Time: Sat Nov 02 09:10:24 1996
To: Harvey Wysong <hwysong@atl.mindspring.com>
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: request to discipline Roger Cravens
Cc:
Bcc: liberty lists, Nancy Lord, Neil Nordbrock, Electra, Dean, Chris Wilder, Richard Ginn
At 10:49 AM 10/27/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Gents,
> I must tell you that this is bizarre stuff. I have met Roger upon
>the occasion of his speaking to Americans for Lawful Government and share
>many mutual friends with Paul. You both appear to be well intentioned,
>intelligent men. I would suggest that one of you pick up the phone. Both of
>you are beginning to look foolish. Very foolish.
>
>-- Harvey
Dear Harvey,
Please explain to me why you
think what I am doing here is
foolish. I understand that *you*
think it is foolish, but you
have not exactly said why.
I do not want to be placed on
Roger's private email list without
my permission. After one very
disappointing go-around on this
question, my name was finally
removed from his private list.
Now my name is back on his
private email list, less than
one week after the "flap",
shall we call it?
I fail to see what talking on
the telephone is going to
accomplish, after I have made
my request crystal clear in
the plainest of English.
Furthermore, I do not want the
man having my private telephone
number. Before you know it,
that number would be all over
the Internet, with who-knows-what
attached to it. "For a good time:
call this number" maybe? My
answer: NO!
Privacy is a fundamental Right;
Congress has said so at 5 USC 552
et seq., and I happen to believe
them when they do. Violations
of fundamental Rights are felonies,
per 18 USC 242.
Last but not least, I asked a
very reasonable question about
Roger's authority to be using
government resources to spend
his time screening inbound email
and reposting it to so many
outbound email lists. Since he
did not answer the question,
as far as I can tell, may I suggest
that he save the taxpayers some
money and do it at home, on his
own time, with his own computer.
It doesn't matter one inch whether
or not he is posting "politically
correct" material (whatever that
is). That is not the point. The
point is AUTHORITY! With the CDC
now implicated in the Gulf War
Syndrome, and maybe implicated
big time, this matter could turn
into a rather big embarassment
for CDC. How many other CDC
employees are spending federal
money on projects Congress has
not approved?
Please don't give me this stock
answer that Roger is doing it on
his own time. He may be, but the
LAN belongs to CDC. This I know
after asking Roger to use "Bcc:"
(blind copy) in his posts, and he
responded by saying that the LAN
uses software incapable of doing
so. I then recommended that he
get his own copy of Eudora, and
dial out through his own modem.
Answer: can't do that; LAN policy.
So, the information available to
me is that the LAN belongs to CDC.
I am willing to fight for my Rights
in this situation, and I submit that
privacy is a fundamental Right, pursuant
to the Tenth Amendment. See case
law surrounding FOIA and the Privacy Act.
I will even go so far as to fight
"Patriots" (whatever they are), if they
decide to deprive me in any way of my
fundamental Right to privacy.
Your turn ...
/s/ Paul Mitchell
exhausted from a serious "virus"
incident not far from CDC
> ===================================
>>From: Harvey Wysong <hwysong@atl.mindspring.com>
>>Subject: request to discipline Roger Cravens
>>
>>>Date: Sat, 2 Nov 1996 04:25:14 -0700 (MST)
>>>To: (Recipient list suppressed)
>>>From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
>>>Subject: request to discipline Roger Cravens
>>>
>>>Memo
>>>
>>>From: Paul Andrew Mitchell
>>>
>>>Date: November 2, 1996
>>>
>>>
>>>Dear Internet Friends,
>>>
>>>I am making a personal request here
>>>for direct discipline of Mr. Roger
>>>Cravens, at the Centers for Disease
>>>Control in Atlanta, Georgia.
>>>
>>>After making several requests to be
>>>removed from his private email list,
>>>nothing happened and I continued to
>>>receive unwanted email from him,
>>>either directly, or via other lists
>>>of which he and I are both members.
>>>
>>>This annoyed me very much, because
>>>I had previously made a polite inquiry
>>>of Mr. Cravens to disclose the
>>>authority he had to use CDC resources
>>>to be screening inbound email and
>>>re-posting it on so many lists.
