Note: This website has no control over the ads placed on it. Caveat emptor.

1992 flyer, with 1999 introduction  [Skip intro][c. 3,800 words] [End]

Everything Government says about AIDS is false.


In 1992, Homosexuals Intransigent! issued a one-page flyer to point out the absurdities in the HIV theory of the causation of AIDS. We sent out several hundred copies of this flyer to newspapers, TV news departments,  talk-show hosts, and to private persons who contacted us for general information. Now we offer the text below. But first, an introduction.

Gay men have been terrorized for over a decade by malicious, knowing lies uttered by the U.S. Government for the express purpose of scaring people out of homosexuality. The lies started early. The January 1982 issue of Discover Magazine said that a malady that came to be known as AIDS had started to appear a year and a half earlier: mid-1980. (Page 12, "In the News" department, item "Outbreak":  "In the past year and a half, CDC recorded about 170 cases of Pneumocystis pneumonia and a cancer called Kaposi's sarcoma. These diseases had previously been found in people whose immune systems were known to be deficient, suppressed by either illness or drugs....") Yet Government says that AIDS started in mid-1981. Why? Who knows?  Perhaps it's because if AIDS had started a year earlier, the numbers would not have been as alarming as Government wanted them to be. Perhaps it's because if "full-blown" AIDS had started in mid-1980, all the numbers would have had to be MUCH larger.

(Note that the item from Discover recognized in 1982 that the immune system can be "suppressed by . . . drugs." You're not supposed to know that, and certainly not supposed to think about it. But we know that the immune system can be suppressed by drugs, because otherwise there could be no organ transplants!)

Now, new AIDS cases have been declining for a minimum of 5 years, but you're not supposed to know that either. The CDC claims that AIDS has been declining only since 1996 — which is quite a while nonetheless. In actuality, however, the rate of new AIDS cases has been declining since 1994. Check for yourself. Go to the CDC's "HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report" online: and check out lines 1, 2, and 3 of Table 11 ("AIDS cases by year of diagnosis and definition category") in any Surveillance Report prior to 1998. (These are .PDF files that require Adobe Acrobat Reader.) Table 11 used to be Table 10. But the data it presents is so starkly revealing of CDC fraud and bad faith that people started to tell others to check out Table 10. The CDC first changed that table's number and then, in 1998, eliminated the table from Surveillance Reports altogether! Check out pre-1998 Surveillance Reports while they are still online, because the CDC will surely want to delete them entirely from the public record as soon as possible.  These are the relevant numbers. Note that they differ from one year-end report to the next (supposedly because of reporting delays), but the trend is nonetheless plain:  DOWN.

In case you don't know, AIDS has been "redefined" at least three times, once in about 1985; once in 1987; and once in 1993. Each time, more "indicator diseases" were included, essentially to boost the numbers, in order better to scare people. The 1993 "redefinition" boosted the numbers by 75%!, and included as indicator diseases several forms of cancer, even tho T-cells, which HIV is supposed to kill, do not fight cancer, so depleting T-cells would not give rise to cancer, and thus no form of cancer would be an indicator of AIDS if AIDS is the result of T-cell depletion. Here, then, are the numbers for the last three definitions as reported by the CDC.

Line 1, new cases of "Pre-1987 definition" AIDS
Year-End 1996 Surveillance Report, Table 11 Year-End 1997 Surveillance Report, Table 11
1993:  28,265
1994:  22,064 1994:  25,542
1995:  16,449 1995:  18,511
1996:    8,227 1996:   13,002
1997:     6,358

Line 2, new cases of "1987 definition" AIDS
Year-End 1996 Surveillance Report, Table 11 Year-End 1997 Surveillance Report, Table 11
1993:  14,992
1994:  11,942 1994:  12,550
1995:    9,305 1995:  10,228
1996:    4,736 1996:     7,543
1997:     3,752

Line 3, new cases of "1993 definition" AIDS
Year-End 1996 Surveillance Report, Table 11 Year-End 1997 Surveillance Report, Table 11
1993:  35,201
1994:  34,384 1994:  35,117
1995:  34,933 (blip; trend resumes next year) 1995:  37,494 (blip; trend resumes next year)
1996:  23,860 1996:   34,111
1997:   21,043

So AIDS has been declining since at least 1994, not 1996. (Actually, I think the numbers of "Pre-1987 Definition" and "1987 Definition" AIDS have been declining since around 1991, but I don't have those numbers handy, and it takes a long time to get any info from the CDC's online server. I'm not even sure reports that old are still online. If you're interested, you can certainly check that site. Suffice it to say that the CDC's claims that AIDS has declined only in the past two years are LIES, as shown by their own information in Table 11 before 1998.)

Another oddity about this supposed STD is that AIDS is distributed wildly unevenly across the country, which makes no sense for a sexually transmitted disease in a country with as much movement of people, as both residents and tourists, as the present-day United States.  "During 1998, . . . more than half (57%) [of new AIDS cases were] from the [five] states of New York, Florida, New Jersey, California, and Texas." The other 45 states accounted for only 43% of the Nation's AIDS cases! What transmissible disease follows such a pattern year after year?

