One for Ceffer: HIV/AIDS resurgent?

 invite response                
2022 Feb 12, 12:57am   8,899 views  100 comments

by AmericanKulak   ➕follow (8)   💰tip   ignore  


Been seeing a lot of talk about HIV/AIDS on a level I've not seen since the 90s.

Comments 1 - 40 of 100       Last »     Search these comments

3   Robert Sproul   2022 Feb 12, 6:32am  

Moderna has an HIV vaccine in trials. If this 'media promotion' is successful they can try for some EUA action.
In the future the over 2000 vaccines in the pipeline can be approved by them with a simple phone call.
4   Ceffer   2022 Feb 12, 9:57am  

Dunno. The Globalist plan was to get people used to serial shots, then use the vaccines to spread actual manufactured diseases and/or genetic modification/ trans humanism schemes. Bill Gates of course rode his sterilization schemes on the back of so called vaccines in Africa and successfully sterilized huge numbers of women there.
There is a reason they want the contents kept secret, and they also make different batches to different ends.

HIV AIDS resurgence appears to be a straw man to explain away vaccine injuries damaging immune systems as something else not related to the vaccines, like they have been trying to 'normalize' heart attacks and strokes in young people through MSM. VAIDS (vaccine induced AIDS) should probably be the moniker, but the Globalist wouldn't want that I presume. The Globalists are so utterly loathsome that the collapse of their plans could be making them hysterical in their deceptions. They clearly MUST act on the basis of deception, even when the truth might work better for them. Mandatory deception is the Satanist crap.

Like people around here have already stated, the HIV AIDS resurgence bullshit is likely a fake hue and call from the same suspects and is another programmed deception/ fear totem, like an old actress dragged back for a swan song.

I notice even on Patnet more 'civilians' have become fairly sophisticated on medical issues without medical background through sheer self education. If only that were true of the general population. It's weird to see from testimonials that even so called educated professionals and health workers share the same superstitions about medical issues, like there is a thought barrier in which they prefer the superstition to the information aka religious fog of war.
6   Patrick   2022 Feb 12, 11:41am  


50 MILLION doses of 'vaccine recalled as they triggered 'false positives' in HIV tests. The magnitude of this is beyond wrong. This is channel 7 news.
8   Patrick   2022 Feb 12, 1:07pm  

9   Kepi   2022 Feb 12, 2:37pm  

Booger says


Funny to see that. Curious.

About one month ago I was in the doc's office and he suggested getting an HIV test and ordered one. First time in my life. I have not done it.
10   stereotomy   2022 Feb 12, 2:44pm  

Like I told some random stranger (also proudly unmasked) at the grocery store yesterday, "I'm sure you always suspected that many of the people you know were idiots. Now you have the proof!" She laughed, "so true."
12   Ceffer   2022 Feb 12, 10:28pm  

LOL! AIDS is the new hot potato."Here, Pfizer, you catch it! No, Moderna, you catch it! Dr. Fauci, YOU catch it!"
13   Ceffer   2022 Feb 12, 10:30pm  

CDC declares they have never seen so many butt fuckers catching new, virulent strains of AIDS: "They must be moral degenerates, one and all, and who could possibly have imagined this would happen? These butt fuckers are just everywhere now!"
16   Patrick   2022 Feb 13, 10:36am  

My point is that you really don't know what's in those injections, so it comes down to trust in the pharma-government complex.

I don't see why any rational person would trust government agencies which are clearly captured by the very companies they exist to regulate.
17   Tenpoundbass   2022 Feb 13, 11:13am  

Not those that were forced to take it, but for those that actually took it against their better judgement, because they hate fucking Trump supporters, who just happen to swear they will never take it. I hope every last one of those dumb sons of bitches, low life cocksuckers, all catch it and die in a fortnight.
18   Ceffer   2022 Feb 13, 2:59pm  

I don't want anybody to die from vaccines, even if they are foolish, vicious or misdirected.

