reSee.it - Related Video Feed

This complex diagram highlights the presence of HIV in the spike protein, as identified by Luc Montagnier, a leading virologist and Nobel Prize winner for discovering HIV. Montagnier's research indicates that 18 RNA fragments in the spike protein match those of HIV and simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV). Notably, information about his former academic position has been removed from the internet, similar to the erasure of details regarding Zhang Li's work. Montagnier's findings emphasize the connection between HIV and the spike protein, reinforcing his authority on the subject.

This video discusses research by virologist Luc Montagnier showing HIV RNA fragments in the spike protein. Montagnier, known for identifying HIV, found 18 RNA fragments matching HIV and SIV in the spike protein. The presence of these fragments raises questions about the origins of the virus. The video highlights the complexity of the situation and the need for further investigation.

Professor Luc Montagnier, a Nobel Prize winner in medicine and the discoverer of HIV, discusses his current work on the virus. He explains that he is working with a colleague on a computer rather than in a lab. Their work is based on the disease itself and the measures being taken in laboratories on patients. Professor Montagnier concludes that there has been manipulation of the virus, specifically the addition of sequences from HIV. He clarifies that this is not a natural occurrence but the result of meticulous work by a molecular biologist. However, the purpose behind this manipulation is unclear, and Professor Montagnier emphasizes that he is only presenting the facts and not accusing anyone.

Viruses don't exist, according to the speaker. They argue that the process used to prove the existence of viruses is flawed, as it relies on adding samples from sick individuals to monkey cells and observing cell death. However, even when no sample is added, the cells still die. This suggests that viruses may not be real. The speaker refutes the theory of viruses and states that the cause of illness could be exposure to toxins or other factors. They compare it to refuting the existence of an evil butt gremlin under a bed based on lack of evidence.

Professor Luc Montagnier, Nobel Prize winner in Medicine and co-discoverer of HIV, discusses his current work on the virus. He mentions that he is not conducting experiments in the lab but rather working on a computer with a colleague. They have concluded that there has been manipulation of the virus, specifically the addition of sequences from the HIV virus. However, Montagnier does not know who is responsible for this manipulation or the purpose behind it. He emphasizes that his role is to present the facts and not accuse anyone.

Lequontaineier was a controversial figure challenging the mainstream beliefs. Some argued that HIV alone is not enough to cause AIDS and that cofactors might be necessary. However, others disagreed, with Dr. Fauci strongly advocating for HIV as the sole cause. There was a clash between classical science, requiring proof, and the postmodern, monetized world. HIV's role in AIDS was questioned due to its limited infection and activity in cells. Dr. Fauci's stance caused anxiety among infected individuals, who felt there was a conspiracy against them. He dismissed the idea of HIV-negative AIDS cases and renamed them to avoid suspicion. This led to the introduction of a new disease called Idiopathic CD 4 plus lymphocytopenia or ICL.

Today, I want to address the AIDS epidemic and draw a parallel to the lies of Hitler during World War II. The National Institutes of Health, along with the media, are perpetrating a horrible scam in the name of science. I challenge individuals like Gallo, Fousey, Hazeltine, and Essex from the NIH, who I believe are guilty of genocide, to take me to court. Burroughs Welcome, the pharmaceutical company, has knowingly released a deadly drug. I am not alone in exposing these truths. Renowned virologist Peter Duesberg has risked his career to speak out. Despite losing his laboratory and funding, his tenured professorship remains intact.

Today, I draw parallels between the AIDS epidemic and the lies of Hitler, accusing NIH members like Gallo and Fauci of genocide. I challenge them to take me to court, armed with evidence from my book. Renowned virologist Peter Duesberg risks his career to speak out against the deception.

Professor Luc Montagnier, Nobel Prize winner in Medicine and co-discoverer of HIV, discusses his current work on the virus. He clarifies that he is not working in the lab but rather analyzing data with a colleague. Through their analysis, they have concluded that there was manipulation involved in the virus, specifically the addition of sequences from the HIV virus. However, Montagnier does not know who was responsible for this manipulation or the purpose behind it. He emphasizes that his role is to present the facts and not accuse anyone.

Professor Luc Montagnier, Nobel Prize winner in medicine and discoverer of HIV, discusses his current work on the virus. He explains that he is not working in the lab but rather on a computer with a colleague, analyzing the measures taken in laboratories on patients. He concludes that there has been manipulation of the virus, with sequences from HIV added to the original bat virus model. However, he does not know who is responsible or the purpose behind it. Montagnier emphasizes that he is only presenting the facts and not accusing anyone.

Today, I want to address the AIDS epidemic and draw a parallel to the lies of Hitler during World War II. The National Institutes of Health, along with the media, are perpetrating a horrible scam in the name of science. I challenge individuals like Gallo, Fousey, Hazeltine, and Essex from the NIH, who I believe are guilty of genocide, to take me to court. Burroughs Welcome, the pharmaceutical company, is knowingly distributing a deadly drug. Renowned virologist Peter Duesberg has risked his career to speak out against this. Despite losing his laboratory and funding, he remains tenured and committed to exposing the truth.

The comparison to HIV is important because, like early HIV infections, mild or moderate COVID can cause unseen destruction. With HIV, people were infected for years before symptoms appeared, while the virus quietly destroyed the immune system. However, the HIV epidemic spurred brilliant science that changed how HIV is treated. We are now learning about mitochondria, viral impact, brain fog, changes in neurons, and cells that nourish neurons because of Long COVID. The goal is to reach a point where, through research, people with Long COVID can not only survive but thrive, just as HIV patients can live normal lifespans today.

Today, I want to address the AIDS epidemic and draw a parallel to World War II. I believe there is a massive scam happening in the name of science, perpetrated by individuals like Gallo, Fousey, Hazeltine, and Essex from the National Institutes of Health. They are guilty of genocide, and I challenge them to take me to court. Burroughs Welcome, the pharmaceutical company, is also responsible for knowingly distributing a deadly drug. I have concrete evidence of this in my book, "Deadly Deception." I am not alone in exposing this truth. Renowned virologist Peter Duesberg has risked his career to speak out against the lies. Despite losing his laboratory and funding, he remains tenured.

Doctor. Montagnier got the Nobel Prize for identifying HIV. Doctor. Montney identified 18 RNA fragments that match HIV and SIV. This is Simeon or monkey grade eight immune deficiency virus. If you look at it, remember I told you about PRRA? That's four amino acids and every amino acid requires three nucleotides. That's 12, right? 12 nucleotides. 590 amino acids or seventeen seventy nucleotide bases that match HIV-one. Now understanding that mutations occur one nucleotide at a time scientifically I'd like somebody to justify to me how that's possibly a mutation. That doesn't happen. This is the man who defines it. Every one of these red arrows and every one of these are the nucleotides that match HIV. That's why there's so much up there. It's not one. It's not just a little. It's a lot.

No one responded when I asked for proof. Everything was rushed in the case of AIDS, with no proper research or debate among scientists. The announcement was made without solid evidence, and a veil of secrecy was placed over an approximate truth. This is not how science works. Normally, you conduct experiments, analyze the results, and verify them before making a scientific announcement. But in this case, they held a press conference and declared that HIV is the cause of AIDS. They didn't explain why or provide any scientific references. There is no scientific reference, just a collection of arguments and indirect evidence.

Today, I want to address the parallels between the AIDS epidemic and the events leading up to World War 2. The National Institutes of Health and the media, particularly individuals like Gallo, Fauci, Hazeltine, and Essex, are perpetrating a massive scam and scandal. They are guilty of genocide and knowingly distributing a deadly drug. I challenge them to take me to court, where I can provide concrete evidence as outlined in my book, Deadly Deception. Renowned virologist Peter Duesberg has also risked his career to expose the truth. It's puzzling why the press ignores these obvious facts. Duesberg, being tenured, has nothing to lose.

The documentary traces the global HIV/AIDS story through shifting science, politics, testing, treatment, and personal narratives, revealing a landscape of debate, fear, and influence that has shaped how the epidemic is understood and managed. From the outset, the film juxtaposes dramatic claims about the virus with questions about complacency, fear, and the human cost of AIDS. Early voices warn that HIV remains a deadly virus despite reduced fear, while others emphasize a persistent problem for individuals and the vast number of people living with the virus. The central tension is set: can a cure be found, and what would it take? A through-line is the distinction between HIV and AIDS. The narrator and interviewees seek clarity on what causes AIDS, how HIV relates to it, and why the distinction matters for diagnosis and treatment. Experts emphasize core definitions: HIV is a virus; AIDS is a syndrome caused by infection with the virus; you don’t get infected with AIDS, you get infected with HIV which can lead to AIDS. Yet the dialogue also documents persistent public confusion about the difference, and shows that international definitions and country-specific criteria have evolved and sometimes diverged, complicating diagnosis and statistics. The film surveys the history of HIV/AIDS terminology and surveillance. It highlights the GRID term, the early CDC framework, and the 1985, 1987, and 1993 definition changes that broadened AIDS criteria, sometimes to include people with varying CD4 counts or opportunistic infections. A retroactive redefinition in 1993 reportedly increased estimates, and a Bangui criteria conference in Africa sought a simple clinical way to diagnose AIDS in settings with limited lab access. World Health Organization definitions multiply across countries, leading to several AIDS definitions worldwide and debates about how to interpret the numbers. The program documents how testing has driven both diagnosis and fear, including debates over screening versus confirmatory testing. It shows rapid antibody tests, ELISAs, Western blots, and viral-load tests, noting limitations and discrepancies: rapid tests may yield false positives or negatives, confirmatory tests can yield inconsistent results across manufacturers, and in some settings, developing nations rely on screening tests without adequate confirmatory verification. The story includes personal accounts of misdiagnosis, false positives, and the emotional toll of testing, as well as examples where people faced life-altering decisions based on uncertain results. The film also questions the reliability of testing narratives in light of varied international criteria and the economics of testing. The narrative shifts to Africa, particularly South Africa, where the epidemic intersects with poverty, infrastructure, and policy debates. It documents the perception that Africa bears the highest incidence of AIDS, the Bangui criteria’s adoption in Africa, the social and economic context, and the role of poverty as a deadly factor that can mimic or exacerbate immune deficiency. It also notes skepticism about how data are compiled and presented, including claims that numbers are influenced by advocacy, funding incentives, and political considerations. The film chronicles the evolution of treatment from AZT monotherapy to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and the cocktail era, detailing dramatic shifts in prognosis and the emergence of drug toxicity and side effects. Personal testimonies recount adverse reactions, weight changes, lipodystrophy, heart risks, and the existential dilemma of lifelong treatment versus quality of life. The dramatic arc notes that, while HAART transformed AIDS from a fatal disease to a manageable chronic condition for many, the treatment introduced new side effects and ethical concerns about prescribing practices, access, and the long-term effects of therapy. A recurring theme is the tension between scientific consensus and dissenting voices. The film presents prominent figures associated with HIV research and advocacy, including discussions of the role of Robert Gallo, Françoise Barré-Sinoussi, and Montagnier, and the geopolitical dynamics around the virus’s identification and acceptance as the cause of AIDS. It includes accounts of cofactor theories proposing that other factors—cofactors beyond HIV—may influence progression and that poverty, malnutrition, and coexisting infections can affect immune function. Some interviewees critique the dominance of a single narrative and suggest that alternative explanations have been marginalized or labeled as unscientific. Personal stories punctuate the analysis: families learning of HIV status, the experience of testing in settings from a South African train station to clinics in Romania, and the emotional and practical consequences of a positive diagnosis. The film documents the journey from diagnosis to treatment, including the trials and revelations of those who have acquired, faced, or combated the disease, and those who question or reconsider the standard medical narrative. Towards the end, the documentary reflects on the broader social and ethical implications: the cost and allocation of billions in AIDS funding, the disproportionate burden on poorer nations, the role of activism and politics in shaping policy, and the ongoing uncertainty about optimal testing, diagnosis, and cure. It closes by acknowledging the resilience of people living with HIV and those who work to understand and treat the virus, while underscoring that many fundamental questions about HIV, AIDS, and their interconnections remain debated in scientific and public spheres. The conclusion suggests that the epidemic’s true battles may extend beyond biology to include poverty, access, governance, and the politics of data.

Today, I want to address the AIDS epidemic and draw a parallel to World War II. I believe there is a massive scam happening in the name of science, perpetrated by individuals like Gallo, Fousey, Hazeltine, and Essex from the National Institutes of Health. They are guilty of genocide, and I challenge them to take me to court. Burroughs Welcome, the pharmaceutical company, is also responsible for knowingly distributing a deadly drug. Renowned virologist Peter Duesberg has risked his career to speak out against this deception. Despite the evidence, the media and press seem to ignore these truths. Duesberg has already lost his laboratory and funding, but his tenured professorship remains intact.

The comparison to HIV is important because both viruses can be asymptomatic. HIV taught us a lot about immunology and changed cancer therapy. Similarly, we are now learning about the impact of the virus on mitochondria, brain fog, and our neurons through long COVID. Mild and moderate COVID can cause destruction, just like HIV did to our immune system. However, the brilliant science that came out of HIV research transformed how we treat the virus, allowing people to live normal lives. We need to do the same for long COVID, so that those affected can not only survive but also thrive.

Viruses have never been isolated, which is a major fraud against humanity. There is no measles virus, and each year a new virus with similar symptoms emerges. This started with the Third Reich and Doctor Enders. In my book, "A Second Thought about Viruses, Vaccines, and the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis," I discuss this issue. Even Professor Peter Guisberg lost his funding at Berkeley University for writing "Inventing the AIDS Virus" and questioning the existence of a virus. The situation is dire.

Tony Fauci won a power struggle by asserting that AIDS is caused by a virus, a claim supported by Bob Gallo. Some argued that the disease was not viral but rather linked to environmental factors and drug use, particularly among individuals in the gay community who used poppers and other injectable drugs. In the early days of the epidemic, many of the first AIDS victims were known to be addicted to poppers, which are associated with Kaposi's sarcoma. Despite differing opinions within the agency, Fauci emphasized the viral aspect to classify it as an infectious disease, which allowed him to take control of the narrative surrounding AIDS.

The speaker claims the AIDS epidemic is the most horrible scandal and scam ever perpetrated in science and humanity, drawing a parallel to the lies preceding World War II. They accuse members of the NIH, particularly Gallo, Fauci, Hazeltine, and Essex, of genocide and invite them to take them to court, along with Burroughs Welcome for allegedly producing a killer drug knowingly. The speaker asserts that in court, they would provide absolute proof and evidence, as presented in their book, Deadly Deception. They highlight that virologist Peter Duesberg has put his career on the line, losing his laboratory and funding, to expose these truths. The speaker questions why the press ignores these obvious truths.

Three Nobel laureates have expressed doubts about the official thesis. They are biologist Barbara McClintock, the late Professor Walter Gilbert of Harvard, and Karim Ulrich, the 1993 Nobel laureate in chemistry. Ulrich, the inventor of PCR, a process that isolates and amplifies genes, became interested in the question of HIV and AIDS. However, when searching for scientific publications to support the claim that HIV causes AIDS, Ulrich couldn't find any references. He asked specialized researchers about their conviction, but they couldn't provide the references either. Ulrich needed the reference to renew a grant for his laboratory, but he couldn't find any evidence that HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.

The speaker accuses individuals from the NIH, including Gallo, Fousey, Hazeltine, and Essex, of being criminals guilty of genocide. They challenge Burroughs Wellcome to take them to court, claiming they have evidence of a killer drug. The speaker questions why the press ignores these truths and mentions virologist Peter Duesberg, who has risked his career by challenging the mainstream narrative. Despite losing his laboratory and funding, Duesberg's tenured professorship remains intact.