1 could never be crossed to give HIV-1. HIV-1 has things in it that neither of the others have.

HIV-1 is a member of the same family as Visna but more complex. Indeed, much of what is known about Visna is used to further our knowledge of HIV-1.

The Africa hypothesis is not that of Essex. What he has retracted is something that relates to HIV-2, an HIV of West African origin. Max detected the presence of this virus in man but when he isolated it, a contamination occurred in his lab with SIV-1 (a simian AIDS virus). This was not found out until later. The real HIV-2 exists and is a second human virus.

You need to read much more than Segal and I suppose I should read more abut him. I finally stopped some time ago when I concluded he was on the wrong track. I can imagine how difficult it is for you, though, with all of this controversy about. It is a very strange time in science.

Best regards,

Antonio L. DiAngelo

*

Oct. 29, 1989 Dear Tony,

I know I'm in way over my head, but all I can do, like everyone else, is try to evaluate somehow or other the opinions of experts, which is very difficult when they contradict each other.

I don't know if you are referring to the tat genes when you say HIV-1 has things that Visna and HTLV-1 do not, but if so Segal responds to this objection in his book as follows:

"As early as June 1986 Gonda et al. (Proceedings of the Nat. Academy of Sciences 83, 4007-4011) published a comparative study of the HIV and Visna virus genomes … The result was that both genomes were highly similar, and that all structural elements were shared by both of them, except for a small segment of 300 nucleotide pairs with an exceptionally high genetic instability, nearly identical to a section of the HTLV-1 genome. That means that all the new structural elements first described in the HIV genome, such as the tat-genes complex, also exist in the Visna virus genome."

Segal has a whole chapter based largely on this study by Gonda and an earlier one published in Science 227, 173-177 (1985).The 60% homology Gonda found between Visna and HIV-1 in 1986, with the latter varying by mutation at abut 10% every 2 years (Hahn et al., Science 232, 1548-1553, 1986), would point to near identity around early 1978, when Segal claims that a section of a genome originating from HTLV-1 was added to Visna by gene surgery to produce HIV-1.

In another chapter, Segal suggests that HIV-2 is a manipulated SIV virus, made pathogenic possibly by the surgical insertion of an orf-A gene.

Other microbiologists I have talked to do not dispute Segal's thesis that AIDS is a laboratory product, though there is disagreement as to exactly how it might have happened and from precisely what components. I have also been referred to an article by Julie Overbaugh et al. in Nature 332, 731-734 (1988), which apparently demonstrates that it is possible to produce a new virus in the laboratory which is more pathogenic than its components. This means that Segal's scenario is at least not to be ruled out by any fundamental law of nature.

Certainly Dr. MacArthur did not believe this in 1969, when he made the statement to Congress that Segal quotes in the article I sent you. Jeremy Rifkin's petition of Feb. 10, 1988 (appended to Segal's book) to disclose what became of this project yielded nothing, of course. It's a secret! Perhaps the scientists themselves are our best hope. Segal feels that Gonda may have tried indirectly to point to the truth by calling attention to the similarity between Visna and HIV–if so, more power to him.

The worst thing about Segal's theory is not that it may be correct, bad as that would be, but that it is being, as the Germans say, "tot geschwiegen." Of that there can be no doubt, and the implications are dismal. Sincerely,

Mike

*

>>15354716