In June, 19, the results of the Army's  (46 of ) mandatory testing were released to the Second World Congress on AIDS. The false-positive results were so low as to be statistically irrelevant. Colonel Donald F. Burke was the officer in charge of administering the HIV-tests to recruits. His meticulous record keeping has never been questioned, nor the credibility of his report that there was only one false positive test per 130,000 recruits. Even more striking was Colonel Burke's report that by 1983, the Army had developed techniques which cut the rate of false-positive tests to one in a million. Why have the gay lobby and the Olympians gone to such lengths to prevent mandatory testing? Because they want the public kept in ignorance about how widespread AIDS has become. Mandatory testing would reveal to the public that AIDS is much more widespread than now believed. The Olympians do not want AIDS slowed down by informed public demands for proper epidemic controls. There is no merit to the argument that a law requiring mandatory AIDS testing would lead to the violation of gay civil rights or that gays would become the target of an incensed population. The U.S.

Army has shown that testing for HIV can be made simple, non-intrusive and highly accurate. The idea that a fatal disease must not be identified in a carrier because it might lead to a deprivation of his civil rights is simply bizarre. Yet the gay lobby persists in its destructive course. The International Gay Alliance has grown bold enough to ask for "observer status" at the United Nations. A number of U. N. delegates, including the American delegation, are acting as "ex-officio" representatives for the International Gay Association, thus making AIDS even more of a political issue rather than a fundamental life-and-death matter of epidemic control and public health. The gay leadership wrongly a fatal mistake believes it has the sympathy and protection of government. Undoubtedly that is true of many compassionate people who work in government and are as unwitting of the real cause of AIDS as anyone else. But the truth about some of those powerful enough to manipulate government at the highest levels The Olympians is exactly the opposite. To the gays, I say this with my deepest conviction, after years of researching the AIDS epidemic: government is your enemy, not your friend. Relatively useless laws passed to protect gay civil rights are nothing but a red herring to draw attention away from the real problem. The real solutions to the AIDS epidemic for everyone do not lie in the current policies. Much of the leadership of the gay community does not appear to have grasped this nasty truth. Gays are being duped by a government that has targeted them for death. To those who would ask: "Is that even possible?" I would say: Look very closely at what the top virologists and microbiologists in the world were secretly discussing with each other at the Banbury Conference in the spring of 1985.

On April 28-May 1, 1985, the Banbury Conference on Genetically-Altered Viruses and Environment was held at Banbury Center Laboratories. Banbury Center is the former Eugenics Records Office in Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island. The old Harriman laboratories, which began in 1904 with eugenics experiments designed to create a "perfect" white race and worked for the destruction of blacks and poor whites during the pellagra scourge and opened its facilities to German Nazi scientists during the Thirties, hosted this event.17 The world's foremost molecular biologists and virologists assembled for a conference on: the epidemiology of viruses altered by man. While ostensibly held under the auspices of the Cold Spring Harbor facility, the gathering was carefully supervised and monitored by the U.S. government. At the instruction of several U.S. intelligence agencies, the proceedings deemed sensitive were held under conditions of strict secrecy. The official sponsors of the conference were almost all multinational corporations or their private foundations with close links to the Olympians. The roster was as follows: IBM. The Grace Foundation Inc. Texaco Philanthropic Foundation Inc.

The Chevron Fund. The Dow Chemical Company. Exxon Corporation. Phillips Petroleum Foundation Inc. The Bristol Myers Fund Inc. Rockwell International Corporation Trust. The Procter and Gamble Company. These organizations all donated large sums of money for future research. The U.S. government also contributed a substantial amount of money, although the exact amount could not be determined. Letters of inquiry about this use of taxpayer funds, addressed to the General Accounting Office, went unanswered. Other corporate sponsors who donated various sums of money were mainly drawn from the Olympian network, and for this reason, they are significant: E. L. du Pont de Nemours and Company. Hoffman-La Roche. Monsanto Company. Agrigenics Corporation. Beckton Dickinson and Company.  (48 of ) Ciba-Geigy Corporation. Genetics Institute. Johnson and Johnson. Schering Plough Corporation. UpJohn Company. Genentech Inc. American International. Biogen S.A. Eli Lilly and Co. Pall Corporation. American Cyanamid Company. Cetus Corporation. Pfizer Inc. CPC International Inc. Mitsui Toatsu Chemicals Inc. Smith Kline and French Laboratories.

Nearly all of the above are top companies in the pharmaceutical industry or leaders in genetic research. All are connected in one way or another with David Rockefeller, the Harrimans and the Morgan Banks. In the spring of 1985, the American public was not yet concerned about AIDS. The President of the United States had never spoken the word publicly. It was still regarded as a curse upon drug addicts and homosexuals. Most Americans believed that their odds of infection were about the same as hitting the lottery. Rock Hudson was still alive. It was his death that October that shocked the national media and the public into asking serious questions about this thing called AIDS.

The notion that it was created by human hand was nothing more than sick fantasy. Fact or fantasy? You decide after reading E. D. Kilbourne's paper "Epidemiology of Viruses Altered By Man" presented to the Conference. Kilbourne went into great detail about what he called a "maximally malignant monster virus," (MMMV) which he stated could be created in spite of the difficulties that would be encountered in synthesizing it. His paper was, in effect, a mere confirmation, although he posed it hypothetically: "Because we know the primary structure of many viral genes and have the technical capacity to synthesize both genes and gene products, it would appear that planned design of friendly or unfriendly viruses is not too remote a possibility. If the latter should be the perverse goal of our paranoid society, can we construct a virus worse than rabies virus with its 100 percent fatality rate or influenza with its pandemic potential for twenty million deaths worldwide? Hypothetically: yes. "But if the creation of MMMV is unlikely to the point of absurdity, we must also appreciate that in the proper setting single base changes may be sufficient to significantly influence viral properties, including virulence.   Then in an amazing revelation, Kilbourne seemed to come close to admitting that AIDS was indeed a created retrovirus, although he did not actually name it: "The more imaginative vistas of genetic engineering are concerned less with the modification of existing viruses than with the segregation and manipulation of single virus genes. Perforce, the epidemiology of virus genes in new environmental or even different temporal context must be considered." In other words, the creation of new retroviruses was what appealed to the most advanced microbiologists. Kilbourne then issued a warning that the freezers of most laboratories "are potential if unlikely sources of new pathogens…

Manipulation of the genes of viruses capable of genetic reassortment must not be undertaken without awareness that these viruses comprise an extended genotype or gene reservoir available for interspecific viral gene transmission." Research of this nature was precisely what was done at Fort Detrick and Los Alamos and Cold Spring Harbor. One of the most telling admissions during the Conference came when it was disclosed that the purpose of genetic tinkering with the envelope of the HIV virus was to broaden the range of target cells for infection. Dr. Robert Gallo, the head of AIDS research for the National Institutes of Health, attended the Banbury Conference and felt safe enough to admit, in a moment of spontaneity, that deliberate genetic tampering with viruses had created new, unnatural lethal viruses. In the discussions that followed the presentation of a paper, "Genomic Variations of HTLV-III/LAV, the Retrovirus of AIDS," co-authored by Beatrice H. Hahn, George Shaw, Flossie Wong Staal and Gallo himself, one of the delegates, H. Fields, asked the following question: "If you took the HTLV LTR's or the region involving transcription and put it into other retroviruses or other viruses, would you have any concern about it in terms of the hosts or the environment?"

As if unthinkingly, Gallo blurted out: "It is already being done." In plain language, what Fields was asking was: "If we made dangerous new viruses, would you be worried about it?" Fields followed up by asking: "What would be the nature of your concern, considering everything you have done?" As a scientist regarded (wrongly) as a world-class microbiologist, Gallo was supposed to be doing everything in his power to stop the march of AIDS. He answered: "I am not overly concerned about attaching the HTLV-III LTR to the genome of other retroviruses because there is much evidence that the cytopathic genome of HTLV III does involve the need for specific regions of the HTLV genome. I would be concerned about doing things that broaden the range of target cells for infection or if something we've done to alter the envelope gives it greater capacity for survival. I would be concerned."  

