Eric Snowden, Afghanistan/heroin, AIDS, and condom use

[woodyboyd]

When I watched Eric Snowden on video, I didn't see a show boater. I saw a guy who couldn't live with what he was seeing. He couldn't not blow the whistle on what he saw: fascism and turnkey terrorism. It's not like anything Snowden said wasn't stuff I had read before; he just confirmed it.

The playbook for the turnkey tyranny then is exposed. When one of the government's enemies breaks the law, you proclaim the country to be a rule of law. The preferred method for government breaking laws is legal immunity, but even when that fails, there is selective law enforcement. So Nancy Pelosi barks about rule of law as a reason to pursue Snowden (and got booed off the stage) but ignores that DNI leader James Clapper perjured himself before Congress or that the government is blatantly violating the 4th Amendment.

That the Department of Justice pursued Roger Clemens and have left James Clapper alone speaks volumes about the fascist state America has become. That Clapper hasn't even resigned his post shows government arrogance at its worst.

Take a look at this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElEciFI0Pew
"The Taliban finances much of its operations by selling opium." Forget about the propaganda narrative and look at what do you see, an American solider happy about heroin production and in fact protecting its production. When the Taliban were in charge of Afghanistan, Afghanistan produced $3 billion in heroin. Now the UN estimates that number at $65 billion, and a British journalist estimates the number is closer to $120 billion.

Let me put this in perspective: the U.S. corn crop is worth around $75 billion, and the total production of all crops is $143 billion. The difference though is how the money is spread. Afghans get about $1.5 billion for their share of the work, so the folks who are involved with the distribution and transportation of Afghan heroin are involved in the most profitable agricultural venture in the world.

And even though we have soldiers protecting the fields and our reporters petting the poppy plant, somehow people believe it is the cave dwelling dimwits that make up the Taliban that are capable of distributing $65 billion worth of product. Also, why isn't anybody concerned the troops, "our heroes", wouldn't be tempted with heroin?

That the CDC puts out publication after publication about exploding deaths to prescription narcotics does not surprise me. Prescription narcotic sales get in the way of the sale of heroin.

With regards to AIDS, a CDC leader admitted to what propaganda tools they are when he said that he didn't see a downside to inflating the number of AIDS cases. Instead of people getting outraged, I got the feeling they were nodding in agreement. It just amazes me that the CDC lies and people somehow think it is for their own good.

I see people on the forums here post some variant of "If you don't wear a condom, you are risking death" all the time. I could point out the anaphylatic potential of latex which condoms are usually made of and how dangerous latex really is, the super comission of government agencies that found no proof condoms prevent most STDs and buried the report, or another buried study showing zero transmission between couples where one was HIV + and the other was -, but I get how studies can be hard to read.

What I don't get is how people can beat off to watching John Holmes, who they know was HIV +, fuck the shit out of Ginger Lynn, Amber Lynn, and a plethora of other women, and there are no reports of his transmitting the virus to any of them, and the Lynn girls are STILL doing porn. There are no reports, zero, of women giving HIV to any male stars. Marc Wallace fucked hunderds of women and reportedly gave two of said women HIV, and the last I read these two women are still alive.

So even though the CDC admits to lying about HIV numbers and people beat off to Ginger Lynn, they repeat the CDC narrative: no condom equals death!

I just don't get it. What makes anyone think the government is telling the truth about AIDS? Do you think your own eyes are lying to you?

[Sidewinder]

As a matter of fact, the CDC issued a press release several years ago, admitting that unprotected well-lubricated heterosexual vaginal intercourse WITH AN INFECTED PARTNER (emphasis mine) was not high-risk behavior for transmitting AIDS. They went to considerable length to remind everyone that this was sky-high risk behavior for transmitting every other STD known to Man. It was VERY clear from the language that they really didn't want to issue that press release, but the hard data left them no other ethical choice.

They have since backed away from that VERY politically-incorrect press release.

If you look on their website, it just says HIV and AIDS are transmitted through "sexual contact". They do not ANYWHERE say what kinds of sexual contact are risky.

The issue is this: AIDS, even today, is overwhelmingly a disease that strongly preferentially targets male homosexuals. The secondary target is IV drug abusers. If it were honestly labeled such a disease, and the actual actuarial risks enumerated, someone would raise a HUGE political stink about spending billions of dollars on AIDS research, which will benefit at most some 2% of the population, instead of heart disease, or breast cancer, or sickle-cell anemia, which statistically will affect, if not outright kill, a much larger chunk of the population.

Here's a simple homework problem, that could be handed out in any introductory college-level probability and statistics class: 1. Estimate the probability that any given male in the United States is HIV+ or has AIDS. 2. Estimate the conditional probability that any given male in the United States is HIV+ or has AIDS, provided that he is known to be homosexual.

Once you have worked that homework problem, you will be in a far better position to understand what's really going on.

[John Bull]

Very interesting Woody and Sidewinder. I have a couple of other questions for the kids. We have STD's up the ying yang. Many of them are bacterial. Why don't we have vaccines for them? Yes, we have recently developed one for HPV and there is one for two of the Hep infections. But other than that, you're on your own. Could it be the religious lobby or could it be the condom lobby? I would come down on the religious lobby as the main culprit followed by politicians who don't want to rile them up by funding std research.
While we're at it, Snowden has made gross mistakes by associating with long time enemies of the USA and at least seeming to give away our secrets but for exposing these fascist cruds - btw it started with Saint Bill and was expanded by both Bushies - Snowden should get a medal.
What I don't understand is why the people aren't in the streets?

[Gotyour6]

I am wondering why this is in D&T

[woodyboyd]

Originally Posted by John Bull

We have STD's up the ying yang. Many of them are bacterial. Why don't we have vaccines for them?

Probably because the antibiotics are so effective and cheap, and the whole autism/vaccine thing has scared off drug companies.

It is funny though that you bring up vaccines. What are they? An exposure to a pathogen that creates an immune response. People think that if they have sex with someone with herpes, for example that they get herpes, but it really doesn't happen that often. In fact repeated exposure without infection probably lessens your overall chance of getting the infection.

Originally Posted by John Bull

Yes, we have recently developed one for HPV and there is one for two of the Hep infections.But other than that, you're on your own. Could it be the religious lobby or could it be the condom lobby?

Vaccines vary a lot in terms of how effective they are. As for why there isn't one for HIV, there are. They just don't work. AIDS has to do with the immune system more so than the virus, and the more I look at things, the more apparent it becomes that HIV correlates with but does not cause AIDS.

Originally Posted by John Bull

Snowden has made gross mistakes by associating with long time enemies of the USA

I don't know about you but I would be careful about the "our" part. To me, the NSA makes Nixon looks like an amateur, and I don't want to be on their team. I get that Snowden had to use whatever bed fellows he could to protect himself. The notion of China, our largest trading partner, as enemy doesn't fit.

As for Russia, who is a bigger threat to our freedom, the NSA or Russia? It is not close, the NSA is blatantly violating our 4th amendment rights and IMO is the real enemy to our freedoms.

[woodyboyd]

Originally Posted by Gotyour6

I am wondering why this is in D&T

Because there was a question about BBFS on one of the sugar daddy threads in D&T and it was not answered.

Even though the misinformation about condom use irks me to no end, I usually let it slide because I don't want to deal with the idiotic commentary sure to follow. D&T is or at least was a place where the commentary was more sophisticated.

Maybe the guys here who want BBFS on this forum are unsophisticated jerks like elsewhere. But I wanted some of the ladies to see that some of the men who desired BBFS are sophisticated and learned and know BBFS isn't the death trap that the government/CDC wants us to believe it is.

[zerodahero]

Jonathan Williams of the University’s College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences Griffin Campus led a multidisciplinary study of HIV spread in association with the University's College of Public Health Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham's College of Public Health, the University of Ghana, Georgia Southern’s Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health and Texas A&M’s College of Veterinary Medicine that has determined two naturally occurring toxins in corn are in part responsible for the international spread of HIV.
The progression of HIV has now been shown to be related to two toxins within corn: aflatoxin and fumonisin, both of which are in much of the corn consumed in Africa.


HIV infection combined with high concentrations of the aflatoxin-albumin adduct biomarker have been associated with a decreased potential for antibody responses, decreased immune cytotoxic activity and decreased numbers of regulatory T cells, which may result in hyperactivation of the immune system. Thus, dietary sources of aflatoxin are a potential factor in the HIV epidemic.
The corn grown in the United States could contain the toxins but good farming practices in the United States reduce toxin levels.

Williams estimates that simple changes to farming practices in Africa alone could prevent one million infections per year.

That reduction in HIV infections reduces suffering and death as well as reducing the costs to governments particularly the United States that funds a vast majority of the HIV/AIDS prevention efforts in Africa.


This research is the strongest correlation found to date between a common food and the worldwide spread of disease.

The research paper was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition on June 30, 2010.
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/92/1/154?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTF ORMAT=1&author1=Williams%2C+J& andorexacttitle=and&andorexact titleabs=and&andorexactfulltex t=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0& sortspec=relevance&fdate=5/1/2010&resourcetype=HWCIT

[Gotyour6]

Originally Posted by woodyboyd

Because there was a question about BBFS on one of the sugar daddy threads in D&T and it was not answered.

Even though the misinformation about condom use irks me to no end, I usually let it slide because I don't want to deal with the idiotic commentary sure to follow. D&T is or at least was a place where the commentary was more sophisticated.

Maybe the guys here who want BBFS on this forum are unsophisticated jerks like elsewhere. But I wanted some of the ladies to see that some of the men who desired BBFS are sophisticated and learned and know BBFS isn't the death trap that the government/CDC wants us to believe it is.

Ah ok,
Understand now.

My girl and I Bareback.
No one has died yet and I haven't got an STD from it so I guess you are correct.

[gnadfly]

According to the CDC only 1300 white women contracted HIV last year. Not trying to make this a race thing, just showing how low for a population group of say 50 million WW the contraction rate is. 10-15 years ago when some 'experts' said penis to vagina transmission and vagina to penis transmission of HIV was almost nil in the US the media demonized those 'experts.' Those experts seem to have been correct.

Don't believe me?
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/ataglance.html




Sidewinder, I'd like to see the press release from the CDC you referenced.
JB, vaccines usually work off viruses, not antibiotics.

As always, play safe out there. Hint: BB Greeking a woman by an infected partner is likely the cause of how those women contracted HIV.

[Sidewinder]

Gnadfly, I didn't save a copy at the time. I wish I had.

It is politically impossible to admit that HIV is overwhelmingly a disease of male homosexuals, that poses almost negligible threat to heterosexuals and FEMALE homosexuals. If we admit that, we have to ask why we are spending so much more money on HIV and AIDS research than we are on e.g. heart disease, breast cancer, ...

[oldster]

AIDs is an infectious disease, while heart disease has many causes including genetics, and deaths from heart disease would have been called natural causes in someone over 70 not so long ago.


15000 people dying of a disease is not insignificant, and in other countries the toll is enormous, something like 1.7 million. In an age of worldwide travel, that is dangerous.

'only' 10000 people died in drunk driving accidents in 2010, most consider it still a problem


Am I missing the graph or is there no category for white heterosexual men?

I mean, I knew we were disappearing but ..........

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Sidewinder

Gnadfly, I didn't save a copy at the time. I wish I had.

It is politically impossible to admit that HIV is overwhelmingly a disease of male homosexuals, that poses almost negligible threat to heterosexuals and FEMALE homosexuals. If we admit that, we have to ask why we are spending so much more money on HIV and AIDS research than we are on e.g. heart disease, breast cancer, ...

The majority of HIV for females in not from sexual activity but shared needle use.

Having unprotected anal sex with a infected partner is the next worse form of transmission.

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by John Bull

Very interesting Woody and Sidewinder. I have a couple of other questions for the kids. We have STD's up the ying yang. Many of them are bacterial. Why don't we have vaccines for them? Yes, we have recently developed one for HPV and there is one for two of the Hep infections. But other than that, you're on your own. Could it be the religious lobby or could it be the condom lobby? I would come down on the religious lobby as the main culprit followed by politicians who don't want to rile them up by funding std research.
While we're at it, Snowden has made gross mistakes by associating with long time enemies of the USA and at least seeming to give away our secrets but for exposing these fascist cruds - btw it started with Saint Bill and was expanded by both Bushies - Snowden should get a medal.
What I don't understand is why the people aren't in the streets?

I ike the topic generally, but it`s a wide stretch from STDs to Snowden in my book. In Europe, unfortunately a few countries don`t cover the HPV vaccine (and it`s ridiculously expensive if you cover it by yourself) but they do cover Viagra. hmm.

What strikes me more interesting is how many people don`t get regularly screened for STDs and sleep around without condoms and don`t bother. Many people, including clients and escorts, are also grossly misinformed about some of these things. And - pardon my pun -

monogamous people tend to be biased in thinking that "bacterias or viruses" are also "faithful" (lol). Or make a distinction between "love" or "Just sex".

To Snowden: It does not bother me a slight bit what he did, but I see the hypocrisy also in the european countries, how they don`t want to get their feet wet. Plus, they also might spy on their citizens ( oh my god, who would have guessed ..... ... such a surprise, really.... )
like we saw in france and that is also bad.

I find it also interesting that the USA can tell Austria (or some other countries, Spain, France, Portugal, you choose a name - ) to check a flight machine of a Bolivian politician, and endanger his mission by not let him land anywhere (the guy would have run out of gasoline) and no one makes a peep.

I mean it`s simply hilarious! Such kiss asses all over the place. I think coming to Snowden (maybe Sandbox topic? ) there are several opinions to be discussed, but for me this is just a hilarious puppet show. I bet Obama just called Merkel and they planned "Yay , sweetheart, just pretend to be outraged for a few weeks, ok? The lets get back to normal? "

Here is an interesting research about "whistleblowers"
"Who is the real bad guy?"

http://ethics.csc.ncsu.edu/old/12_00...t/bad_guy.html

and here is some priceless video (The onion about facebook, which dramatically cust agency costs" (which shows how stupid most people are..... and what information they let the internet have ...)
http://www.theonion.com/video/cias-f...cys-cos,19753/

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by WTF

Having unprotected anal sex with a infected partner is the next worse form of transmission.

As is in general the worst form of transmission of ALL STDs. Anal intercourse.

[woodyboyd]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

According to the CDC only 1300 white women contracted HIV last year. Not trying to make this a race thing, just showing how low for a population group of say 50 million WW the contraction rate is. 10-15 years ago when some 'experts' said penis to vagina transmission and vagina to penis transmission of HIV was almost nil in the US the media demonized those 'experts.' Those experts seem to have been correct.

Don't believe me?

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/ataglance.html


LOL. Yeah, I don't believe you. You posted a table showing how white women got more HIV infections than any other subgroup... but you cut off the key word. The phrase over the graph is "estimated" new HIV infections.

And here are 10 reasons that HIV can't cause AIDS: http://www.healtoronto.com/10reasons.html

"Estimated total HIV infected worldwide: 28,000,000 ?
Total of reported AIDS cases worldwide: 1,400,000"

95% percent of people estimated to have HIV do not have AIDS. So much for estimates.