Venezuela's Chavez: did U.S. give Latin American leaders cancer?

[Dover]

(Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez speculated on Wednesday that the United States might have developed a way to give Latin American leaders cancer, after Argentina's Cristina Fernandez joined the list of presidents diagnosed with the disease.

It was a typically controversial statement by Venezuela's socialist leader, who underwent surgery in June to remove a tumor from his pelvis. But he stressed that he was not making any accusations, just thinking aloud.

"It would not be strange if they had developed the technology to induce cancer and nobody knew about it until now ... I don't know. I'm just reflecting," he said in a televised speech to troops at a military base.

"But this is very, very, very strange ... it's a bit difficult to explain this, to reason it, including using the law of probabilities."

cont'd

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/28/us-venezuela-usa-cancer-idUSTRE7BR14I20111228

[Enrique]

1. we'll have to take good care of Evo

Chavez said other regional leaders should beware, including his close ally, Bolivian President Evo Morales.

"We'll have to take good care of Evo. Take care Evo!" he said.

[hunter]

2. The East German Secret police used to blast dissidents with x-rays...

"After the Berlin Wall fell, X-ray machines were found in the prisons. Indeed, three of the best-known dissidents died within a few months of each other, of similar rare forms of leukaemia. Survivors state that the MfS intentionally irradiated political prisoners with high-dose radiation, possibly to provoke cancer in them."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi

[Dreamer Tatum]

3. Looks like Chavez has been blasting himself with beef and cheese rays nt

[Ken Burch]

37. Cheap shot.

Chavez' cancer treatment probably included steroid injections...they have the effect of making people swell up like that.

(and how very classy it was of you to make fun of a person due to the physical changes caused by his having to battle a possibly life-threatening condition).

[NickB79]

64. I think Chavez or the other Latin American leaders would remember being kidnapped

Strapped to chairs, and repeatedly subjected to X-rays.

That is to say if they even had forms of cancer even remotely associated with radiation exposure, which they don't.

[hunter]

76. Needn't be radiation...

I'm not saying this isn't "creative speculation," but the USA has a history of covert and not-so-covert political assassinations and other thuggery in Latin America.

[Judi Lynn]

84. He most clearly remembers being kidnapped, held outside the country on an island

while a military coup was attempted, before the public finally found out through non-right-wing-controlled media, poured into the streets, surrounded Miraflores, and forced the return of their elected President.

The story is well known by now.

Over a thousand people in Guatemala continued to remember being controlled by U.S. doctors, and infected with sexual diseases, remembered that experience up to the time they died in agony. That story is well known, as well.

In fact, people right here in the United States recalled being injected and forced to experience living hell, too, up until they died, also, helplessly, suffering helplessly at the hands of U.S. government-employed doctors.

The United States government did something that was wrong—deeply, profoundly, morally wrong. It was an outrage to our commitment to integrity and equality for all our citizens. . . . clearly racist.

—President Clinton's apology for the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment to the eight remaining survivors, May 16, 1997

For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, for the most part illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness. Informed that they were being treated for “bad blood,”1 their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all. The data for the experiment was to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to degenerate under the ravages of tertiary syphilis—which can include tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, insanity, and death. “As I see it,” one of the doctors involved explained, “we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”

The Tuskeegee Experiment and the shocking crimes against Guatemalan people were completely unknown by the U.S. citizens, the ones who footed the bill for this criminality on the part of the U.S. government, completely hidden from the public for a very long time until the information was finally exposed, and revealed to the world.

People who are concerned about the morality of situations like this have been sadly awakened by the truth of the matter for a long time, as well.

It's hardly virgin territory for our own government.

[Dreamer Tatum]

156. Without writing another history book on Latin America...

...did the US give Chavez cancer?

Yes or no? Just sign up for one.

[L. Coyote]

89. They certainly remember the 100,000 progressive activists that were kidnapped and disappeared

Permanently!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

George Bush Sr. May Face Charges: Conspiring to Kidnap and Murder Political Activists
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2459135

But, it seems that in the USA, memory is restricted to pop culture.

So, any coincidence that progressive activists like the Kennedys and MLK are shot? Think about it rationally.

[Dover]

4. And all leftists...

Chavez, Fernandez, Paraguay's Fernando Lugo, Brazil's Dilma Rousseff and former Brazilian leader Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva have all been diagnosed recently with cancer.

[dixiegrrrrl]

6. Hmmm..I WAS wondering about that.

[Dover]

7. And.... we know what happened to the Socialist contender for the presidency of France...

Strauss-Kahn. He would never have been arrested in NYC if the US supported his presidency (whether or not he was guilty).
He was dragged through the mud and held just long enough to assure he would not be able to run for the presidency.