AIDS has practically vanished from most of the country and even, within those five supposedly afflicted states, from the bulk of society, retreating from the general population deep into the ghetto of drug use. You're not supposed to know that — or think about it. You're not, in fact, supposed to THINK about AIDS at all. You are just supposed to believe every syllable Government utters about AIDS, and 'repent your evil ways', for 'the wages of sin is death'. Or so you are to believe: first, that homosexuality is sin; second, that that sin kills, for there is (supposed to be) a special link between homosexuality and AIDS. But there have always been far more heterosexuals than homosexuals with AIDS, from the very start. And AIDS has always been tightly associated with hard-drug use.

Heroin addicts thousands of miles apart — e.g., in Singapore and New York — who had no contact whatsoever, independently developed AIDS, but we are supposed to feel that there had to be some kind of contact, for we are not supposed to believe that drugs are dangerous. Other parts of Government than the CDC, however, tell us every day that drugs kill. So why are we not supposed to believe that drugs can kill by suppressing the immune system? Well, that would allow us to see sex as safe, and we mustn't do that. So for purposes of AIDS, drugs aren't so bad after all. It is sex, and especially homosexual sex, that kills! Nope.

For several years now, news reports of AIDS have been few and far between, because there is nothing new to report. No cure, no vaccine, no explosion into the general population. Therapies don't work reliably, and have serious "side effects" — including death!

For years, indeed, news reports have scarcely talked of AIDS at all, but only about HIV. AIDS is apples, but we hear reports only about oranges. We are supposed to believe that reports on oranges ARE reports on apples. No, they're really not.

It is bizarre that people who actively distrust the U.S. Government on almost everything believe EVERY WORD Government utters about AIDS. Every word. DON'T.

I have followed the AIDS story since, at latest, 1980. By the time I saw the Discover Magazine item mentioned at the start of this Intro, I had already heard and noted (for obvious reasons) at least two televised news stories on this subject: a deadly malady affecting homosexual men. No one knew what it was due to. Then in 1985, the U.S. Government proclaimed that it was caused by a single virus, which it called HIV: "Human Immunodeficiency Virus". I was willing to believe that, especially since we knew how to inoculate people against viruses, so if it were a viral disease, a vaccine should be along shortly. Indeed, the Government declaimed that a vaccine should be available within five years!

By early 1987 it was plain that a virus could not explain the patterns of AIDS. In March 1987, the medical journal Cancer Research published an article by Peter Duesberg, Ph.D., a distinguished microbiologist at the University of California/Berkeley, that concluded that HIV could not possibly cause AIDS. I didn't hear about that article for perhaps three months, but by mid-1987 I had independently become what we now call an "AIDS Dissident", for it had become plain to me that the patterns of AIDS are simply not consistent with a viral disease spread by sex and blood. Once my friend John Lauritsen called my attention to the Cancer Research article, I saw that he and I, who for months had discussed our serious doubts about HIV, had been right to doubt, and we became militant AIDS Dissidents, which we remain to this day.

John has gone on to devote innumerable hours to examining the literature on AIDS and HIV and shown that it supports the conclusion that HIV could not possibly cause AIDS.

John and I met and corresponded with Duesberg and other AIDS Dissidents, and I tried to persuade Duesberg that AIDS was plainly a chemical injury produced by recreational drugs and toxic "treatments" for HIV, and particularly AZT, a deadly poison. For years, Duesberg held himself aloof, saying to media and scientific colleagues that he didn't have to show what does cause AIDS; he only needed to show that HIV couldn't possibly be the cause. After myriad hostile media challenges to name the cause if HIV is not the cause, Duesberg changed his mind, and by the early 1990s came out publicly with the same conclusion as I and John, that AIDS is a chemical injury, not a disease at all.

In 1993 John published THE AIDS WAR: Propaganda, Profiteering and Genocide from the Medical-Industrial Complex (Asklepios (press), New York), which followed up his earlier book POISON BY PRESCRIPTION: The AZT Story. Today, hundreds of scientists, journalists, and private citizens all over the world have stated aloud their disbelief of the HIV theory. In Britain, one of the most distinguished newspapers on Earth, The Sunday Times, has published articles on AIDS dissent, and several documentaries on the defects in the HIV theory have appeared on the British television network Channel 4. In this country,  however, all public discussion of AIDS dissent has been suppressed by media in connivance with or intimidated by Government. No doubt of the HIV theory is permitted to appear in major media, all of which unanimously call HIV "the cause of AIDS", and we are not to ask why AIDS never invades the general population, but is in steady decline.

The most famous HIV-positive person in the country, Magic Johnson, doesn't develop AIDS, and we are told that that is because of miraculous new therapies. Media report that these magical therapies don't work on some people — but never explain how that can be. The reason is simple: the people with HIV who never develop AIDS would never have developed AIDS from HIV because HIV does not cause AIDS. The people who don't benefit from anti-HIV therapies but go on to die from AIDS do so because attacking HIV in no way combats AIDS, because HIV does not cause AIDS. Attacking something that is not the cause of AIDS will in no way cure AIDS. That's why new antiviral therapies don't work on them.

If AIDS is, as its patterns plainly show, a chemical injury that arises separately in each person who develops it, there will never be any "cure" for AIDS, any more than one can "cure" the injuries caused by automobile accidents, burns, falls, etc. We can at best heal from an injury — but not if we are assaulted by dangerous chemicals, such as AZT, which themselves cause dangerous injuries to the immune system.

It is urgently important that gay men THINK, and avoid HIV tests and anti-HIV therapies, if they are to stay healthy.

We present below the slightly-updated text of a flyer Homosexuals Intransigent! issued in 1992. It summarizes the truth about AIDS that Government and the Religious Right don't want you to know. It asks you to think. If you WANT to believe that sex kills, no one can talk you out of that guilt-arisen desire. But if you are willing to think, and not be buffaloed by fearmongers into denying your fundamental nature and living in misery, read on — and  DO THINK.

Everything Government says about AIDS is false.

Ask yourself, if AIDS is a "rapidly spreading epidemic", how come the number of people "infected with AIDS" never increases? For fourteen years Government has been saying that 1-2 million people are infected with the so-called "AIDS virus". That number never grows. In 1991 it dropped, to 1 million. At year-end 1993, a survey of blood samples suggested that the total number of people infected with HIV is actually on the order of 550,000. Six months later, the Government lowered its official estimate to '600,000 to 1 million' — Government just can't let go of that 1 million figure, even tho an actual survey of real blood showed it to be without basis. What kind of "epidemic" never grows, but instead shrinks? And why don't media ever ask why the number never grows?

If you ask the typical well-informed American how many people in this country are "infected with AIDS", he will likely say "1 million", because Government has been using that figure, or variants on it like '600,000 to 1 million' for fourteen years! Why hasn't everybody caught wise to so obvious a scam? If the number of people "infected with the AIDS virus" never grows, but AIDS does, it is obvious that the virus has nothing to do with AIDS at all.

For nineteen years, AIDS has refused to enter the general, (hetero)sexually active population, an impossibility for a venereal disease. Nine times as many men as women have AIDS, even though it is far easier for men to pass any germ to women sexually than the other way around. Tho the claim is made that in Africa AIDS is evenly distributed between men and women, no such pattern exists in the United States, Canada, or Western Europe — or, for that matter, any other place where we have good information — but only in Sub-Saharan Africa, a region in which we have in truth essentially no reliable information at all. In part that is due to the fact that in parts of Africa there is one physician for every 30,000 people, as compared to one physician for every 391 people in the United States. In what Diane Sawyer, when she worked for CBS News' 60 Minutes called "the very heart of AIDS in Africa", the region to the west and north of Lake Victoria, Uganda has one physician per 20,720 people; Tanzania 1 per 19,775; Rwanda 1 per 24,697; Burundi 1 per 31,777! Do we really need some mysterious virus that acts like no other virus known to man, in order to understand why a lot of people in such a region might be deathly ill?

Consider these other biological oddities.

Why does Government say that sex causes AIDS? Think about it. When conservative Republicans took the White House in 1981 (the very year AIDS is said to have begun, though it actually started in mid-1980), the Sexual Revolution was in full swing. Conservatives needed, desperately, to stop it, so launched a Great Sexual Counter-Revolution based on fear. AIDS as fatal sex- and blood-borne disease serves a number of Government purposes:

Is it coincidence that AIDS serves Government purposes? Or was AIDS invented precisely to attack these 'social problems'? The issue is not whether the goals are legitimate but whether the means, lying about matters of life and death, is legitimate. Government tells people that sex, which gives life and cements relationships, kills, but drugs, which destroy individuals and ravage society, are "safe" if injected thru a clean needle or taken noninjectively. That foments interpersonal suspicion, intergroup hatred, and increased drug use as solace for emotional emptiness.

No, sex does not kill. No, drugs are not "safe", no matter how you take them. The exact opposite is true: sex is safe; drugs kill. AIDS is a drug injury, not a disease at all. Don't take drugs and you won't get AIDS, no matter how many people of whatever gender you may sleep with. Enjoy the natural pleasures of sex and love. Avoid the phony pleasures of drugs. You'll live longer. And better.

For a comprehensive overview of the science of AIDS that shows that HIV is plainly not the cause, go to  Look especially to the articles of Peter H. Duesberg, Ph.D., Professor of Molecular Biology at the University of California/Berkeley and a member of the National Academy of Sciences; and the contributions by John P. Lauritsen, gay historian and investigative writer on AIDS.

(This is the end of this section.) [Go to the top of this page.] [Go to the MrGayPride home page.]