Shocked

[Beauregard]

I can't believe that. I can't believe that you thoughtlessly removed those links. Everything on those pages was true and it was not inflamitary, I posted those links so that other people with AIDS could find these things out. I don't mind if the rest of the world is in on the cover up, this is apouling.

What happened to a freedom of speech?

I don't mean to sound angry, but I am furious at you for doing that. People have a right to other opinions and those links were to books by skilled researchers and no matter what the forum rules say, I believe that people with AIDS deserve to know that there may be another way of curing people of the disece.

I know that if I post the links again they will be removed, so I'll just say that if anyone wants the links from the other thread, e-mail me at beauregard97@hotmail.com

Once again, I am shoocked at you, Jamie, and you, Philip.

Bye for now,

Beauregard

 

[Luke]

I think you should be free to repost, with the links - just in a thread in the general discussion forum about AIDS, not Richard. I'm guessing thats the problem - his death has been publicly reported as being from AIDS, he was a public figure so as long as a thread about his death contains fact and not probing or speculation then it should be fine to discuss it. Going the route inside that thread of suggesting that his cause of death didn't even exist is highly speculative and would be upsetting to anybody who knew him, although i know you didn't post it for that reason. Again, i don't see any problem with us having a general debate about AIDS at 'Muppet Central' - just that the way it was done was a little unthoughtful if you consider the circumstances.

 

[Beauregard]

OK, maybe it was a little harsh of me to put it in that thread, but that is a point that I have felt very strongly on since I first found out about it.

Re-reading my last post. I think that I was a little rude and harsh on Jamie and Phil, and I am sorry about that. Please forgive me.

Is it alright for me to do as Luke suggests and post the links in a thread in 'general discusion'?

In some ways, I still think that what I said in the other thread did not warrent deleting though. If, as the guys who wrote the books I linked to have found out in years of reasurch, is true, then I think that it deserves to be posted here, and across the net, but maybe it was a little unfeeling of me, still, I thought that people, maybe not his family and friends, but others who have friends still alive with 'AIDS' would be interested to read the things posted there.

Anyway, I'll step off my soapbox for now, but I'll keep it next to me for the time being so I can jump back up at any point,

Bye for now,
Beauregard

 

[radionate]

Ok, I’m about to really loose my cool for the first time in a long time around here.

The reason those links were taken off ma’am is because they were insane, ludicrous, and hurtful to anyone who has ever been in contact with anyone suffering from HIV/AIDS. To even begin to insinuate that the virus does not exist and that it is a world wide cover up is absolutely INSANE AND IGNORANT!

Protease inhibitors came out in 1996. As soon as people started using PI's, the AIDS death rate plummeted. It's gone up slightly since then -- mostly because of people deciding not to take their meds anymore. This there-is-no-AIDS argument was incorrect but almost understandable in the late-80's, when the meds that existed then didn't work that well. It is completely inconceivable now. 1996 was the moment when the last shred of defensibility was torn away from this aging scam. To spread it now is completely irresponsible, unethical... and the sign of someone who really has no experience with the subject.

Do you know how many doctors there are in the world who are working on treating/curing AIDS? Do you really think they all want to kill people for money?

 

[Buck-Beaver]

I can't believe that. I can't believe that you thoughtlessly removed those links. Everything on those pages was true and it was not inflamitary, I posted those links so that other people with AIDS could find these things out. I don't mind if the rest of the world is in on the cover up, this is apouling.

What happened to a freedom of speech?

I don't mean to sound angry, but I am furious at you for doing that. People have a right to other opinions and those links were to books by skilled researchers and no matter what the forum rules say, I believe that people with AIDS deserve to know that there may be another way of curing people of the disece.

I know that if I post the links again they will be removed, so I'll just say that if anyone wants the links from the other thread, e-mail me at beauregard97@hotmail.com

Let's just back the truck up here a moment Beau. First of all, I'll fess up to being one of the folks who complained about the links. It wasn't personal and had nopthing to do with freedom of speech.

I personally complained for the following reasons:

#1 - I really do think posting the links in a discussion about Richard was totally inappropriate and it did violate the forum rules. That is pretty self-explanitory.

#2 - I am a supporter of free speech, thought, etc. but I really think the question you posed in your post was horrifyingly insensitive and, again, violated the forum's rules.

#3 - You also misrepresented the content of the sites you linked to. I didn't read anything through those links (inaccurate as I believe they are) that suggests that AIDS doesn't exist or doesn't kill people. You're right - they're a lot of things but I do not believe they are inflammatory. However, intentional or not, your comments were incredibly inflammatory. AIDS doesn't kill people? Are we living in 1982? To suggest that is like trying to deny the holocaust – hurtful, insensitive and horribly ignorant. Shame on you!

As for the sites you linked to - as far as I could tell - their main argument is that there has not been a definitive link established between HIV and AIDS. This is (technically) true I believe. They do not argue attempt to argue that AIDS does not exist or that AIDS does not kill people (if I am wrong about this someone please correct me). That is an impossible position for any rational human being to support.

It's true that the full nature of the AIDS/HIV link is not completely understood by science and yes, there are cases of HIV positive people not developing AIDS or developing AIDS only after several years, usually because of advances made by the very researchers the site condemns. A lot of these people are closely studied by researchers because they want to understand why those people don't have AIDS. If we find the answer to that question we might find a cure.

But the real problem with the sites' arguments is that the crux of them is that there is no "good science" to support the HIV/AIDS connection. Unfortunately, the authors don't present any "good science" to back up their claims (at least on the site). It's all quotes (the sources for which are not provided - which makes me question if they are even valid), assumptions, ill-conceived logic, smoke, mirrors and healthy dose of contempt for the medical establishment. I guess we're supposed to believe that if we buy the book then the evidence will be contained inside.

It’s important to remember that the sites you've mentioned aren't a scientific journal or legitimate research paper or impartial source of information. They are a promotional site for a book.

I don't know what kind of "research" the authors have done, but I have a pretty good layman's understanding of some of the science involved with AIDS (I have relatives who work for organizations in the forefront of some of the research on the disease) and I don't buy it. I don't have a problem with their hypothesis (and that's all it really is), but I do think they are not proving anything or backing it up with their supporting information. It also seems like the book was written more for the sake of an ideology rather than science. They seem to be just trying to use a little science to dress up an otherwise unsupportable position.

Don't get me wrong - I mistrust the drug companies and researchers who are increasingly in bed with them as much as the next guy - it's just you can't argue someone's position doesn't meet the generally accepted scientific burden of proof by countering it with an argument that fails to meet that same burden of proof.

I believe you honestly didn't intend to offend anyone with your post Beau. Personally, I think this stuff is a bunch of bunk, but hey that's just my lil ol' opinion. You and the authors (and anyone else who agrees) are certainly entitled to your own opinions, that's your right.

Anyone who is interested in this subject should email Beau, check the sites out and read it for themselves. But don't just read them. Read other articles, compare the information. Think about the issues. Use common sense.

I share other MCers sense of outrage about this discussion, but I believe the best way to deal with this sort of thing is out in the open with public debate. Nothing shuts up ignorance faster than the light of day.

I think it might make for a good debate here (in the general discussion area) as long as it is kept within the forum rules. Just please - please - do us all a favour and don't claim that AIDS isn't killing people. That's terrible. Don't affront the dignity and memories of the millions who have been lost to this terrible disease.

Please show some sensitivity and respect.

 

[Skeeter Muppet]

Buck-Beaver, would I be out of line if I gave you a standing ovation for that?

-Kim

 

[frogboy4]

This thread is closed. Yes, there is freedom of speech in this country, but this forum is nobody's personal living room. It is a place where all people meet and discuss issues about Muppets. In everything we do, we should be mindful of others. It is not the appropriate place for inflammatory, half-baked propaganda that has offended so many members.

This terrible disease has touched the lives of several forum members who have had friends and family die. It is insulting, naive and insensitive to report the disease as some sort of myth and ultimately it went against the rules to disregard the action taken by the moderators and post on this subject again.

All subsequent threads on this topic will be closed. There is nowhere for the topic to go but downhill. We received complaints, discussed the issue and shut it down. It would have been done sooner if not for the holiday weekend. Further action may be taken. I am saddened and disappointed at this outcome.

 

[Beauregard]

Sorry.

I know that Jamie said all these threads would be closed, but I want to say sorry to anyone that I offended with my latest topic. I realise that it is a very sensitve area for a lot of people, and maybe I didn't think before I leapt.

I think that it was unfair for Jamie to shut the last topic before I got a chance to defend my position, so here is my defence:

I am only 15 and so don't really understand all this stuff, and, in fact, only really knew as much as I have heard from my parents and the guy who wrote that book.

No, I haven't prehaps included the best links, but they were the best I could find at the time.

I didn't realise it would create a forum war, I just thought that I should bring the topic up.

I didn't mean, in the things I said, to say that NO ONE is killed by AIDS, it is just what I have heard others say and I thought that in a thread about the subject all aspects should have been brought up.

I have been hearing from those in my family for the last few months that AIDS is a compleat myth and so you can't blame me for believing it.
I am sorry to Jamie for the things I said about you in my last thread, and in my complaint to Phill about your posts.

I am sorry to Richard's friends and family.

I am sorry to Radionate, Buck Beaver and all the rest of the board for bringing up a subject that would bring such pain to you all, and cause such an argument.

Please forgive me all of you, and please can we just go one being friends like before.

I will try to be more carefull in the things I say in the future,

Bearegard

 

[Ryan]

I am only 15 and so don't really understand all this stuff, and, in fact, only really knew as much as I have heard from my parents and the guy who wrote that book.

Um, then why comment on the topic in the first place if you weren't fully aware of the situation?

 

[Beauregard]

Um, then why comment on the topic in the first place if you weren't fully aware of the situation?

I posted the reason...

I have been hearing from those in my family for the last few months that AIDS is a compleat myth and so you can't blame me for believing it.

And also, like I said. I thought (wrongly it seems) it was an issue to discuse...

Sorry again.

Beau