I think the US and certain allies are terrified of the rise of the left and the global disenchantment with this country and the
capitalist, free market model.

[loudsue]

18. I think you're absolutely correct. And I've had 3 VERY liberal, socialist, vocal friends who have

each and every one developed brain cancer.

Maybe it's a coincidence, but it's still weird as hell.

[hack89]

56. You realize you are now straying into industrial strength conspiracy theory? nt

[The Doctor.]

66. Can you imagine? I remember a wacky conspiracy theory among Native Americans...

About settler giving them disease-laden blankets.

Now that's some crazy talk before tin foil was even invented!

[NickB79]

70. Comparing the transmissibility of smallpox with various forms of cancer?

Really? You don't see a logical and scientific fallacy in there anywhere?

[The Doctor.]

81. There is no 'logical fallacy' there.

If were were native Americans and we started talking about the possibility of the white men putting 'disease spirits' in our blankets, we would be called 'conspiracy theorists' by those like you.

That you can't see the obvious parallels is your failing, not mine.

[hack89]

86. You can't "catch" cancer. nt

[The Doctor.]

110. Which is entirely irrelevant to the point.

There are ways to surreptitiously inflict diseases on someone. Including cancer. You can 'catch' cancer from overexposure to many things.

So I guess you're essentially wrong anyhow.

That happens often to people that are more interested in 'scoring points' or obfuscating on issues they have no direct argument against.

[hack89]

113. So propose a mechanism whereby you can give someone colon cancer. nt

[Demeter]

114. HPV

Human papilloma virus.

[hack89]

115. Wrong

Human papillomavirus is not associated with colorectal cancer in a large international study.

Abstract
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY:

Recent publications have reported an association between colon cancer and human papillomaviruses (HPV), suggesting that HPV infection of the colonic mucosa may contribute to the development of colorectal cancer.
METHODS:

The GP5+/GP6+ PCR reverse line blot method was used for detection of 37 types of human papillomavirus (HPV) in DNA from paraffin-embedded or frozen tissues from patients with colorectal cancer (n = 279) and normal adjacent tissue (n = 30) in three different study populations, including samples from the United States (n = 73), Israel (n = 106) and Spain (n = 100). Additionally, SPF10 PCR was run on all samples (n = 279) and the Innogenetics INNO-LiPA assay was performed on a subset of samples (n = 15).
RESULTS:

All samples were negative for all types of HPV using both the GP5+/GP6+ PCR reverse line blot method and the SPF10 INNO-LiPA method.
CONCLUSIONS:

We conclude that HPV types associated with malignant transformation do not meaningfully contribute to adenocarcinoma of the colon.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20087645

And just how did the CIA get HPV into Chavez - slip him a gay lover?

[The Doctor.]

121. Give them a plutonium colonoscopy.

A few atoms of plutonium on the aperture would virtually guarantee cancer.

You could do a little research and inform yourself about just how radiation causes cancer, but I don't mind educating people on occasion.

Radioactive material gives off radiation, which is essentially high-energy particles that are released during decay. These particles are of just the right mass and character to punch through DNA and disrupt the 'information' by which DNA replicates. This can lead to a mutation or 'stochastic' result. Two of those results can be cancerous. Plutonium gives off a high enough amount of radiation to virtually guarantee such results. Kind of like buying $1 billion in lottery tickets for a $10 million lottery.

Learning can be fun and ultimately informative. Feel free to ask me anything.

[hack89]

122. So the CIA stuck plutonium up Hugo's ass?

OK - if you say so.

[The Doctor.]

124. I didn't say anything of the sort.

You asked me how it could be done. I told you how.
What's with the dishonesty?
Oh, wait, I know. You can't admit that you have no position, so you have to twist, evade, and put words 'in my mouth'.

Let me ask you this: "Do you believe that our government does not have the resources to accomplish such a task?"

This might be tough given that it is a 'yes/no' question.

[hack89]

125. So how did the CIA give Hugo colon cancer?

I can't think of any way that would not take decades, have a high probability of failure or could not be detected.

Have you ever considered that Hugo's life style or family history made him more vulnerable.?

[The Doctor.]

134. You really don't see how transparent you are. Here it is again:

First, I didn't say the CIA did it. I'm not sure how it would take 'decades' to do a single colonoscopy. If that's how long yours take, I recommend another proctologist.

You can't admit that you have no position, so you have to twist, evade, and put words 'in my mouth'.

Let me ask you this: "Do you believe that our government does not have the resources to accomplish such a task?"

This might be tough given that it is a 'yes/no' question. The fact that you are desperate to avoid it only proves that you're being deliberately dishonest.

Why are you so terrified of answering the question?

[hack89]

135. So Saint Hugo is talking shit? What a suprise.

or are we back to the Area 51 gambit?