If something we've done to alter the envelope gives it greater capacity for survival. I would be concerned. He went on to say: "Incidentally even HTLV-I is spreading in many parts of the world because it has a very long latency period and only a 1:100 disease-to-virus infection ratio. It is much less evident, but I suspect HTLV-I is going to be an increasing problem 10-30 years from now. In summary, I would evaluate each planned alteration carefully." I would evaluate each planned alteration carefully. Gallo's own words can lead only to the conclusion that the alteration of the structure of viruses was ongoing in 1985, and already far advanced. At a closed session of the proceedings, discussions were held about the research of a group of British doctors who wrote a paper stating that they had found the answer to why certain people appear to get AIDS more readily than others. It was in the genes. Doctors Lesley Jane Eales, Keith Nye and Anthony Pinching found the method of isolating the right gene that resists AIDS and the gene that does not. This should have been an important landmark in AIDS research, qualifying the doctors for the Nobel Prize. But instead of world-wide recognition for their astounding achievement, Dr. Pinching, leader of the team, was forced to withdraw the group's findings on the specious grounds that "an error was subsequently discovered and some of the data was flawed." The three British pioneers had to be forced underground. Their findings would have caused political explosions around the world.

Even the layman would have understood why Africa and Brazil and Haiti were being ravaged by AIDS, while the disease was not spreading as rapidly in Western Europe and the United States: the British scientists had discovered that the AIDS virus attacked the GC-1 gene, common to blacks and "coloreds," more redily than the GC-2 gene common to whites. This would explain why blacks and Hispanics in the U.S. are contracting the disease at a much faster rate than whites: They're genetically more susceptible to HIV.18 The report of proceedings at Cold Spring Harbor betrayed their true arrogance. Their conclusion was that the world would never believe that the AIDS virus was the result of genetic reprogramming. There was nothing to worry about. The public should just continue to be told that the creation of such a dangerous retrovirus belonged in the realm of the absurd. Any attempt to open up the truth about genetic tampering which led to the birth of the AIDS virus and others yet to emerge would simply be denied and explained away. (Which is exactly what has happened ever since.) A year after the Banbury Conference, in 19, there was, as one intelligence report described it, "a further gathering of the initiated at Cold spring Harbor."

They were there to hear Professor W. Bodmer of the Imperial Cancer Research Institute, a world-renowned Oxford geneticist, speak on "The Molecular Biology of Homo Sapiens." Here is a quote from the intelligence report: "Behind closed doors several delegates expressed the view that population explosion was the greatest threat to the stability of the world, echoing the words of Sir Julian Huxley19 Harbor Conference: "population growth is the most alarming problem and loss of genetic quality must be reversed." "Professor Bodmer began his address by saying: 'Analyses of normal human variability in facial features, character and mental abilities is surely one of the real challenges of human genetics. Now, with the availability of polymorphic DNA markers, there is a well-defined approach. The DNA technology that is now available should in due course be able to answer the question as to whether indeed the genes that control facial features and certain aspects of behavior are closely linked…Knowledge of the total human genome sequence has profound implications, not only for the analysis, prevention, and treatment of disease, but also for the better understanding of normal variations, and through that, hopefully, making a contribution to solving broader problems of society.' "Behind closed doors, Bodmer left his listeners in no doubt that one of the greatest 'broader problems of society' was overpopulation of the world by 'undesirables,' and population explosions among black nations urgently needed to be arrested and stopped altogether, and their populations drastically reduced. Although the word AIDS was not mentioned, the sum and substance of Bodmer's remarks left his audience in no doubt that genetically-engineered retroviruses were the only hope of achieving the desired goal." But the top scientists in the most powerful institutions were hard at work on those genetically-engineered retroviruses.

