The Man-Made Origin
Of AIDS - Important Notes

From Alan Cantwell
From Professor Robert E. Lee, MS, MSW, LCSW
Author - AIDS: An Explosion of the Biological Time Bomb?
Author - AIDS: Our Chances, Our Choices
(Note - This is an email reply to Boyd Graves. -ed)
Dear Boyd,
Relative to the evolution of HIV and Maedi-Visna Virus, I can say this:
1. Visna has been called "visna" since about 1932 when it appeared in sheep in Iceland. Prior to that, it was seen as a progressive pneumonia in sheep in Montana.
2. There have been many outbreaks of visna in sheep herds in the past 50 years requiring the killing of entire flocks to prevent transmission.
3. There have not been any previous outbreaks of HIV in any recorded history prior to this present outbreak. There is no mythology or other tribal stories of a wasting disease in Africa prior to the present HIV outbreak of which I am aware. Granted, I am not an anthropologist and have not visited central Africa but a thorough check by me of any central African mythology/tribal verbal histories shows no reference to a wasting disease.
4. HIV is alleged to mutate at a rate 1000 times faster than the typical influenza virus. This is astounding evolution given that there is need for new update influenza vaccinations every year to prevent infection. I know that visna also mutates but I do not believe it is at the same rate as HIV.
5. I therefore conclude that while HIV and visna are related agents, I do not believe that they evolved together. There is no evidence to suggest this anywhere of which I am aware.
6. There is substantial evidence to suggest that visna was grown in human cells prior to any recorded outbreak of HIV anywhere on the planet. I have previously cited at least 4 different scientific articles prior to 1980 showing that visna had been grown in human cells, e.g., astrocytes, etc., with the earliest records going back into the 1960s.
7. There is a demonstrated paradigm in the molecular/virological sciences of taking a virus occurring in one species and moving it into non-permissive species. Particularly there is a demonstrated paradigm showing movement of these retroviral/lentiviral agents into primates, e.g., the Feline Sarcoma Virus used to infect marmoset monkeys. There are other indications that feline and mouse retroviruses have been used to infect primate hosts in the literature. There is direct statement in the scientific literature of the movement of maedi-visna virus into porcine, bovine, primate, and human cells... all of this occurring prior to any advent of HIV anywhere on the planet.
8. Rather than to accept the "visna and HIV have evolved together" data which infers a natural origin to HIV based on phylogenic comparison, assumptions concerning molecular clocks, and other molecular-biological mumbo-jumbo, I believe it is rather more useful to examine the literature which shows this:
9. The capital-lettered statement above is uncontestable. It is a fact.
10. I can also say that there are other leukemia and lymphomas and sarcomas which have been moved into human and primate cells as well resulting in productive infection of the primate and human cells.
11. I can also tell you that every molecular biologist in the land will ignore what I have just said and will tell you eleventy-jillion stories about where HIV origin came from monkeys in remote Africa and tribesmen eating monkeys. I can tell you this: I don't believe that explanation for one second. Rather, I believe, based on now some 16 years of investigation of this whole thing that HIV is a strategic biological weapon designed to kill billions of people in a slow-unfolding relentless holocaust which was released in two different vaccination programs: a) the smallpox vaccination program in Africa commencing in the late 1960s, b) the hepatitis-B vaccination program in the United States in the mid-to-late 1970s. Moreover, so it is perfectly clear, this contamination was no accident. It was done on purpose with the goal of "thinning the herd" in a nazi-like mindset that has covertly governed population control politics since the 1870s. These same politics had pervaded the WHO and most of western medical experimental science throughout the 20th century. And, to be very pointed: the same political ideology is still there. Non-whites are detrimental to the gene pool's evolution so says the political philosophy. To see a bit of this in history, go here:
This belief system is pervasive in the molecular sciences as it is at the heart of eugenics, cloning, evolution, and heritability.
After looking at the above information answer this question: Why are non-whites all susceptible to HIV infection whereas there are 1% of whites who are impervious to HIV infection as they have the homozygous CCR5-32 deletion allele. Why would a disease evolving in sheep have a relationship to an emergent disease in humans that will infect every non-white person and not infect some white people and that relationship just happens to be by accident given there is a history of scientific racism going back to 1870?