It was not their responsibility to be certain the vaccines were a benefit rather than intended to kill, it was the politicians and the whored out public health/medical establishment who were responsible. They all knew and accepted money to sell out the public to psychopaths who want to kill 90 percent of the human race.
19   Hircus   2022 Feb 13, 3:28pm  

Ceffer says

That doesnt look true. CDC IS a federal agency.
21   NuttBoxer   2022 Feb 13, 6:48pm  

So far, these warnings seem to all be emanating from England, but they've come from the Royal Family, and government, which I think is why they've caused alarm.

So is there any truth to this? Well, if you've been reading the research from the beginning, you know the shots have a negative impact on T-cells that are critical to the immune system. This has been reported from numerous studies and sources. From what I understand it's not exactly like AID's in that it won't deplete your white blood cells, although that guy(doctor)? who died in Florida after the shot had that exact symptom. But T-cell depletion apparently will give you the same net result, your immune system will be fucked, and you will struggle to fight off any infection, possibly forever. Sure sounds like AID's to me.

You all know I'm a firm believer that there is always a chance a condition can be cured or reversed. Here's hoping this is one of those conditions.
22   HeadSet   2022 Feb 13, 7:21pm  

Ceffer says

You might want to fact check a statement like "CDC is not a Federal Agency" before you post.
23   Patrick   2022 Feb 13, 7:25pm  

I checked that one too because I couldn't believe it.

The CDC is a captured federal agency, but it is still a federal agency.

24   Patrick   2022 Feb 13, 7:39pm  

Another one for @Ceffer


I think everything pointed out in the article is true, but I'm not sure it proves that the conspiracy was about anything other than money and power.
25   FortwayeAsFuckJoeBiden   2022 Feb 13, 8:23pm  

Vaccines don’t give aids, they do revive existing aids.

Gay community gonna be lit lol
26   Patrick   2022 Feb 13, 8:46pm  

Fortwaynemobile says
Vaccines don’t give aids, they do revive existing aids.

Seems to be true about herpes virus:


So it's possible with AIDS too.
27   Ceffer   2022 Feb 13, 10:27pm  

I think the error is that CDC Foundation is a private corporation. The CDC is a federal agency.
However, if anything captured the CDC, it is the so called foundation part. A private funded corporation lobby basically runs it, no matter the taxpayer input.

"Although the CDC Foundation was chartered by Congress, it is not a government agency nor is it a division of CDC. It is a private, nonprofit organization classified as a 501(c)(3) public charity. To connect with CDC Foundation, click here ."

As soon as you see 'private' associated with these so called foundations, it means external control, lobbying, monetization and bribe funneling. The Foundation is the conduit for Pharma controlling the CDC.

I think when the article stated that the CDC is private, he just cuts to the chase about who is really in control of it, though he did it in an inaccurate citation about CDC itself. The technicality is that CDC is nominally a federal agency, but is essentially influenced by a private corporation, the Foundation. It's a nice way of nazifying the so called government agency.

In spite of the altruistic baloney in the mission statements, employees can look forward to cushy jobs in the foundation part, and the conflicts of interest are vast, with lots of Pharma shareholders in the ranks. Just like Congress and the military!

You see all those Pharma executives just flipping back and forth between government agencies and the private sector. They aren't wearing different hats when they do, they are all Pharma all the way.
28   Ceffer   2022 Feb 13, 10:54pm  

HIV segments have been identified in the Covid 19 lab produced genome. AIDS is acquired immune deficiency syndrome, which describes a state of the immune system without necessarily clarifying cause.

Notice that the recommendations are to get tested for AIDS the syndrome, not HIV specifically. HIV and AIDS should not be used interchangeably, as you can have the syndrome (AIDS) without necessarily it being HIV( a virus causing AIDS).