>>>(I was routinely getting 5+ copies
>>>of everything from him.) Mr. Cravens
>>>did not answer my inquiry about his
>>>authority, if any.
>>>
>>>At that point, I became rather annoyed,
>>>and I decided to escalate, first by
>>>sending him 10 copies of my demand to
>>>be removed, then 25, then 50, then 100.
>>>I finally ended up sending 350 copies
>>>of the White House Constitution to
>>>Mr. Cravens, before somebody at his
>>>end chose to notice and respond. They
>>>use a local area network (LAN), and the
>>>LAN administrator intervened.
>>>
>>>After all that dust had settled, now I
>>>get the following. I want you to know
>>>that I have made it very VERY plain
>>>to Mr. Cravens that he does NOT have
>>>my permission to put me on his private
>>>email list, as he has done below.
>>>After all that has happened, I am
>>>frankly shocked that he would take
>>>it upon himself to do it again, less
>>>than one week after our little "blow up"
>>>over this matter.
>>>
>>>I am probably in "hot water" with CDC for
>>>re-posting a message concerning possible
>>>CDC complicity with the Gulf War Syndrome.
>>>Evidently, it has been reported that
>>>officials within CDC knew about the
>>>shipment of biological weapons to Iraq.
>>>Can this be his motive? If not, then
>>>what is?
>>>
>>>You can see for yourself that my email
>>>address has been placed back on Roger's
>>>private email list, to wit:
>>>
>>>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>>>
>>>
>>>>From: "Cravens, Roger D." <rbg3@CCDOSA1.EM.CDC.GOV>
>>>>To: "Ruffin, Michael" <mar5@CCDDN1.EM.CDC.GOV>,
>>>> "Miller, Joan K." <jkp1@CCDOSA1.EM.CDC.GOV>,
>>>> "Pollard, Robert A." <rap3@CCDOSA1.EM.CDC.GOV>,
>>>> Rush Limbaugh <70277.2502@compuserve.com>,
>>>> "'Steven Baker (S)'" <ACCESS@PHOENIX.NET>,
>>>> Robert Ireland <aircav@zapcom.net>,
>>>> "matthew.sadler" <balchain.com!matthew.sadler@chattanooga.net>,
>>>> "'Ross Cavitt (P/S)'" <cavitt@juno.com>
>>>>To: Ross Cavitt <Cavitt@msn.com>, Paul Cordingley <crs1026@INFORAMP.NET>,
>>>> Patti May <jcook@eagle.ca>, "'Robert Cooke (AOL)'" <kd4dpc@aol.com>,
>>>> Randolph Langley <langley@scri.fsu.edu>,
>>>> mbmartin <mbmartin@srasds.attmail.com>,
>>>> MilitiaNet <MilitiaNet@aol.com>, mm505 <mm505@mindspring.com>,
>>>> "MR.BILL888" <MR.BILL888@edm.net>, newcol419 <newcol419@aol.com>
>>>>To: "N. Shay" <nshay@bbs.cresnet.org>, NYO41ed <NYO41ed@aol.com>,
>>>> "'Pat Swindall (P)'" <plspbnet@aol.com>,
>>>> Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar], <----- Note Well
>>>> Patricia Neill <pnpj@db1.cc.rochester.edu>,
>>>> "Peter L. Sroufe" <psroufe@ibm.net>,
>>>> Richard Comer <rcomer@thor.pla-net.net>,
>>>> "Robert D. Baker" <rdbake@harold.eastky.com>,
>>>> RevCOAL <revcoal@pcnet.com>
>>>>To: "richard.dale" <richard.dale@juno.com>,
>>>> "Rick.Slater" <Rick.Slater@Dartmouth.Edu>,
>>>> Richard Ridgeway <ridgeway@CCM.SEIKOTSI.COM>,
>>>> RightAway <RightAway@aol.com>,
>>>> "R. J. Tavel, J.D." <rjtavel@iquest.net>,
>>>> "Robby Noel (P)" <robnoel@primenet.com>,
>>>> "Rob Schofield (P)" <rosco@cyberia.com>,
>>>> Roger Sayles <rsayles@aol.com>, Scangene <Scangene@aol.com>
>>>>To: scottd1 <scottd1@map.com>, scotty07 <scotty07@ix.netcom.com>,
>>>> "'Sean Hannity'" <seanh@mindspring.com>,
>>>> SkyWriter <SkyWriter@Public-Action.com>, sm9m <sm9m@aol.com>,
>>>> "Scott Hudson (P/S)" <sphudson@mindspring.com>,
>>>> Starfyre <starfyre@blarg.net>, "'Rickey Stein'" <steinda@umdnj.edu>,
>>>> "'Microwave Rider'" <ticom@l0pht.com>,
>>>> Patti Johnson <whitewolf@toad.net>
>>>>Subject: Astounding info about AIDS
>>>>Date: Mon, 28 Oct 96 09:03:00 EST
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>AEN News
>>>>from ralph@TeamInfinity.com
>>>>
>>>>http://TeamInfinity.com/urls.html
>>>>
>>>>Please disseminate widely...