Am I saying that Visna is HIV? NO. I am saying they are related lentiviruses.
Am I saying that there is an alternative explanation deserving fair hearing of the origin of HIV? YES.
Am I saying there is a rat in the proverbial woodpile? YES.
This is not a "by accident" thing here that there is a relationship between HIV and Visna.
Will what I think make any difference at all? NO.
Will any politician address this? NO.
Will any biologist come forward and tell the truth? NO.
Will any court hear the evidence and rule a finding that HIV is a strategic biological weapon? NO.
Will any peer-reviewed scientific journal seriously address the deep-dark racist biological weapons programs and their attack on people of color? NO.
Professor Robert E. LeeM.S., M.S.W., L.C.S.W.
Author ofAIDS: An Explosion of the Biological Time Bomb?
Author ofAIDS: Our Chances, Our Choices
Related Story:
Leading AIDS Origin Author Endorses International AIDS Review
Boyd Graves
Dear Prfoessor Moore:
Science Vol 227, pp. 173-177, January 1985:
ABSTRACT: A study was conducted of the genetic relation between human T-cell lymphotropic retoviruses and visna virus. The human T-cell lymphotropic viruses include those assoicated with T-cell malignancies (HTLV-I and HTLV-II), as well as the etiologic agent of the acquired immune deficiecy syndrome (HTLV-III). Visna virus, a slowwly replicating and pathogenic but nononcogenic retrovirus of sheep, is a member of the subfamily Lentivirinae. Results obtained by molecular hybridization and heteroduplex analysis indicated that a greater extent of nucleotide sequence homology exists between HTLV-III and visna virus than between HTLV-III and any of the other viruses. The homology observed under conditions of low stringency spanned the entire genome, but was strongest in the gag/pol region. The morphogenesis and fine structure of HTLV-III and visna virus also demonstrated striking similarities. The data provide strong evidence for a close taxonomic and thus evolutionary relation between HTLV-III and the Lentivirinae subfamily.
Professor Moore, Drs. Gonda and Gallo, et al also provide sequenced electron microscopy photos of the two viruses, they appear to be identical. SO how does an Icelandic sheep disease and an African monkey sexual disease co-mingle in such a way to have an evolutionary relationship with HIV?
Sir I believe you are in error to exclude the sheep evolution of HIV from your ORIGIN of AIDS inquiries. Please bear in mind that the United States concedes that VISNA sheep disease had not YET been associated with human disease as late as 1971. So where did the VISNA sequences in HIV come from between 1971 and 1985, the date of the Gonda and Gallo paper?
Additionlly since VISNA had been isolated as early as 1949, why would HIV appear a mystery( in 1979) in light of the close microscopic similarity of the two viruses?
Boyd Ed Graves
(I will attempt to refrain from making derogatory analogies as you have done with your Bush and Kerry buffonery. I again refer you to the comments of your
Jim Moore <jjmoore@ucsd.eduwrote:
At 5:13 PM -0800 11/11/04
Boyd Graves wrote:
Dear Professor Marx:
According to the United States National Academy of Sciences, HIV/AIDS evovled from sheep VISNA disease. When did sheep VISNA disease "cross species" so as to beocome the etiological agent of HIV/AIDS?
I cite PROC NAS VOl 83, pp. 4007 - 4011, June 1986
Mr. Graves cites a paper in PNAS; it is M. A. Gonda et al. 1986 (PNAS 83(11):4007-4011. Far from stating that HIV "evolved from VISNA", the article uses sequence similarity to VISNA (and other lentiviruses) to support a "close evolutionary relationship between HTLV-III [HIV] and the Lentivirinae subfamily of retroviruses." In its conclusion, Gonda et al. specifically note there may be other lentiviruses more closely related to HTLV-III, and singles out the "new viral isolate, simian T-lymphotropic virus type III (STLV-III)" as a likely candidate.
Mr. Graves' error is exactly analogous to concluding, from the reports that George W Bush and John Kerry are related, that Kerry is Bush's father.
and PROC NAS vol 92 3283 - 3287, April 11, 1995.
In the 1995 article, the United States concedes that sheep ( not
monkeys) are the best animal model for the testing of new anti-hiv
This article (Thormar et al.) states: "Visna virus is the prototype of the lentivirus subgroup of retroviruses and is related to HIV" citing a pair of 1985 papers: Sonigo et al, Cell 42: 369-382 and Gonda et al. Science 227: 173-177; this presumably covers same ground as their PNAS paper).
It concludes: "For evaluation of potential anti-HIV drugs, it is therefore important to test their effect on brain infections caused by viruses that are related to HIV and that elicit a comparable pathological response in the brain. The results of this study strongly suggest that visna virus infection in sheep may be a feasible animal model for testing the effects of drugs on brain infections caused by lentiviruses, such as HIV."
The analogy here: Given that Bush & Kerry are related, the fact that a drug which kills Bush also kills Kerry PROVES that Kerry is Bush's father.
As a primatologist, I also need to point out that many factors go into choosing animal models for biomedicine, and several involve the availability, cost, and ethical dimensions involved with the animal. Sheep are abundant, domesticated, easy to handle, and their (humane) deaths accepted by all but vegetarians; monkeys and apes are wild, capable of biting, difficult to handle, and (especially apes) considered by many deserving of special treatment for ethical reasons. Promoting a sheep model over a primate one, if their biomedical utility is comparable, is a no-brainer.
Mr. Graves' main contention is that a secret project created HIV, as supported by various unpublished documents/"gray literature" that he has found. It is hard to evaluate his claims about those, since they are not easily accessible. The only thing we CAN evaluate is how he treats literature that IS accessible and so we can verify his accounts of what the articles say. He is TOTALLY WRONG in his interpretations of what these two PNAS papers state.
Please draw your own conclusions.
Clearly the VISNA strain ks1514 which originated in 1932 matches the exact 'anatomic year' of the origin of HIV offered by Korber and Hahn.
At some point you and your colleagues are going to have to address the 'identical VISNA sequences' inherent in the HIVgenome. As a point of reference, in 1971, the United States concedes that VISNA sheep disease had not YET been associated with human disease. See, page 39, progress report #8, U.S. Special Virus program (1962 - 1978).
I am including the email below sent to you by Myron Struck of .
Preston Marx:
I've been following the work of Boyd Ed Graves for a while, and his contention that there is a connection between AIDS and the work of failed, misguided or somehow malevolent actions of the United States government, ostensibly as part of a cancer research program that was either used for cover, or which went awry.
I am sure you have been exposed to Graves' work, and positions. It seems the core of the argument is that the government is involved in covering up the potential links between their work (per Graves' position that there is a flow-chart showing these connections) and the modern-day understanding of the root of AIDS.
As an expert, and someone who has studied this, could I suggest and pose a few questions to you? We don't know each other, and by that I mean I am unfamiliar with your other work or understanding, so I ask you this only in response to your versed opinion filed on the list serve recently in response to Graves.
Is the Graves contention plausible?
If not, where was AIDS, as it is now understood, to have been before the time-line that Graves establishes?
Do you have a contrary view to the root cause?
If you have time to respond, I'll follow up after I understand if you want to delve into this a bit more.
Myron Struck
editor/president, Targeted News Service
7723 Harwood Place, Springfield, VA 22152
703/866-4708 ... 703/304-1897
Boyd Ed Graves 619-542-0819, Ext 2221
the Common Cause Medical Research Foundation
(We believe a review and investigation of the U.S. Special Virus
program is warranted and necessary.)
Jim Moore The secret of success is honesty and
Anthro 0532 fair dealing. If you can fake those,
UC San Diego you've got it made. [Groucho Marx]
9500 Gilman Drive
La Jolla CA USA 92093
voice 858 534-5572
fax 858 534-5946
SoCal Primate Research Forum:
African Ape Study sites:



This Site Served by TheHostPros