That's why they are calling it VAIDS, or vaccine induced AIDS and not HIV. If anybody ever finds out what exactly is in the vaccines, I wouldn't be surprised if somebody would find HIV or HIV genome material in there, like lab generated Covid 19, but I don't think that it is specifically known yet.

However, it does appear that the publicity engines are trying to make it look like HIV AIDS could be the cause of the AIDS resurgence, and not the vaccines, or they would like the public to be deceived and confused along those lines. I guess they are encouraging the new cottage industry of home HIV tests to shift the frame and the blame.

If you get a 'home HIV test' and it is negative and you are vaxxed to the max, then you probably don't think you have AIDS when you might very well have AIDS from the vaccine. It's another nice diversionary ploy. Anybody investing in 'home HIV' test kits? Is it in Nancy's magic portfolio?
29   Patrick   2022 Feb 13, 10:58pm  

I think it is already widely known and admitted that at least portions of the HIV virus are in the vaccine.

There was a BBC article about it somewhere.
32   Ceffer   2022 Feb 13, 11:23pm  

This article states that the boosters have HIV strains in them. I think that needs confirmation, because if is true, it is an extreme vector tool. However, there could be confusion concerning HIV genome segments and fragments vs. intact HIV virus particles. Montagnier recommends AIDS testing. I am not aware that he made a statement about HIV testing. Does anybody know if he recommended HIV testing vs. AIDS testing? The fog of confusion is being exploited by both sides it seems.
34   Ceffer   2022 Feb 14, 9:51am  

Test for HIV; a test for presence of HIV virus or viral segments

Test for AIDS: a test to determine if the immune system is properly functioning.

HIV test is not equivalent to testing for AIDS, they are two different things.

It is possible to have positive HIV test and not have AIDS. It is possible to have AIDS, but not test positive to HIV.

If you test positive for AIDS, then you then proceed to determine a source, which may or not be HIV. HIV has been a common cited 'cause' of AIDS.

AIDS was determined as a condition several years before HIV was cited as a 'cause' of AIDS. However, even that has remained controversial to some observers.

Don't waste your time with home HIV tests. If you engage in risky sex, intravenous shared needles, or have had transfusions, then a proper lab test for HIV may be indicated. A home HIV test will not tell you if you have vaccine induced AIDS, or AIDS of any kind.

It seems there is an ad hoc propaganda effort to promote the confusion between AIDS and HIV as equivalency in order to mask the association of AIDS with the vaccines. Whether vaccines or boosters actually contain HIV or fragments of HIV, I am not certain that any cause and effect relation between such fragments and VAIDS (vaccine induced AIDS) is currently established. I suppose they could be, and I wouldn't put it past the architects of the vaccines, but I don't know if it has been specifically demonstrated. There does seem to be an emerging association between AIDS and the vaccines (VAIDS) which the usual suspects are trying to gaslight or hide.
35   Patrick   2022 Feb 14, 10:03am  


We are currently witnessing a major epidemic caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019- nCoV). The evolution of 2019-nCoV remains elusive. We found 4 insertions in the spike glycoprotein (S) which are unique to the 2019-nCoV and are not present in other coronaviruses. Importantly, amino acid residues in all the 4 inserts have identity or similarity to those in the HIV-1 gp120 or HIV-1 Gag. Interestingly, despite the inserts being discontinuous on the primary amino acid sequence, 3D-modelling of the 2019-nCoV suggests that they converge to constitute the receptor binding site. The finding of 4 unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV, all of which have identity /similarity to amino acid residues in key structural proteins of HIV-1 is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature. This work provides yet unknown insights on 2019-nCoV and sheds light on the evolution and pathogenicity of this virus with important implications for diagnosis of this virus.

From Jan 2020
36   Al_Sharpton_for_President   2022 Feb 14, 10:17am  

Do these HIV aa inserts code for epitopes that bind to CD4 receptors is a question.
37   Patrick   2022 Feb 14, 10:39am  

@Al_Sharpton_for_President You seem to know more about this than I do.

So are you saying that the spike protein could infect white blood cells via the CD4 receptor like HIV does?
38   Al_Sharpton_for_President   2022 Feb 14, 10:53am  

Patrick says
@Al_Sharpton_for_President You seem to know more about this than I do.

So are you saying that the spike protein could infect white blood cells via the CD4 receptor like HIV does?
It is a question. IF the HIV inserts code for epitopes (discrete protein bits) that bind to cellular receptors, like CD4 and CCR5, and the body's immune system attacks the protein bound cells, either via innate immunity or via adaptive immunity caused by infection or immunization, then mucho problemas. CD4 is present o CD4 T cells, of course, as well as monocytes. CCR5 is also expressed on T cells and monocytes.

Or, if the virus binds to T cells and monocytes via these epitopes in its spike protein, the infected cells are toast.

Hopefuly these inserts are not present in the spike protein gene therapies, just the virus. But as I understand it, the sequence used for the gene therapies came from the viral sequence, and so they may in fact be in the "vaccines."

So whether during the process of viral replication, these possible binding bits are released, or when the virus gets digested by cells of the immune system, freeing these bits, or when the virus dies naturally, freeing these bits, is only an hypothesis. IF they are released and bind to cellular receptors, the immune system will take out the cells. If these cells include T cells and monocytes, AIDS. Cancer, too.

Likewise if the virus uses these sequences to bind to receptors on the immune cells to infect them, bad news.

If the sequences are present in the gene therapies' spike protein, we know that these "vaccines" result in soluble circulating spike protein, which if binding to immune cells, will result in their being taken out. This would be consistent with Luc Montagnier's concerns about the gene therapies.

From your referenced publication: "The first 3 inserts (insert 1,2 and 3) aligned to short segments of amino acid residues in HIV-1 gp120."

And what we know about HIV-1 gp120: "Gp120 is essential for viral infection as it facilitates HIV entry into the host cell and this is its best-known and most researched role in HIV infection." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20088758/

"The selectivity of CD4+ cell destruction is due to the specific binding of gp120, the external envelope glycoprotein of HIV, to CD4, initiating viral entry. Binding of gp120 to CD4 on the cell surface may also lead to CD4+ cell depletion by inappropriate immune targeting, and may interfere with CD4+ cell function and ontogeny by disrupting CD4-mediated cell signaling." https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1910691/

It's be a heckuva strategy to make a bioweapon, just saying.
39   mell   2022 Feb 14, 3:32pm  

Hold on, a protein usually cannot infect cells, only viruses can. There is the exception of prions, it's not clear yet if and how infectious they are although research seems to be suggestive of some sort of infectious process in select cases. Infiltration and possible damage or destruction is not the same as infection which would necessitate replication as well,no?
40   Al_Sharpton_for_President   2022 Feb 14, 4:01pm  

Yes, Mell. We know that soluble spike protein binds to the ACE-2 receptor. And that the gene therapies do create soluble spike protein; the protein just doesn't stay localized at the site of gene therapy injection. So the spike protein that binds to ACE-2 receptors in cardiac tissue, for example, acts as a beacon for immune cells that have been instructed to recognize it via "vaccination", previous infection, or just via innate immunity. And the immune cells kill the protein bound cells.

Now if (underscore if) the referenced HIV sequences are present in the gene therapy produced spike protein, and if the sequences cause the soluble spike protein bind to CD4, the same thing will happen, that is, CD4 cells will be targeted and taken out. This is the "CD4+ cell depletion by inappropriate immune targeting" described in the last reference above. So while Gp120 enables HIV entry into the cell, it does this by first binding to CD4. The spike protein is not a virus, but it might be able to bind to CD4 and act as a beacon for "inappropriate immune targeting" if it is enabled to do so by the presence of the gp120 amino acid sequences.

Comments 1 - 40 of 100       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions