Aletho News

2 Comments »

1. It’s now called the Faucipox. It spawned from all the bullshit he has been tossing around for the last two years!

   LikeLike

   Comment by papasha408 | May 24, 2022 | Reply

2. KARI MULLIS “DIED” 2019.
   I believe he was murdered!
   WHY?
   He was the Noble Prize Winner for creating the PCR TEST!
   SO?
   WHAT KARY MULLIS SAID ABOUT FAUCI & GALLO:
   ABC’s Nightline approached Mullis about participating in a documentary:
   The show was superb, and represented a historic turning point, possibly even the end of the seven-year media blackout on the HIV debate. But it still didn’t fulfil Mullis ultimate fantasy.

   “What ABC needs to do,” says Mullis, “is talk to [Chairman of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Dr. Anthony] Fauci and [Dr. Robert] Gallo [one of the discoverers of HIV] and show that they’re assholes, which I could do in ten minutes.”

   But, I point out; Gallo will refuse to discuss the HIV debate, just as he’s always done.

   “I know he will,” Mullis shoots back, anger rising in his voice. “But you know what? I would be willing to chase the little bastard from his car to his office and say, ‘This is Kary Mullis trying to ask you a goddamn simple question,’ and let the cameras follow. If people think I’m a crazy person, that’s okay. But here’s a Nobel Prize-winner trying to ask a simple question from those who spent $22 billion and killed 100,000 people. It has to be on TV. It’s a visual thing. I’m not unwilling to do something like that.”

   INTERVIEW KARY MULLIS
   AIDS; Words from the Front By Celia Farber, Spin July 1994
   We have not been able to discover any good reasons why most of the people on earth believe that AIDS is a disease caused by a virus called HIV. There is simply no scientific evidence demonstrating that this is true.
   We have also not been able to discover why doctors prescribe a toxic drug called AZT (Zidovudine) to people who have no other complaint than the presence of antibodies to HIV in their blood.

   In fact, we cannot understand why humans would take that drug for any reason.

   We cannot understand how all this madness came about, and having both lived in Berkeley, we’ve seen some strange things indeed. We know that to err is human, but the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is one hell of a mistake.

   “FAUCI DOESN’T KNOW ANYTHING REALLY ABOUT ANYTHING”

   Coronavirus
   PCR Inventor, and Noble Prize Winner, Kary Mullis Talks About Anthony Fauci —
   “he doesn’t know anything really about anything”
   Posted on Dec 10, 2020
   Watch ➥ LIBRY | YouTube
   Kary Mullis
   Kary Mullis (1944 – 2019) was an American biochemist and a chemistry Nobel laureate. He earned the prized recognition for his invention (alongside Michael Smith) of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method.
   The method he invented has been of extreme use and importance in both medical research and forensic science; however he was critical of its use in public health for quick tests.
   January 19, 2021 – Dr Martin issues the ‘The Fauci COVID-19 Dossier‘.
   Transcript of Clips
   Each separate clip is time-stamped below.
   Kary Mullis ➝ 00:00
   What is it about humanity that it wants to go to the all detail to stop and listen. Guys like Fauci get up there and start talking, and he doesn’t know anything really about anything, and I’d say that to his face. Nothing.
   The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope and if it’s got a virus in there, you will know it. He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and he doesn’t understand medicine. He should not be in a position like he’s in.
   Most of those guys up there on the top are just total administrative people and they don’t know anything about what’s going on with the bottom. You know, those guys have got an agenda, which is not what we would like them to have, being that we pay for them to take care of our health in some way.

   They’ve got a personal kind of agenda. They make up their own rules as they go. They change them when they want to and a smugly like Tony Fauci does not mind going on television in front of the people, face out, and lie directly into the camera.
   You can’t expect the sheep to really respect the best and the brightest. They don’t know the difference, really. I mean, I like humans, don’t get me wrong. But basically, there is a vast, vast majority of them do not possess the ability to judge who is and who isn’t really a good scientist.
   “Guys like Fauci get up there and start talking, and he doesn’t know anything really about anything, and I’d say that to his face. Nothing.”

   Kary Mullis, PhD
   Inventor of PCR, Nobel Laureate
   That’s a problem, that’s a main problem actually with science, I’d say, in this century. Because science is being judged by people. Funding is being done by people who don’t understand it. Who do we trust? Fauci? Fauci doesn’t know nothing, you know.

   If Fauci wants to get on television with somebody who knows a little bit about this stuff and debate him, he could easily do it because he’s been asked. And I’ve had a lot of people… President of the University of South Carolina asked Fauci if he can come down there and debate me on the stage in front of the student body because I wanted somebody who was from the other side to come down and balance my point, because I felt like, “Well, these guys can listen to me but I need to have somebody else down here that’s going to tell me the other side.” But he didn’t want to do it.
   Kary Mullis ➝ 02:09
   Epidemic.
   The number of cases reported went up epidemically, exponentially because the number of tests that was done went up exponentially. How many doctors knew about HIV in 1983? Two. How many knew about it in 1985? Say 500. How many knew about it in 1986? 40,000. So that’s where the curve came from. How many tests were done.

   Kary Mullis ➝ 2:34
   If it’s just caused by needles, or it’s just caused by homosexual activities. You’re not going to really get a whole long sustained public outcry against it. And nobody’s going to want to spend $6 billion a year. They’re going to say, well, we really don’t like those people. Anyhow. Great. I can’t think of a better solution to the homosexual problem than a disease that’ll kill them all. I mean, there’ll be congressmen that talk about that quietly. Not on television. So the CDC had to say, we can’t say that.

   We’re gonna say, it’s going to be, it’s got to be heterosexually transmitted. There’s no proof that it’s transmitted at all at that point. So why not just say, well, it’s heterosexually transmitted too [heterosexual transmission chains], because that made it a plague again. The CDC needed one. The CDC hadn’t had a good plague since polio. Their funding was probably going to be cut back if they didn’t come up with one. The guy that was the head of the CDC, in fact wrote memos that have been obtained, you know, where he describes this as hot stuff. You know, those guys have got an agenda, which is not what we would like them to have being that we pay for them to take care of our health.

   Kary Mullis ➝ 3:37
   And they are considered the final arbiters of what’s good for the planet or what’s bad for the planet. And they haven’t got the slightest idea. Instead of wearing white robes, they wear white lab coats, you know, instead of like bringing you the word of God, they bring the word of the, the EPA or whatever, and they don’t have to understand what it is that they’re making you do, in fact, and people, you know, just, I think they fall naturally into it because there is a need in humanity for something like a religion.
   Anthony Fauci ➝ 4:10
   Occasionally you get a false positive. Uh, under those circumstances, a western blot can absolutely confirm. Western blots are also important when you have people, for example, who have been vaccinated in vaccine trials and making antibody against one protein, the only way you’re going to tell if they’re infected serologically is by looking at a western blot, showing they make antibodies to the other protein. So it has a lot of value. It’s fundamentally a confirmatory diagnostic tests.
   Reporter ➝ 4:37
   More likely to be positive there because they use much more lax criteria. Yeah.
   Anthony Fauci ➝ 4:41
   I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with different countries having different criteria because the different criteria are only really for that small group of patients that come in the indetermined level. When a western blot is really positive, it hits you like a truck. It’s only for that little indeterminant group that you have to be concerned.

   “They change them when they want to and a smugly like Tony Fauci does not mind going on television in front of the people, face out, and lie directly into the camera.”
   Kary Mullis, PhD
   Inventor of PCR, Nobel Laureate
   Scientist ➝ 4:59
   In theory, at least, that if you were tested in New York today and then flew to Australia and you had three bands in New York, you would not be positive in Australia, but you would be positive in New York City. Now. I mean, a virus cannot behave in this manner.
   Stefan Lanka ➝ 5:12
   He lowered the sensitivity of the antibody test.
   Kary Mullis ➝ 5:15
   If they didn’t allow them to charge so much for it, I think that’d be a lot less use of it. You know, it’s just like in political scandals, follow the money trail, figure out who’s getting paid for this. Who’s getting the money for those western blots. There’s your person who’s going to always come down on the side of, yeah, you’ve got a confirmatory western blot cycle. They don’t even do them in England anymore, but it’s totally, it’s… And ask a doctor how it works. The doctor who prescribed, it says you gotta have a western blot to confirm this ELISA positive thing. How does that work, doctor, sir? How, how, what, what is, what are they now measuring about me that is different from what they measure with the ELISA test? He wouldn’t know, he’s not got any idea. I bet you there’s scarcely 50 physicians in this country that know what a western blot really is.
   Kary Mullis ➝ 6:04
   The thing that I learned like back in 1968, when I first published a paper by myself in Nature, in a field that I had no expertise in at all. There are no old wise men up there at the top of science where, which I would have, I really did until 68. I would’ve thought, you know, if you try to publish a dumb paper in a journal, like Nature, it won’t get published. If you try to publish a good paper in there, like I later tried to publish PCR, the invention of PCR in the same journal. And they didn’t take it. There isn’t enough there. There’s no place up on the… The Academy of Sciences is just a bunch of idiots, just like everybody else. You know, the editors of journals, austere journals, even. They’re just busy with their little lives and stuff. There are no old wise men up on the top, making sure that we don’t do something really dumb.

   More Resources:
   Dr Hodkinson — ‘This is the Greatest Hoax ever Perpetrated on an Unsuspecting Public’
   James Lyons-Weiler — Pathogenic Priming: Coronavirus Vaccine Safety Warning
   The Great Reset is Communism 3.0 — Martin Armstrong
   ________________________________________
   Sources:
   ‘AIDS Inc.’, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQVFA38j598 (Copyright Gary Null, 2007)
   https://twitter.com/TruthandFreedo8/status/1336767749012541443 (December 9, 2020)

   AIDS
   AIDS: Multiple Sex Partners; Multiple STDs; Multiple Antibiotics; Multiple-Drugs: Poppers, Cocaine, Heroin, Crac; Multiple infections; Deficient Diet leads to compromised immunity, result = AIDS

   It is indisputable that if an individual homosexual has extremely close contacts with a lot of people, the number of infectious organisms that this individual’s immune system is going to have to deal with will be high. If this person has 300 sexual contacts a year – with people who themselves are each having 300 contacts a year – that’s 90,000 times more opportunity for infections than a person involved in an exclusive relationship.

   In the 1970s we had a significant number of highly mobile, promiscuous men sharing bodily fluids and fast life styles and drugs. It was probable that such homosexuals would be exposed to near every infectious organism that has lived on humans.

   Science as it is practiced today in the world is largely not science at all.

   KARY MULLIS, NOBEL PRIZE WINNER IN CHEMISTRY

   The following was written by Kary Mullis for the introduction to the book “Inventing the AIDS Virus” by Peter H. Duesberg (Regnery Publishing, INC; Washington DC, 1996):

   In 1988 I was working as a consultant at Specialty Labs in Santa Monica, CA, setting up analytic routines for the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). I knew a lot about setting up analytic routines for anything with nucleic acids in it because I invented the Polymerase Chain Reaction. That’s why they hired me.

   Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), on the other hand, was something I did not know a lot about. Thus, when I found myself writing a report on our progress and goals for the project, sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, I recognized that I did not know the scientific reference to support a statement I had just written: “HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.”

   So I turned to the virologist at the next desk, a reliable and competent fellow, and asked him for the reference. He said I didn’t need one. I disagreed. While it’s true that certain scientific discoveries or techniques are so well established that their sources are no longer referenced in the contemporary literature, that didn’t seem to be the case with the HIV/AIDS connection. It was totally remarkable to me that the individual who had discovered the cause of a deadly and as-yet-uncured disease would not be continually referenced in the scientific papers until that disease was cured and forgotten. But as I would soon learn, the name of that individual – who would surely be Nobel material – was on the tip of no one’s tongue.

   Of course, this simple reference had to be out there somewhere. Otherwise, tens of thousands of public servants and esteemed scientists of many callings, trying to solve the tragic deaths of a large number of homosexual and/or intravenous (IV) drug-using men between the ages of twenty-five and forty, would not have allowed their research to settle into one narrow channel of investigation. Everyone wouldn’t fish in the same pond unless it was well established that all the other ponds were empty. There had to be a published paper, or perhaps several of them, which taken together indicated that HIV was the probable cause of AIDS. There just had to be.

   I did computer searches, but came up with nothing. Of course, you can miss something important in computer searches by not putting in just the right key words. To be certain about a scientific issue, it’s best to ask other scientists directly. That’s one thing that scientific conferences in faraway places with nice beaches are for.

   I was going to a lot of meetings and conferences as part of my job. I got in the habit of approaching anyone who gave a talk about AIDS and asking him or her what reference I should quote for that increasingly problematic statement, “HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.”

   After ten or fifteen meetings over a couple years, I was getting pretty upset when no one could cite the reference. I didn’t like the ugly conclusion that was forming in my mind: The entire campaign against a disease increasingly regarded as a twentieth century Black Plague was based on a hypothesis whose origins no one could recall. That defied both scientific and common sense.

   Finally, I had an opportunity to question one of the giants in HIV and AIDS research, DL Luc Montagnier of the Pasteur Institute, when he gave a talk in San Diego. It would be the last time I would be able to ask my little question without showing anger, and I figured Montagnier would know the answer. So I asked him.

   With a look of condescending puzzlement, Montagnier said, “Why don’t you quote the report from the Centers for Disease Control? ”

   I replied, “It doesn’t really address the issue of whether or not HIV is the probable cause of AIDS, does it?”

   “No,” he admitted, no doubt wondering when I would just go away. He looked for support to the little circle of people around him, but they were all awaiting a more definitive response, like I was.

   “Why don’t you quote the work on SIV [Simian Immunodeficiency Virus]?” the good doctor offered.

   “I read that too, DL Montagnier,” I responded. “What happened to those monkeys didn’t remind me of AIDS. Besides, that paper was just published only a couple of months ago. I’m looking for the original paper where somebody showed that HIV caused AIDS.

   This time, DL Montagnier’s response was to walk quickly away to greet an acquaintance across the room.

   Cut to the scene inside my car just a few years ago. I was driving from Mendocino to San Diego. Like everyone else by now, I knew a lot more about AIDS than I wanted to. But I still didn’t know who had determined that it was caused by HIV. Getting sleepy as I came over the San Bernardino Mountains, I switched on the radio and tuned in a guy who was talking about AIDS. His name was Peter Duesberg, and he was a prominent virologist at Berkeley. I’d heard of him, but had never read his papers or heard him speak. But I listened, now wide awake, while he explained exactly why I was having so much trouble finding the references that linked HIV to AIDS. There weren’t any. No one had ever proved that HIV causes AIDS. When I got home, I invited Duesberg down to San Diego to present his ideas to a meeting of the American Association for Chemistry. Mostly skeptical at first, the audience stayed for the lecture, and then an hour of questions, and then stayed talking to each other until requested to clear the room. Everyone left with more questions than they had brought.

   I like and respect Peter Duesberg. I don’t think he knows necessarily what causes AIDS; we have disagreements about that. But we’re both certain about what doesn’t cause AIDS.

   We have not been able to discover any good reasons why most of the people on earth believe that AIDS is a disease caused by a virus called HIV. There is simply no scientific evidence demonstrating that this is true.

   We have also not been able to discover why doctors prescribe a toxic drug called AZT (Zidovudine) to people who have no other complaint other than the fact that they have the presence of antibodies to HIV in their blood. In fact, we cannot understand why humans would take this drug for any reason.

   We cannot understand how all this madness came about, and having both lived in Berkeley, we’ve seen some strange things indeed. We know that to err is human, but the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is one hell of a mistake.

   I say this rather strongly as a warning. Duesberg has been saying it for a long time.

   LikeLike

   Comment by Pip | May 24, 2022 | Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

« Previous | Next »

Site info

Aletho News