And no - the government does not have the technology to give people cancer.

[The Doctor.]

140. Thanks so much.

I'm glad you are of the opinion that the most resourceful government in human existence does not possess a technology that has been available in dentist's offices for decades now.

I suppose the US government should catch up on this here 'internet' thing. Then maybe they wouldn't have to waste so much money on telegrams.

Thanks for the laugh. At least someone got the money's worth.

[hack89]

145. So those vaunted Cuban doctors didn't notice the radiation burns?

and just how did they x-ray his colon without detection?

On edit: stop being obtuse - it is clear that in regards to Hugo's claims, we are talking about covert methods. Unless you think he let the CIA stick an xray machine up his ass.

[The Doctor.]

169. It's fun watching you employ your tactics.

Do they really work on most people? I find it hard to believe that most people can't see clearly through your methods.


What kind of 'radiation burns' would a picogram of plutonium leave? I'll just chalk that up to your not having any understanding of the potency of the substance.

But this is pretty transparent:

"it is clear that in regards to Hugo's claims, we are talking about covert methods. Unless you think he let the CIA stick an xray machine up his ass."

Are you actually saying that the CIA does not have the assets or resources to perform such an operation without his security apparatus knowing? You too often argue that our intelligence assets are incompetent or otherwise incapable of so many things. Heck, If I were head of the CIA, part of my operations would be to pay people to create that impression.

How else but 'covertly' would we accomplish something like that?

Neither I, nor Chavez is certain that we have... and neither can you be certain we have not. Your arguments that the US doesn't possess the technology and is generally incompetent are pretty laughable.

But keep it up.

[hack89]

171. Ah - the old plutonium up the ass trick. CIA favorite I have heard. nt

[Occulus]

193. Georgi Ivanov Markov

Go Google how he died and get back to us.

That was decades ago, BTW.

[hack89]

199. Killed by an easily detected ricin pellet. No cancer.

No mystery or questions.

[hang a left]

90. I am sure the science has evolved

and there might be a way of infecting someone with cancer cells. AMNAD but if there is technology our government has it, hell they probably discovered it.

[hack89]

120. The old Area 51 gambit

I have no clue but there has to be a secret government program that has figured it out.

[The Doctor.]

123. You really don't see how transparent you are, do you?

The poster said 'If such technology exists, the government has it'.

Deliberately mischaracterizing what the poster said is dishonest right on the face of it. Here's how we cut through that dishonesty...

I ask you the following question:

"Is that poster's assumption that the most resourceful government in human history would possess a technology if it existed not a reasonable one?"

Then we find out whether you simply mistook the poster's meaning (somehow) when you honestly answer the question, or that you were indeed being deliberately dishonest when you avoid, distract from, or further mischaracterize the question.

I would very much like to think that you merely misunderstood what the poster meant. Please help make this clear to us.

Thank you.

[hack89]

85. Smallpox was well understood - cancer not so well

there is no way to "catch" cancer like small pox.

[arikara]

95. And you know this

how?

[hack89]

96. Inoculation against smallpox goes back to the 1500s

It was common in America by the 1720s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine


on edit: there has never been a case of cancer being transmitted in a similar manner as smallpox.

[PavePusher]

108. Aww, don't be such a killjoy....

I really want to see where they take this.

[The Doctor.]

111. Again, I'll point out that your observation is totally irrelevant to the point.

Creating strawmen to argue against is usually transparent. I'm sorry to see that other posters have fallen for it.

The point is that smallpox was deliberately inflicted on the indigenous people of America, that such a thing would most certainly be considered a 'conspiracy theory' (until the fact was established), that cancer can indeed be inflicted on someone and that you aren't fooling anyone by trying to create a strawman.

Well, you have apparently fooled a couple people who want to 'see where they go with this'. The answer is, of course, 'nowhere' given that it has nothing to do with the point and doesn't negate it in any way.

Unless of course you're trying to say that cancer cannot be inflicted upon a person.

I'd really like to see 'where you go with this'.

[hack89]

178. To bad those other posters aren't as smart as you.

It is hard living around sheeple that just don't get it. Come down to the 911 forum - there's a bunch of folks just like you.

[The Doctor.]

179. Yes, it's such a darn shame.

Don't worry, I'll be happy to enjoin per your invitation.

Watching the paranoids freak out over things they can't deal with rationally is something of a hobby to me.

I sure hope to see you there.

[hack89]

181. Your logic would fit in well

I suspect you have a bit of a Truther in you.

[Dover]

126. loudsue! Aren't you a sight for sore eyes!

I was just watching Harry Belefonte on both Charlie Rose and Tavis Smiley tonight and he's either not considered
a big threat or he's been spared for some reason. He was telling Charlie what a big disappointment Obama is and he does not seem
to support him at all.