"It is already being done." "If something we've done to alter the envelope gives it greater capacity for survival." "I would evaluate each planned alteration carefully." Dr. Robert Gallo Cold Spring Harbor, 1985 All along, the establishment's AIDS "hero" has been Dr. Robert Gallo of the National Cancer Institute. Described for years by the press as the "co-discoverer of the AIDS virus" and "the nation's leading AIDS researcher," Gallo has argued ferociously that AIDS cannot be spread by casual contact of any kind. He has led the way in ridiculing "alarmist" beliefs about the transmission of the disease. But Dr. Gallo's own credibility has suffered severely in the last few years. Dr. Luc Montagnier of the Pasteur Institute in Paris has always contended that his early laboratory test results were stolen by some unknown Americans, and that Dr. Gallo could not, and did not, isolate the AIDS virus in 1982. A committee of inquiry was called by the National Institutes of Health to investigate several aspects of Dr. Gallo's research.  (52 of ) Among the most important questions about Dr. Gallo:

1) When did Dr. Gallo recognize that the researchers working with Dr. Montagnier in Paris had isolated the AIDS virus?

2) How was it possible that the AIDS virus isolated by Dr. Gallo was a genetic twin of the one isolated by Dr. Montagnier in Paris?

3) How can Dr. Gallo explain the impossibility of the two viruses, isolated thousands of miles apart, being the twin of each other, given the fact that AIDS viruses mutate at such a rapid rate? The virus could only have mutated in one place, in Paris or at the National Cancer Institute in the U.S. But not in both places at the same time.

4) Given the fact that the Paris laboratory isolated the virus two years before Dr. Gallo announced his "findings," Dr. Gallo must have kept quiet about his "results" for two years. Why would he have done that? 5) In his original article in Science magazine, Dr. Gallo claimed that the French and American viruses were different viruses. How can he explain that impossibility?

A strong case exists that Dr. Gallo's "records" of his "discovery" of the AIDS virus were a complete fraud. He was in such hot water that it looked like he might face the public disgrace of being forced to return the $303,000 he had received in royalties for his "testing." The controversy over Dr. Gallo's role or faked role in the discovery of the AIDS virus had profound implications for the public which paid little attention. Because if Gallo was dishonest with the press, the public and his colleagues about his claim of "co-discovery" of AIDS, then why should he be trusted in his explanations of how difficult it is to transmit the disease? Unfortunately, the public will never know the answers to those questions about Dr. Gallo.

Once again, the scientific world closed ranks. Gallo's battle with the Pasteur Institute ended in a sordid compromise between himself and Dr. Luc Montagnier. Jonas Salk, the discoverer of the Polio vaccine, stepped in and "brokered" a deal that would allow the scientists to keep their secrets to themselves and protect their professional reputations. But the whole dirty business was done at the expense of the public. Dr. Abraham Karpas, Assistant Director of Research, Clinical School of Medicine at Cambridge University captured its essence in a letter of protest he wrote to Dr. Robert Windon, Assistant for Health, Department of Human Services, Washington, D.C.: "There is no question in my mind that certain scientists at the National Cancer Institute are responsible for the lost years in AIDS research. You must realize that this resulted in the logarithmic increase in the number of cases of AIDS virus infection both through sexual intercourse and the transfusion of thousands of units of contaminated blood.  

"Progress in AIDS research was delayed by a full year while Drs. Gallo and Essex published eight articles on HTLV, the rare human leukemia virus (also known to be the cause of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome), as the cause of AIDS. In the process they prevented directly and indirectly the publication of medical and scientific data that HTLV was not involved in AIDS and that another virus was the cause of this new disease. As a result, many thousands of individuals became infected with contaminated blood and the virus kept on spreading at an accelerated pace. "Only after Dr. Gallo received the AIDS virus from France and managed to grow it did he change its name from LAV to HTLV-II and claim himself as the discoverer. In order to justify calling it HTLV-II, Gallo with Wong Staal presented scientific 'data' on the similarity of the HTLV-I and the HTLV-II, which they published in Science and Nature, thereby causing further deadly delay in AIDS research by sending newcomers to this field into blind alleys. "There is no question in my mind that Dr. Gallo is responsible for the large number of infections especially through blood transfusions during the lost year.… I find it amazing that this situation is being tolerated in the U.S.A.