Dr. Garth Nicolson, Gulf War, HIV

Tom Keske tkeske at mediaone.net
Thu Nov 4 21:17:29 EST 1999

 This is a continuing debate, concerning Dr. Garth Nicolson,
and his suggestion that Gulf War Veterans were hit by
an HIV-related biological war agent, that may have been
produced in our own country, and given to Iraq, along
with many other biological agents:

> I do not need to be a microbiologist to know bullfunky
> when I read/hear it.

I suppose that name-calling like "bullfunky" is your idea of a
properly scientific peer review?   The gene sequences of HIV and of
similar retroviruses are well-known. It should not be a difficult
matter to identify such sequences, if they are appearing in Gulf War
Veterans.  I would trust Nicolson on this, on his credentials, alone.

The fact that Dr. Nicolson's lab was once mysteriously trashed
is probably a hint that his research findings are hardly "bullfunky".

This kind of harassment and intimidation of researchers and
journalists is typical, when they are investigating AIDS origin,
Gulf War Syndrome, or other major scandals.  Other researchers
have been murdered.  That is part of the reason why some
would not care to give "peer review", other than negative ones,
for findings that imply government misdeeds.

> So where is the gene sequence of this alleged HIV gene.
> Where is the validation that gene tracking correlates with
> mycoplasma isolation.
> Instead of posting volumes of text, how about showing us
> which peer reviewed paper has the data in it???

Peer reviewed papers censor controversial points of view, just
as shameless as the mainstream media do.   You will be seeing
more posts in the future, documenting many examples.

Most new articles don't go to that level of detail: I haven't seen
the gene sequence of HIV in Newsweek, either.  I have researched
enough to have gene sequences of HIV and similar retroviruses at
my disposal.  What Dr. Nicholson does or doesn't have in this
regard, I haven't had time or occasion to investigate, so I make
no presumptions about it.

Rather than use me as middleman, I suggest that you go straight to the
source with your demands:

       Prof. Garth Nicolson
       Institute for Molecular Medicine
       15162 Triton Lane
       Huntington Beach, Calif.  92649-1401
       (714) 903-2900

       gnicimm at ix.netcom.com

BTW, for anyone else out there, the Institute for Molecular Medicine
is getting some stellar reviews from Gulf War Veterans and their
families for Nicolson's treatment and research (see attachment).

As I recall, I believe that the Nicolsons' own daughter was a Gulf
War Veteran stricken by the disease.  I doubt that the Nicolsons
would be careless either in their diagnosis or treatment.

Donations to the Institute for Molecular Medicine are tax-deductible.

> Can you please show me ANY documentation that the Pentagon was
> considering HIV as a bioweapon.

Of course <humor follows>:  the Pentagon has recently published
the Pentagon HIV Biowar Papers.  Page 193, Section 29, paragraph 12
conveniently describes the Pentagon's intent to explore the
possibilities of weaponizing HIV.

I did not say that there was "documentation", I said that there was

If you start with some common sense, you don't even need to see the
evidence.  Question: could a country like Iraq try to weaponize HIV?
What about China?  The former USSR?  What kinds of weapons could they
make, how effective would they be?  How vulnerable would our
country be?

If you are honest- you don't know.  Neither do non-microbiologist
Congress members or Generals know.  Do they need to know?   You bet.

Thus, they must get some microbiologists together and ask them to
study the questions.  It would be irresponsible and negligent of
them *not* to do this, at least for the purely defensive purposes,
and for our own national security.

Yet, there have been no newspaper reports about such evaluations.
You can conclude one of two things: 1) they are too stupid to think
of doing such prudent evaluations, or 2) they have done some quiet
evaluations, about which they have not told the public.

Now, suppose that they have in fact done such prudent evaluations.
How can  you tell if this was *really* a purely defensive
investigation, or was really a potentially *offensive* investigation?
You couldn't.   Not even the scientists who were working on the
secret evaluation could tell for sure, could they?

Welcome to the wonderful world of biowarfare, the ethical
dilemmas, the politics and secrecy, the dangers thereof.

Yes, there is more specific evidence, not that I can easily
detail in an already too-long response.

For instance, there was a Pentagon official who made remarks that the
Pentagon had concluded that HIV would make a poor weapon- a slip, not
realizing that he was implicitly admitting that they had at least
studied the question.

Another "for instance"- I was contacted by an investigator who was
describing how our government was producing HIV *far* in excess of
what they needed for legitimate research purposes- a fact documented
in the New York Times.  It is similar to a situation in the 70s where
a CIA director admitted to Congress that the CIA was storing enough
shellfish toxin to kill a half-million people.  He also admitted to
Congress that this amount was far in excess of what was needed for
any legitimate "research" purposes.