>>>>
>>>>October 17, 1996 Feature Stories
>>>>[What if everything we have been told about HIV and AIDS is a lie?]
>>>>[The HIV Model Timetable as presented by Project AIDS International]
>>>>[Their tithing dollars at work]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>WHAT IF EVERYTHING WE HAVE BEEN TOLD ABOUT HIV
>>>>AND AIDS IS A LIE? BY JEFF OFSTEDAHL
>>>>OCTOBER 17, 1996, ECHO MAGAZINE (Jeff4Echo@aol.com)
>>>>
>>>>It is the plague of the 20th century. It is grounds upon which people
>>>>are drummed out of military service. It is upon which people lose their
>>>>jobs. They lose their health insurance. They are denied life insurance.
>>>>They have been denied housing, food and even pastoral counseling. Some
>>>>are disenfranchised from their families. It is a four letter word, an
>>>>acronym which spells certain death to all who are labeled as such.
>>>>It is AIDS.
>>>>
>>>> Fifteen years into the "epidemic," it has become a multi-billion dollar
>>>>a year industry which has made millionaires of scientists and drug
>>>>pushers alike. Some 15 years later, people still are dying. With annual
>>>>federal
>>>>funding at more that $7 billion , AIDS research is better funded than any
>>>>other disease. Yet, it has produced the fewest results. Why?
>>>>
>>>> Some important questions which need to be answered are:
>>>>
>>>> If HIV causes AIDS, why have thousands of AIDS victims never had
>>>>HIV?
>>>>
>>>> Why have hundreds of thousands who have had HIV for many years
>>>>remained perfectly healthy?
>>>>
>>>> Why does the co-discoverer of HIV now claim it cannot be the sole
>>>>cause of AIDS?
>>>>
>>>> Why has more than ten years of AIDS research costing tens of
>>>>billions of dollars failed to show how (or even if) HIV causes AIDS or
>>>>attacks the immune system?
>>>>
>>>> What if AIDS is not, in fact, caused by a virus?
>>>>
>>>> What if for all these years the search for the definitive answer
>>>>to the one of the worst afflictions to hit mankind in recent record has
>>>>followed the wrong path?
>>>>
>>>> What if everyone is wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Impossible you ask? Not really. It has happened before.
>>>> In the American 1930s, a devastating disease began to grip the
>>>>poverty-stricken areas of the country. They called it PELLAGRA. The
>>>>condition was marked with skin lesions, gastrointestinal disturbances and
>>>>nervous disorders.
>>>>
>>>> Because of its "outbreak" appearance, scientists were quick to label
>>>>the calamity as viral or bacterial in nature. As such, doctors were
>>>>instructed how to treat their patients. Thousands died before the falsehood
>>>>was
>>>>discovered. It turned out, the dise ase was caused by simple malnutrition
>>>>due to a B vitamin (nicotinic acid) deficiency.
>>>>
>>>> By the time the truth was discovered, scientists had come up with an
>>>>elaborate life cycle for this new virus, which they said came from corn
>>>>mold, involved farm animals, crows, and eventually ended up in people,
>>>>who then died. In fact, the malady stem med from an over-dependence on corn
>>>>in the diet (which has little nutritional value), and the new process of
>>>>bleaching flour for white bread, a process which introduced toxic
>>>>cysteine hydrochlorides into the body.
>>>>
>>>> An even greater example of the medical industry's mishandling of a
>>>>disease occurred in Japan. It came after an observed outbreak of alleged
>>>>immune suppression lasting from 1955 to 1978.
>>>>
>>>> In this case, subacute-myelo-optico-neuropathy (SMON) also was thought
>>>>to be caused by a virus. After 20 years and countless deaths, researchers
>>>>discovered the true cause of SMON: the chemical clioquinol, which was
>>>>sold in Japan to treat upset stomach s. When ingested, it actually induced
>>>>the
>>>>same upset stomach. Thus, more was prescribed and ingested, perpetuating
>>>>the vicious cycle.
>>>>
>>>> Current day AIDS dissidents believe the SMON model (the treatment
>>>>causing the very disease it was supposed to fight) parallels what they
>>>>call the AZT (zidovudine, known generically as Retrovir) cycle
>>>>precipitating AIDS.
>>>>
>>>> Wait a minute.
>>>> You ask: AZT is the cause of AIDS?
>>>> AIDS dissidents? Once they were thought to be the fringe of the
>>>>scientific community. The wackos, if you will. Today, a growing number of
>>>>distinguished and world-renowned scientists and researchers is joining
>>>>the AIDS dissident movement.
>>>>
>>>> "[The HIV model of AIDS] is without a doubt the biggest scientific
>>>>medical error in the history of the world," said Dick Joslyn, founder and
>>>>director of the AIDS dissidence group SPEAK-UP! The organization has no
>>>>official membership. It is a network of activists and researchers who
>>>>question whether AIDS actually is caused by a virus.
>>>>
>>>> "Despite the government's claims to the contrary, HIV has never been
>>>>proven to cause disease," Joslyn said. "Scientists who have reviewed what
>>>>researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have
>>>>offered as proof that HIV causes AIDS have found the evidence to be
>>>>inadequate, inconclusive and downright fraudulent."
>>>>
>>>> Joslyn's belief is supported by more than 200 distinguished doctors and
>>>>scientists, some of whom are Nobel Prize recipients. No longer can these
>>>>people be waved off as the lunatic fringe.
>>>>
>>>> Their arguments begin with the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)
>>>>itself. Joslyn contends the virus, if it truly exists, is a harmless
>>>>organism within the body.
>>>>
>>>> To date, he contends no one has isolated the actual virus. Methods to
>>>>determine the alleged virus include searching for antibodies to the virus
>>>>through the use of Western Blot and Elisa tests. These labs tests do not
>>>>isolate the virus. They react to certain antibodies in the blood.
>>>> "The tests are inaccurate because there are at least 50 other
>>>>conditions, including mumps, diphtheria and venereal warts, that will
>>>>give a false positive," Joslyn explained. "They all produce antibodies that
>>>>will react to the materials used in labs te sts."
>>>>
>>>> "The tests are inconsistent because some people have tested positive,
>>>>then tested negative three months later," Joslyn said research has
>>>>proved. "Someone may test positive at one lab, and the same blood
>>>>sample will test negative at another."
>>>>
>>>> He points to the fact that Dr. Robert Gallo, the man co-credited with
>>>>the discovery of HIV, filed for the patent (worth billions) on the HIV
>>>>test only three days after he fraudulently announced he had discovered
>>>>the virus which causes AIDS.
>>>>
>>>> Gallo's discovery itself is the root of all questions pertaining to the
>>>>viral causation of AIDS. Since 1984, it has been assumed that HIV is the
>>>>sole and direct cause of AIDS. The announcement didn't come in the form
>>>>of published reports in medical re search journals from which other
>>>>scientists examine the data, retest the hypothesis and either prove or
>>>>disprove the theory. The announcement came from a highly publicized
>>>>Reagan administration press conference announcing an AIDS "cure" now
>>>>was within grasp.
>>>>
>>>> At that time, the country was demanding progress in AIDS research. AIDS
>>>>activists were in the streets. It was an election year. Jeremy Selvey
>>>>director of Project AIDS International (PAI) maintains that never once
>>>>has the HIV hypothesis (which is HIV= AIDS=Death) been proven
>>>>scientifically.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Even the alleged HIV co-discoverer Gallo admitted two years after his
>>>>landmark "discovery" announcement, in 1986, that he "saw no evidence"
>>>>that LAV (the French version of HIV) was the cause of AIDS.
