Paul posted 16 articles, most discrediting Canzi lies

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

PaulKing - 08 Dec 2004 22:53 GMT

DM Canzi tries every possible tactic to give a false impression and cover
up the fact he has been proven to be both wrong and a lier.

Reply to this Message

PaulKing - 09 Dec 2004 01:47 GMT

1). He tries to draw attention away from the CDC Revised Definition which
skewed survival figures.

2). He tries to draw attention away from the fact that a mere 16% or so of
people were on HAART as late as 1996 (four years after the REAL decline)
and even before the CDC skewed decline figures.

3). He ignores the fact that 'infections' also declined. These could
hardly be attributed to HAART as who takes highly toxic meds., before even
being told they have 'AIDS'?

4). Canzi uses every trick to try to confuse the reader and cover up the
clear truth.

HAART had nothing to do with the reduction in mortalities. Quite the
reverse as latest statistics show.

HAARTS long term effects INCREASE deaths by a substantial factor.

HAART is HEARTLESS.

Reply to this Message

Gary Stein - 15 Dec 2004 04:08 GMT

> 1). He tries to draw attention away from the CDC Revised Definition which
> skewed survival figures.

They may change survival numbers as a precentage of total AIDS cases Paul no
one has argued with you about that, whats at is is your claim that the
revised definition some how changed the number of actual real deaths that
occured in 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996 which they of course can not change
in that a death is a death and just becasue more people had AIDS diagnosis
after the 1993 definition change that fact has nothing to do with the fact
that more people died from AIDS each year until 1996.

> 2). He tries to draw attention away from the fact that a mere 16% or so of
> people were on HAART as late as 1996 (four years after the REAL decline)
> and even before the CDC skewed decline figures.

Which is it Paul 11% 16% 19% you need to make up your mind your all over the
place with your different postings on this same percentage??????????????

> 3). He ignores the fact that 'infections' also declined. These could
> hardly be attributed to HAART as who takes highly toxic meds., before even
> being told they have 'AIDS'?

Infections decreased when? And what does that have to do with the number of
people who died during a given year?

> 4). Canzi uses every trick to try to confuse the reader and cover up the
> clear truth.

That is a description of you Paul not of David.

> HAART had nothing to do with the reduction in mortalities. Quite the
> reverse as latest statistics show.

Which statistics are those and could you provide the URL so we can see them
for ourselves.

> HAARTS long term effects INCREASE deaths by a substantial factor.

Proof?

Gary Stein

Reply to this Message

muslum - 11 Dec 2004 15:09 GMT

NOW PAUL WITH ALL OF THE ACCUSations of your life and the proven hacking,
copyright violations (dag being shut down for a ouple hours)(smile) How
can you call anyone a lier.
Facts are this.
1.davey boy has not been sued and you say its comming.
2.you claimed you were going to invade websites and on dec.1 and that two
was a lie.
3.you have been accused of childmolesttion accusations over the years and
a mole in your group has reveal you are not allowed to work with
children.
4.You talk about censorship but yet all of your groups are moderated
5.You are into hacking(john scott nik pk use to hack aids ministry. pk
has admitted to being john scott)

PAUL KING HIDES BEHIND ALIAS AND HIDES HIS IDENITY BECAUSE HE IS A COWARD
BUT HIS DEEDS ARE ABOUT TO BE DEALTH WITH THIS I PROMISE!

Reply to this Message