> You obviously are careless in support of your good
> buddy.  Ronald Reagen and Queen of England are not
> considered scientists.  I know of NO credible scientist
> with a proper respectable career allowing the National Enquirer
> to publish there theories.

Obviously, no more careless than "Reagen" and "there" theories.

Do you suppose that the Queen of England "allows" the National
Enquirer to print stories about her bearing the love-child of
aliens or Elvis?   They print pretty much what they want, and
then you have to sue if you care, regardless of whether you are
a scientist or the Queen.

How do you even know what stories run in the National Enquirer,
if you would never think of reading it, yourself?  Perhaps you
are quoting some other source who is an avid reader?

Considering that much of our media is right-wing owned, including
the tabloids, it is entirely possible that the National Enquirer
took the initiative in printing Nicholson's material, just as a
discrediting tactic, to be picked up by people like you.  Perhaps
they tempted him with huge sums of money, that he needed urgently
for his life-saving research.  Please present your evidence that
Nicholson was the one who actively courted National Enquirer.

> Mainstream media is mostly controlled by the entertainment
> industry, Disney, Time/Warner, etc. They depend on government
> regulations and certainly are biased against anti-government ideas
> --unless of course it can sell volumes of news.

Not really true.  They will go after any piece of frivolous news that
will sell papers, but will *not* as a rule print things that butt
heads directly with the Pentagon and CIA, that might cause a panic,
that might spawn extreme anti-government reactions, that might
compromise "national security".  They might sell a few papers,
but would then find themselves getting driven quietly out of
business, as happened to the venerable Houston Post, which had
printed a bit too much about AIDS origin and CIA/Saving & Loan
scandals.  Business shuttered, closed utterly, in spite of never
a single unprofitable year.

Not even the media moguls know when their journalists are working
double, with CIA connections.  History shows *extensive* penetration
and manipulation of our own media, even mainstream, much less
"alternative" and far-left press, against which a virtual dirty war
was declared in the 60's and 70's, leaving it essentially destroyed.

The job of the media is to feed the public reassuring pap, that keeps
them complacent, and keeps them from getting any ideas about rocking
the boat and challenging the status quo in a serious way.  In times
of war, their job is to dispense war propaganda: how awful the enemy
is, how well we are doing.  It has been this way in most countries,
through time immemorial.

AIDS is a war, as the Gulf War was a war, in case you didn't
know.  During the Gulf War, our journalists were barred virtually
at gunpoint from things that they weren't supposed to see.

> So let me summarize your position:
> 1. You believe in the conspiracy theory of Nicolson that the
> Pentagon put HIV genes into mycoplasma

No, that is a sloppy mischaracterization.  I neither believe
nor disbelieve.  I acknowledge the HIV/mycoplasma connection as
a theory and a legitimate possibility.

As for what caused the  HIV/mycoplasma connection, if such a
thing exists- that is a entirely another question.  Pentagon
research would be one obvious theory.  It also could have been
Russian biowar researchers, who are also friendly to Iraq.
Even Iraq itself might conceivably have done such research.
Or, it could even be a conceivably natural phenomenon.

I do not *ever* draw absolute conclusions, as no real scientist
does.  That does not mean that I have no *tentative*, working theory
to which I ascribe the highest probability of correctness.

In this case, I trust Nicolson more than I trust the
Pentagon, and, pardon my saying so, more than you.
His credentials and expertise are impeccable.

If the Pentagon does not want for people like me to trust
Nicolson, then they should not have pulled tricks like
the destroying of Gulf War records.

> 2. You do not believe that mainstream scientists can go off the deep end.

Certainly they can.  I'm glad that you admit this.  People like Robert
Gallo can go off the deep end, and create new viruses for the CIA
and Pentagon, never realizing what other people, also off the deep
end, might go and do with them.

> 3. You respond to challenges by posting volumes of text...very little of
> it that you can understand

Thank for for being a mind reader, and second-guessing what I can
understand and what I cannot.  I do have microbiologist contacts,
thank you, who can help me to get a layman's understanding of nearly
anything, much thanks to their wonderful patience.

Anyone who lacks patience for volumes of text will get almost
nowhere trying to get an understanding of emerging diseases,
including lyme- the devil is in the details.

I'm posting a few excerpts from a Presidential Advisory
Committee, which can be viewed in full at:


The full text is nearly a third of million characters.
I'm abridging the references significantly.

> Did I leave anything out.

The kitchen sink.  But I will not respond on this
thread again.  I know the pattern of determined newsgroup
propagandists: they never quit or move on.  However,
after a few rounds of rejoinders to responses to
replys, no one is left listening, anyway, so it is
diminishing returns, to try to get the last word.

Much better simply to move on, and determine your
own agenda of new, original subject matter.



Wednesday, May 1, 1996

Omni Shoreham Hotel - Diplomat Room
Washington, D.C.


JOYCE C. LASHOF, M.D., Committee Chair


MS. HAMDEN: I will hurry. Good morning.

My name is Julianne Hamden. I am the wife of Army Cpt. Charles Hamden,
who served in the Gulf. In addition, my brother, my brother-in-law,
and my cousin also served in the Gulf. I was stationed at the
National Security Agency during the Gulf War, so I wasn't over there.
We are a military family. Every child in my family has either served
or is still serving in the military.

Since my husband's return from the Gulf, our whole family has been
sick. We were tested by the Drs. Nicolson for mycoplasma fermentans,
and we are positive. We have been taking Doxycycline and are much
better. Without them, I would not be here today. I was bedridden with
uterine pain, and doctors at Walter Reed told me I had "willed" my
uterus to expand.

I come here today as both the spouse of a Gulf War veteran and as a
representative for a large group of Vietnam era and Gulf era veterans
who have been conducting our own investigation into the Persian Gulf
War syndrome. 204,000 of our Gulf War veterans were also veterans of
the Vietnam war.

Vietnam veterans, POW, MIA activists, church leaders, militia groups,
civil rights groups and interested researchers and scientists have
aided us in our search for answers. What we have uncovered includes
evidence that Gulf War syndrome biological exposures may be linked to
chronic fatigue immune dysfunction syndrome. This was published in
the Journal of Occupational Environmental Medicine, acquired immune
dysfunction syndrome or AIDS, and may have relevance for other
autoimmune diseases such as lupus and multiple sclerosis. In these
diseases, an agent often referred to as Agent X or Compound X is
believed to act as a viral catalyst reactivating Epstein Barr, human
herpes virus No. 6 and other viruses. We believe that agent acts as
anthrax and/or mycoplasma fermentans.

Our researchers have uncovered evidence about mycoplasma fermentans
incognitus, and there are hundreds of reports about scientists
worldwide who have conducted research on this organism, and those are
the medical extracts that I gave you on both the anthrax vaccines and
on the mycoplasma fermentans, and those are from Medline, so they are
not classified.

Confidential sources have related to us that mycoplasma fermentans is
a byproduct of anthrax processing. As, for example, dioxin is the
byproduct of Agent Orange. We ask the committee to confirm using
their sources.

Mycoplasma fermentans has been shown to cause signs and symptoms
similar to rheumatoid arthritis and can cause cardiovascular problems,
tissue necrosis, organ failure and other damage to the body. Shyh
Ching Lo of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology showed that this
organism can cause death on its own. The Uniformed Services
University of Health Scientists or USUHS, the military medical school,
has been teaching about mycoplasma fermentans and Dr. Lo's findings
since at least 1993 in their pathology syllabus.

Noted Pasteur Institute scientists, credited with first isolating HIV
and  AIDS, Dr. Luc Montagnier has stated that he believed that
mycoplasma  fermentans and HIV met, perhaps in Haiti, and became AIDS.
He believes that  mycoplasma fermentans is an important cofactor in
AIDS and may be responsible  for much of the pathogenesis of AIDS.

Specifically, we believe that some of the anthrax vaccines were
experimental and that they were designed to totally eliminate, but
instead they only reduced the lethal factor (LF) of anthrax. As
stated earlier, if mycoplasma fermentans is a byproduct of the
anthrax production, it could have contaminated the anthrax vaccines.
Mycoplasmas lack a cell wall, and M.  fermentans is a penetrating
mycoplasma that hides inside the cells of the body.

The Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV1) or in monkeys (SIV), would
make a good shuttle vector and could elicit an immediate immune
response. Drs.  Garth and Nancy Nicolson found a portion of the HIV1
genome envelope. This may have been, we believe, that the HIV1
envelope was inserted into the mycoplasma fermentans. Dr. Facui of
NIH has unsuccessfully used the HIV-GP120 envelope over 20 times in
trials to develop an AIDS vaccine. In the April 12, 1996 journal
Science, scientists from Salk Institute and Whitehead Foundation
reported that HIV may be useful in gene therapy.

More information about the Microbio mailing list