>>>>
>>>> In 1988, Gallo retracted his hypothesis of the "direct killing" of T4
>>>>cells by HIV, and he suggested perhaps more important mechanisms than HIV
>>>>are contributing to T4 cell depletion in patients diagnosed with AIDS.
>>>>
>>>> In 1992, Gallo was convicted of science fraud by the US Office of
>>>>Research Integrity (a department of the National Institutes of Health
>>>>(NIH)) for claiming he had discovered HIV. The discovery was then
>>>>credited to French researcher Dr. Luc Montagnier who has stated on numerous
>>>>occasions: "I do not believe that HIV is in and of itself the cause of
>>>>AIDS. I believe we should place as much emphasis on potential co- factors
>>>>as we have on HIV."
>>>>
>>>> According to Selvey, Gallo who has since left the CDC and is working
>>>>independently for a university is under investigation by Congress on
>>>>various charges of science fraud. This, Selvey contends, further casts
>>>>doubts on the validity of all Gallo's research.
>>>>
>>>> Dissidents to the HIV hypothesis, like Selvey, claim Gallo who for
>>>>decades unsuccessfully tried to prove a virus was the cause of cancer
>>>>latched onto AIDS to revitalize funding for his research, and to take
>>>>attention away from his disappointing cancer research.
>>>>
>>>> Further, they claim the US government eager to disseminate any new
>>>>positive developments on the AIDS front, and thus get AIDS activists off
>>>>its back over-anxiously grabbed onto Gallo's "discovery" and touted it as
>>>>a miracle development.
>>>>
>>>> "Based on Gallo's unproven hypothesis that HIV is the sole and direct
>>>>cause of AIDS, the US Public Health Service has embarked on a campaign of
>>>>implied terror and misinformation that has continued to state HIV, the
>>>>virus which causes AIDS,' can be con trolled by getting tested for the
>>>>AIDS virus' and starting early intervention' in the event of a positive
>>>>test result.'" Selvey writes.
>>>>
>>>> "HIV, the virus which causes AIDS," Joslyn restates for emphasis. "If
>>>>you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes fact." "It is like a high
>>>>priesthood in science," Joslyn explains. "What they believe is what is
>>>>passed down to other scientists, doctors and the media. We're on the
>>>>lowest rung on the totem pole, and we're supposed to believe everything
>>>>they've told us."
>>>>
>>>> Joslyn believes doctors have no idea what research at the highest level
>>>>entails. Most merely prescribe the course of treatment based on the
>>>>dictates of the CDC. For the sake of argument, let us imagine that
>>>>everything we have been told about HIV and t esting for HIV antibodies is
>>>>based on false presumptions.
>>>>
>>>>What, then, causes AIDS?
>>>>
>>>> Enter AZT, the drug nicknamed "AIDS by prescription" by HIV dissidents
>>>>like Dr. Peter Duesberg, professor of molecular and cell biology at
>>>>University of California-Berkeley. A member of the National Academy of
>>>>Sciences, pioneer in retrovirus research, the first scientist to isolate
>>>>a cancer gene, and author of Inventing The AIDS Virus, Duesberg
>>>>brings a world of credentials to the AIDS dissident movement.
>>>>
>>>> But he is not new on the scene.
>>>>
>>>> Duesberg has been challenging the HIV hypothesis for the past ten
>>>>years. He believes AZT is one of the factors which, at the least,
>>>>makes AIDS worse.
>>>>
>>>> AZT is a nucleoside analogue DNA chain terminator. In other words, it
>>>>kills human cells indiscriminately by terminating DNA synthesis, which is
>>>>the central molecule of life. AZT was claimed as the only drug of the
>>>>AIDS crisis at a time when desperate AIDS patients had lost all hope.
>>>>Burroughs-Wellcome alleged they were the creators of AZT. This was "only
>>>>after realizing that a very profitable market existed for long-term'
>>>>treatment with the drug," Selvey said. It was uncovered by PAI that AZT
>>>>originally was created in 1961 by NIH researcher Dr. Richard Beltz. The
>>>>discovery was the result of his research on nucleoside analogues dating
>>>>back to 1951.
>>>>
>>>> According to Beltz, the reasons AZT was abandoned were: 1) Its extreme
>>>>toxicity made it unsuitable for any chemotherapy, even short-term, and 2)
>>>>It was carcinogenic (cancer causing) at any dose.
>>>>
>>>> Duesberg said, "Since AZT cannot distinguish HIV-infected cells from
>>>>uninfected cells, and only one in one thousand CD4 cells is ever
>>>>infected, AZT must kill 995 healthy cells for every one infected cell. AZT
>>>>suppresses HIV by suppressing the manufact uring of CD4 cells,
>>>>predictably causing anemia, immunodeficiency and other degenerative
>>>>diseases."
>>>>
>>>> In its defense, Burroughs-Wellcome cites numerous studies to
>>>>substantiate its claims that AZT both "prolongs life" and "enhances its
>>>>quality." PAI contends all studies that tout AZT's benefits were made
>>>>possible, either directly or indirectly, by gran t money from
>>>>Burroughs-Wellcome. Impartial studies done without the influence of
>>>>Burroughs-Wellcome indicate that AZT neither prolongs life or enhances
>>>>its quality, PAI charges, based on unreleased data from studies conducted by
>>>>the CDC.
>>>>
>>>> Following is a Burroughs-Wellcome list of side effects from AZT, the
>>>>drug it says "improves the quality of life:"
>>>>
>>>>Anemia, cancer, bone marrow depletion, nose bleeds, hematologic toxicity,
>>>>fever, malaise, loss of mental acuity, atrophy, diarrhea, diaphoresis,
>>>>headaches, insomnia, confusion, anorexia, vomiting, neuropathy, skin
>>>>rashes, anxiety, nausea, dizziness, impotence, depression, vertigo,
>>>>hearing loss, photophobia, nervousness, seizures, and leukocytopenia -
>>>>the immunodeficiency of white blood cells.
>>>>
>>>> In addition to the above, studies indicate that the original toxicity
>>>>profile of AZT was fraudulently reported. It actually is 1,000-times more
>>>>toxic to human cells than was originally reported, PAI documents. AIDS
>>>>and gay activists ACTing-UP and demanding expedited drug approval, Selvey
>>>>and Joslyn claim, played right into the hands of Burroughs-Wellcome's
>>>>bottom line.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps we should overlook the fact that, according to Joslyn,
>>>>BURROUGHS-WELLCOME PAID NIH A REPORTED SUM OF $300
>>>>MILLION FOR THE RIGHT TO MARKET AZT, WHICH PAI SAYS NIH
>>>>DEVELOPED WITH TAXPAYER FUNDS.
>>>>
>>>> At the sinister level, Selvey has published a report which states he
>>>>has a tape-recorded conversation with a low-level attorney who represented
>>>>Barr Labs of Canada which was working to try and wrestle patent rights
>>>>for AZT. The attorney allegedly explained to Selvey the trouble Barr Labs
>>>>was
>>>>having compared to the powerful Burroughs-Wellcome.
>>>>
>>>> Selvey wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Calmly [the attorney] said NIH sold AZT to Wellcome. Wellcome was
>>>>supposed to kick-back a large portion [of the profits] to the FDA, NIH
>>>>and the CDC, and the NIH would make grants to the private AIDS
>>>>organizations to promote the sale of more AZT, and the money would be
>>>>spread around. He stated that the FDA studies showing AZT's effectiveness
>>>>were so well done and the publicity campaign was comfortably in place, no
>>>>one expected this degree of success. Instead of following through with
>>>>kick- backs, Wellcome just grabbed the ball and ran with it,' and paid
>>>>the AIDS organizations directly."
>>>>
>>>> After the senior partner of the law firm representing Barr/NIH was
>>>>informed of the taped conversation, the junior attorney was dismissed,
>>>>Selvey said.
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, PAI has a copy of a check (which was viewed by Echo
>>>>magazine) it says Burroughs-Wellcome "laundered" through an NIH
>>>>foundation called FAES (Foundation for the Advancement of Education and
>>>>Science) to Dr. Sam Broder, who was on the NIH drug approval team, for
>>>>$55,000. The date on the check is July 7, 1985, about the time AZT was
>>>>licensed and approved for use on AIDS patients.
>>>>
>>>> How convenient.
>>>>
>>>> Imagine this hypothetical scenario from a drug company's point of view:
>>>>
>>>> *We have a disease which systematically breaks down the immune
>>>>system and kills over a period of time.
>>>> *We have a drug company with a 20-year-old worthless albatross
>>>>of a drug sitting on its shelves, whose only benefit to the human body is
>>>>that
>>>>it breaks down the immune system over a period of time and leads to
>>>>death.
>>>> *CDC estimates millions of people around the world will be
>>>>suffering from HIV by the turn of the century.
>>>> *Get the government to approve the drug for people already
>>>>experiencing immune system breakdown. They will die anyway. Who
>>>>is to say the drug did them in? Better yet, get AIDS organizations and the
>>>>government to recommend the use of AZT as soon as one gets a positive
>>>>test result.
>>>>
>>>> What do you have? A billions-of-dollars-a-year cash cow revolving
>>>>around treating people who are not clinically ill by giving them a toxic
>>>>course of treatment based upon an unproven hypothesis.
>>>>
>>>> It's not a matter of just picking on AZT. Other antivirals such as ddI,
>>>>ddC, D4t and 3TC, Joslyn says, also wreak havoc on the body's immune
>>>>system. Selvey is more specific. He said these "synthetically
>>>>manufactured molecules are being integrated into the genes of all human
>>>>cells; therefore, they block the replication of genes; thus causing a
>>>>deficit in new cells. Sooner or later there exists a lack of newly
>>>>produced immune cells which causes the condition called AIDS."
>>>>
>>>> What about tracking the amount of HIV in the bloodstream via the new
>>>>"viral load" tests? "Viral load PCR tests to measure the amount of HIV
>>>>in the blood (if that is what they really measure) are meaningless," Joslyn
>>>>contends, "because HIV does not cause AIDS."
>>>>
>>>>Coming next issue are answers to such questions as:
>>>>
>>>> Clearly, AIDS existed before AZT and other drugs. How do you
>>>>explain that?
>>>> Where have all the T-cells gone?
>>>> What about protease inhibitors?
>>>> Does a "cure" currently exist, or will there ever be one?
>>>>
>>>>The answers will shock and surprise you. One thing is certain. The gay
>>>>community will not be amused. [end]
>>>>_____________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>From ECHO magazine, issue #185, October 17, 1996,
>>>>vol. 8, no. 3. Their address is PO Box 16630 Phoenix, AZ 85011-6630.
>>>>Phone: 602-266-0550. FAX: 602-266-0773.
>>>>Email: Jeff4Echo@aol.com. Web site: http://www.echomag.com
>>>>
>>>>They have a bi-weekly distribution of 48,000.
>>>>
>>>>PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS, FAXES, EMAILS, ETC. to Jeff to encourage him.
>>>>
>>>>For more "AIDS-dissent" material, visit:
>>>>RETHINKING AIDS website: http://www.xs4all.nl/~raido/index.htm
>>>>_____________________________________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>===========================================================
>>>Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.: pmitch@primenet.com
>>>ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state
>>>===========================================================
>>>
>>>
> ****************************************************
> TRIAL BY JURY PROTECTS ALL RIGHTS
> ****************************************************
> "If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt
> for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it
> invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the
> criminal law the end justifies the means -- to declare that the
> Government may commit crimes in order to secure the convic-
> tion of a private criminal -- would bring terrible retributions."
> --Justice Louis D. Brandeis, dissenting,
> Olmstead et al. v. United States, 277 U.S. 485 (1928)
> ****************************************************
> Please remember the above when you read about the deeds of
> "confidential informants" on the government's payroll.
> ****************************************************
> Harvey Wysong
> National Spokesman, Fully Informed Jury Association
> 701 Longleaf Drive, Atlanta, Georgia 30342, U.S.A.
> hwysong@mindspring.com (404) 266-0930
> ****************************************************
>
>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail