Darin BrownHIV/AIDS theory cannot stand up in court
Posted by Henry Bauer on 2015/03/05
That is to say, it cannot stand up in court if lawyers know what they are doing; and they can know what they are doing if they have the assistance of the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice (OMSJ).
Several earlier blog posts have reported successful outcomes as a result of OMSJ intervention. Now they have won a case that is likely to have far-reaching consequences.
The story began 4 years ago: “Sex, Lies, Vaccines and the Destruction of Sgt. David Gutierrez”. Finally something very good has come out of it: “OMSJ: Military Appeals Court Overturns HIV Conviction”.
Hear from the lead attorney about the significance of this victory: “Just like that, about 25 years of risking an ‘aggravated assault’ or similar charge for not informing a sexual partner that you’re ‘HIV positive’ are effectively over. On February 23, 2015, the highest U.S. military court judged the risk of contracting ‘HIV’ from sex as so low that it is no longer a serious crime not to tell sexual partners”.
The facts have been crystal clear for a long time, that HIV/AIDS theory is bankrupt and has done and continues to do enormous damage to innumerable people (The Case against HIV). But people cannot be forced to look at or admit facts — except (at least sometimes) in court, where HIV/AIDS experts can be cross-examined and their misguided beliefs exposed as such.
When the era of HIV/AIDS finally ends, enormous credit will be owing to the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice.
HIV/AIDS Skepticism 
davidcrowe said
It is still a long road uphill, but we are several steps into the journey now.
David Bailey said
That is a remarkable victory, and I wonder if it will result in a large number of court cases being reviewed – which might generate a lot of publicity.
The incredible story about the legal status if HIV tests http://www.omsj.org/blogs/hiv-tests-explained
prompts me to ask if there are any other infectious diseases whose tests are equally unsatisfactory – nv-CJD perhaps?
Henry Bauer said
David Bailey:
John Scythes has pointed out that syphilis is very hard to diagnose, that the standard test is not very good. He thought some of the early “AIDS” cases might have been undiagnosed syphilis: http://www.colman.net/aids/
People who are concerned about Chronic Lyme disease have argued that it too is not easily diagnosed; its cause, like syphilis, is a spirochete.
I have no knowledge of others but have never looked.
davidcrowe said
Actually, syphilis is a lot worse than John Scythes believes: http://aras.ab.ca/articles/scientific/syphilis-and-aids.html
David Bailey said
I seem to have opened up something of a can of worms with my initial remark!
However, I noticed this sentence in your article to which you linked:
” Firstly, it was a dry run for AIDS, also believed to be a sexual disease predominant in blacks diagnosed with antibody tests, monitored by surrogate markers not health and treated with highly toxic compounds that were not claimed to be cures even in perfectly healthy people.”
The phrase “dry run” suggests that these hideous events were deliberate from the outset, whereas, while I am strongly tempted to believe that HIV != AIDS (I have not heard of your syphilis suspicions before), I find it far more likely that this was the result of initial carelessness than a non-disease being designed maliciously. Is that what you meant?
That is not to say that the suppression of the facts now is anything less than deliberate.
Henry Bauer said
David Bailey:
I don’t recognize that quote; what is “your article to which you linked”?
davidcrowe said
Henry, I was not being literal when I wrote ‘dry run’. I was not trying to imply a conspiracy. What I meant was that the reaction to the so-called epidemic, the blaming of black male sexuality, the reliance on unreliable tests and toxic therapies, the violations of human rights etc. etc, were a dry run for the reaction to the AIDS epidemic. I shouldn’t try to get creative with my language 😉
Henry Bauer said
David BAiley:
AHA! The article to which David Crowe linked.
David Bailey said
Good – two pieces of confusion resolved!