IDSA's Secrets:

Bioweapon Attributes Dickson FDA Yale USDOJ RICO

PubMed: TLR2

"New World Disorder"
IDSA's Persistence "Cryme Disease" book Klempner's Fraud RICO Patents Osp-A/Viral Synergy Grants Search "TLR2" Kissinger NWO Beast
Relapsing Fever Dearborn Quotes Plum Island Corixa RICO "LYMErix ▲ Disease" Myco & Erythrocytes Rx Brain Damage
Steere Falsifies Test Dearborn Booklet Russians & NYMC CDCs Patents w/SKB GarthNicolson-GWI Rockefeller/Psychiatry
IDSA's Imitators Schoen-LYMErix IDSA: "Cyst Viable" DARPA Boots CDC Confronting Crooked NIH CT Med Board Hell/NDEs
IDSA's ShellGame Weinstein's Frauds LYMErix ►Imitators Auwaerter Epstein-Barr NIH Disinfo Foreign CPS' Sexual Assaults
IDSA's Biomarkers Yale's Valid Test UConn's KidTuskegee Plum Stupid Vaccines' Brain Damage Fraud With Intent   CPS' Entrapment
IDSA's Stupid Rx
 
Not used ▲to assess LYMErix? Yale's Congen Lyme
 
IDSA ▲ self-indicts
 

 
Update on Sex Abuse
 


24 May 2012 

HOME


Natural Remedies
 

CDC writes a "bogus article" on Mycoplasma in the blood and Chronic Fatigue.
 

Lyme/LYMErix Cryme Reveals  New Paradigm in Health/Disease:
"Bacterial/Viral Coinfections";

TLR2 (fungi)Signaling Depletes IRAK1 and Inhibits Induction of Type 1 by TLR7/9  (viruses)-- 
-CV Harding, 2012  (More in the chart at the bottom of this homepage)

CFIDS = Seronegative Chronic Active EBV

"Multiple Mechanisms of Immune Suppression by B Lymphocytes" (New and Trashes Yale and IDSA)

NIH's Treatment Recommendations for Chronic Active Epstein-Borreliosis, the chronic illness also induced by OspA vaccination or exposure to molds.

The Antics of the Crazy Stalker Durland Fish and the New Genre in "Education."
 


CDC Greed (won't answer the FOIA)

ELISA = arbitrary cutoff.

Disclaimer

Overview


TUSKEGEE - By Jerry Leonard


1998, CIA Oilmen & Israelis plan to overthrow Saddam for the oil.

Bush/Gore  Oil/War-(Oct,2000)  

Bush's own explainer (Oct 2000) re: Iraq Oil




 

 

 

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0310/06/pzn.00.html

 

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O'BRIEN: In what is believed to be one of the first cases of its kind, a Connecticut woman has been convicted of contributing to the suicide of a 12-year-old son. Prosecutors say Judith Scruggs had created a filthy home that kept her son from improving his hygiene, an issue that reportedly came -- became a constant source of ridicule from his classmates.

Joining us this evening, Scruggs' attorney, Reese Norris.

Good evening. Thanks for joining us.

REESE NORRIS, SCRUGGS' ATTORNEY: Good evening, Soledad.

O'BRIEN: Your client was convicted on risk of injury charge, meaning that she was guilty of intentionally maintaining an environment that put her son at risk. Can you give me a sense of specifically what that meant?

NORRIS: Sure. In this case, it meant that basically an allegation that she had a messy house. She was initially charged with putting his life and limb at risk. She was found not guilty of that. And she was also found not guilty of putting him at risk for failing to get psychological care or also for being cruel to him.

O'BRIEN: Did you ever think your client would be convicted?

NORRIS: Honestly, no. I've never heard of anyone arrested as a result of a child's suicide. And not one expert testified that there was anything about that house which put his health at risk.

O'BRIEN: Did you want a plea bargain? Did you have an opportunity to plea bargain in this case?

NORRIS: This was a case which had to be tried. Who could ask a parent to go through the rest of the life feeling that somehow they had a responsibility for the suicide of their child, when there had been no threats of suicide, no prior suicide attempts?

O'BRIEN: But in fact, that's exactly what a jury found. She faces prison time. Realistically, how much time could she get, do you think?

NORRIS: The maximum term of imprisonment for this offense is 10 years, but we still have a pending motion before the judge to set aside the verdict.

O'BRIEN: You made the argument in court that this child, this 12-year-old boy, was the target of truly mercilous bullying from children, other children in his class. Apparently the jury did not buy that. Why do you think that was the case?

NORRIS: It's hard to believe, because the prosecutor agreed with me in his final argument that Daniel was the subject of bullying. And so it was not even contested between the two sides. So if the jury didn't accept it, that's impossible to understand in this case.

O'BRIEN: Mrs. Scruggs is a single mother who worked two jobs to keep her kids fed. You have said that you think this is going to set a dangerous precedent. What kind of precedent do you think it sets?

NORRIS: Well, I think it's a dangerous precedent when the police come into someone's home, and now we're going to be the judges of how good a housekeeper they are. You have got to understand that although there were clothes in this house, not one officer said they examined the clothes, and in fact the defense witnesses testified that there were clean clothes. There was certainly no contrary evidence introduced at trial.

O'BRIEN: All right. Reese Norris, nice to have you. Thanks for joining us. We certainly appreciate it.

NORRIS: You're quite welcome.