From: 
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 3:14 PM
To: 
Subject: Re: New expose of the AIDS industry- Explosive documentary, so
undeniably effective

 


 

 



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_N4zgjF0K0


 <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_N4zgjF0K0> Image removed by sender. House
of Numbers Trailer   Co-discoverer of "HIV" laughing as he says, "Of course
HIV exists". 
Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.


House of Numbers - film review
<http://matthewbzrebski.blogspot.com/2009/08/house-of-numbers-film-review.ht
ml>  


 
<http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_0vjDB1hfE4U/SoTzan3_uqI/AAAAAAAAAQ8/1iemqwZRNTQ/s
1600-h/House+of+Numbers.jpg> Image removed by sender.
Director Brent Leung is a brave man. But what makes his explosive
documentary, House of Numbers, so undeniably effective, is that he didn't
set out to be. As he tells us in the film, he was born in 1980...part of the
first AIDS generation, a group who came into their sexuality with the threat
of HIV strapped to their genitals like a potentially lit bundle of dynamite.
A few years ago, Leung came to learn there has always been a debate over the
current HIV/AIDS scientific paradigm. Having never known a world without
AIDS, this intrigued him, and so his investigative journey began. He was not
trying to show courage through radical activism or by asserting some
aggressive agenda. He had some questions, and he went around the world
asking top HIV/AIDS scientists for the answers.

Now...one would think that, at least on the basic facts, these pioneers of
HIV/AIDS research and treatment might all agree. Think again. They not only
don't agree, they contradict each other in ways that are truly terrifying.
>From these orthodox HIV experts, there is no agreement on what HIV looks
like, how it kills human cells, how the virus is isolated, how one confirms
an HIV test, how drugs should be used to treat it, whether co-factors are
necessary, or if our own immune systems can beat it all on their own. And
there is much scandal on how it came to be "discovered" in the first place.
There are moments in the film when I found myself laughing heartily at this
clownish behavior from our world's top scientists; it almost plays like
satire. But then I'd remember: this is about lives. And there is nothing at
all funny about this. To his credit, Leung does not try to elicit
laughs...he simply places the interviews side by side, juxtaposing so as to
highlight the contradictions. It serves to rattle any trust one may have in
our medical establishment. In an instant, these scientists lose credibility
and reveal that on the issues of HIV/AIDS, it is confusion, not certainty
that prevails.

In addition, the film gives voice to many self-proclaimed "dissidents" like
Peter Duesberg, Kary Mullis (Nobel Prize winner), and the late Christine
Maggiore - along with investigative journalists Celia Farber and Liam
Scheff. To many, their opinions might seem downright insane. What do you
mean HIV might not cause AIDS? What do you mean we're wasting money giving
Africans HIV drugs when all they need is clean water and nutritional food?
What do you mean "lifestyle" may indeed have played a role in the immune
collapse of some gay men in the early 1980s? None of these are said to be
"true" and all are politically incorrect at best, heretical at worst. But
accompanied by the orthodox swamp of contradictions, one sits back and
ponders...deeply.

The film was screened this week at the Washougal International Film
Festival. Brent Leung and his producer were present and most humble. Knowing
the film has received great backlash from the orthodox scientists he
interviewed, I asked the director to respond to accusations that he has
somehow misrepresented them in the documentary. He simply said, "Not one
person has ever offered a specific example of how I have done so. We invite
them to join in on the discussion. We want there to be an ongoing dialogue."
An audience member asserted that many of the outraged are linked to
pharmaceutical companies that manufacture HIV medications. My research has
shown this to be, at least in part, true. And one must ask, "How could he
misrepresent them?" There are long interview segments with clear, unedited
responses. It's not as if Leung utilizes second-to-second jump cuts to
create a message. In fact, the style of the piece is very straight-forward
and journalistic with very little editorial commentary. It trusts the
audience to draw individual conclusions.

If there is one moment of overt theatricality in the film, it is in its
final frames when the score serves to highlight a most shocking revelation
offered by Luc Montagnier, who just last year was awarded the Nobel Prize
for discovering HIV. He says that one can be exposed numerous times to HIV
and that if they have a strong immune system, their bodies can cleanse it
out. He is asked to repeat this notion by Mr. Leung...as if the director
cannot believe what was just said. Montagnier does not hesitate. He
reaffirms with a simple "yes" - and with that, the ominous piano and minor
synth-string chords echo out. But you know, this moment earns a touch of
scary music - because the implications are monumental.

If Luc Montagnier is correct...if the discoverer of HIV is right...then an
HIV+ status might be meaningless. If one is exposed to HIV and cleanses it
out, then the immune system's antibodies have done their job - but those
antibodies would still show up on the HIV antibody test, resulting in a +
result. This happens a lot with other diseases. For instance, I test + for
TB, which means I was exposed to it and beat it. But with HIV, a + test
result currently means lifelong drugs and eventual death. Are there
thousands of people partaking in the drug protocol who actually have immune
systems strong enough to battle it alone? Given the drugs are lethally
toxic, might this be considered a type of mass medical homicide?

Throughout the film, the struggles of an HIV+ baby girl and her adoptive
parents are followed. While still a toddler, she experienced horrific side
effects from the AZT regimen given to her by doctors to keep her alive. When
the parents reported the horrible side effects, they were told it was HIV
creating the leg cramps and other painful symptoms. Finally, the parents
turned to dissident Peter Duesberg who convinced them to take their daughter
off the meds and leave HIV behind.

During the Q&A after the film, this little girl - now a beautiful, healthy
19 year-old young woman - came onto the stage with her mother. It was a
truly breathtaking moment - one that could not be more illustrative. She has
not taken a drug since she was a toddler. She has no idea what her "numbers"
are in terms of CD4 counts and viral load. For her, it is clear HIV is
something of a mythological bogey man...something that haunted her early
childhood, and has been forever locked in the closet.

And that is what I was left with. Is HIV the deadly epidemic that defines
modern sexuality? Or is it a bogey man perpetuated by a passionate, often
well meaning medical community that might have it all wrong? Brent Leung is
a brave man, because he dares to ask. But what scares me more than anything
is: how have we come to a place in our scientific discussions that one
should have to be brave to simply ask a question?

NOTE: The film is screening all over the US and in the UK in festivals and
other showings. Check HouseofNumbers.com <http://houseofnumbers.com/>  for
more information.

 

 

 

 

*** exposing the hidden truth for further educational research only ***
CAVEAT LECTOR *** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes. NOTE: Some links may require cut and paste into your Internet
Browser. Please check  <http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr> http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr
for more real news posts and support the truth! (sorry but don't have time
to email all posts) free book download:
<http://www.lulu.com/content/165077> http://www.lulu.com/content/165077  ***
Revealing the hidden Truth For Educational & Further Research Purposes only.
***  NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security
Agency (NSA) may have read emails without warning, warrant, or notice. They
may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no
recourse, nor protection.......... IF anyone other than the addressee of
this e-mail is reading it, you are in violation of the 1st & 4th Amendments
to the Constitution of the United States. Patriot Act 5 & H.R. 1955
Disclaimer Notice: This post & all my past & future posts represent parody &
satire & are all intended for entertainment and amusement only. To be
removed from the weekly list, please reply with the subject line "REMOVE"

 


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"total_truth_sciences" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

<<inline: ~WRD098.jpg>>

Reply via email to