I think the big point is that it is sadly very believable that the U.S. would open this Pandora's
Box of covert, insideous type of warfare. As if killing people will actually turn back the tides of change...

[loudsue]

157. Hi Dover! It's so nice to see you posting again!

I've missed you!

I hope you have a stellar New Year!

[Ken Burch]

12. Which does tend to give Chavez' musings a bit more creedence.

The U.S. was, after all, just pretending to like those "center-left" leaders...our real rulers still haven't given up on getting the "austerity on steroids" types back into power in the Southern Cone.

[Dreamer Tatum]

127. I don't think Chavez likes Creedence. And I know HE HATES THE FUCKIN' EAGLES, MAN! nt

[Ken Burch]

129. He must love Mojo Nixon, then.

[Dreamer Tatum]

144. Obviously, you're not a golfer nt

[Capn Sunshine]

25. Did they all spend time in WTC tower 7 as well?

would explain a LOT

[The Doctor.]

67. That makes no sense at all.

For too many reasons.

[hang a left]

91. he is being a jerk

pay him no mind

[uppityperson]

5. Unlocked for now. Not LBN, perhaps GD or Good Reads. Here's link to GD topic....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100281828

The message "off topic" is added automatically by the DU locking thingie. I wish it'd say something else since that doesn't particularly apply in many cases.

LBN SOP says:
Post the latest news from mainstream news websites and blogs. Important news of national interest only. No analysis or opinion pieces. No duplicates. News stories must have been published within the last 12 hours. Use the published title of the story as the title of the discussion thread.

I consider this analysis, even creative speculation. The article is about speculation.

[JackRiddler]

13. It's speculation, but on the part of a state leader and being reported in the mainstream news.

So it's LBN, I'd say, the same as speculative statements by other politicians.

I hadn't thought of this before, but the odds seem astronomical that it would hit five people at the same time - Rousseff, Lula, Lugo, Kirchner and Chavez - all current or immediately former leftist leaders in South America, all hated passionately by their respective oligarchies as well as the US empire.

It's not an impossibility, except to those who believe only the Stasi would come up with such strategems, but never the US government or an ally thereof. Not impossible, merely "unthinkable."

[JDPriestly]

15. But wouldn't these leaders' closest aides also be affected?

How could the leaders be contaminated without the contamination of others in their offices or households?

Remember, these people are all in an age group in which cancer is fairly frequent.

[The Doctor.]

71. Easily.

There are many types of radioactive materials that are easily handled and only really dangerous when ingested. It really wouldn't take more than occasionally breaking a boron capsule of some such substance into their soup. The substance would pass through their system without a trace other than billions of busted DNA strands.

There are any number of ways to deliver a radioactive agent to a single target.

[Occulus]

194. You may want to put Georgi Ivanov Markov in your ammo box against some of the fools on this thread

He was injected via an umbrella syringe stabbing (that's not a joke) with a microscopic pellet containing ricin.

And it wasn't the USA that did it; the Wiki says it was someone possibly connected to the Bulgarian secret police.

I saw this on the Discovery Channel many years ago; it was a show dealing with spy gadgets, IIRC. They even showed the pellet. Apparently, the event was also used on Jeopardy! as the $2000 "Double Jeopardy" answer on show #4611, 11/27/04.

You can see the photo of the umbrella itself if you Google the terms 'ricin poison umbrella' without the ' marks.

[loudsue]

19. And Teddy Kennedy died from it this past year.

Just sayin'.

[The Doctor.]

75. That's not necessarily part of a pattern though.

Just respondin'.

[dipsydoodle]

35. BBC posted it at roughly the same time as the OP's Reuters source.

see # 34 below. The subject was Chavez and there appears to be no doubt he said it albeit in a joking manner.

As you say the default "off topic" wording is a bit unfortunate.

[Peregrine Took]

8. Nothing would shock me - look at what we tried to do to Castro:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/638_Ways_to_Kill_Castro

[Dover]

9. Bush reinstituted a policy allowing the assassination of world leaders...

and to my knowledge, neither Obama nor the current Congress has changed that.

So why wouldn't other world leaders have cause for concern and suspicion?

US policy on assassinations:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/11/04/us.assassination.policy/

[Scuba]

11. Really. If (some of) our leaders could find a way, they know, just know, that ....

... the ends justifies the means. They'd do it in a heartbeat.

[Fredge]

10. As if

No one can contract cancer on their own...

[JackRiddler]

14. Well of course they can, and do.

Do you care to argue that inducing it is impossible - given that it's been done, e.g. by the Stasi?

People can get into accidents and kill themselves on their own, but this doesn't mean that accidents and apparent suicides cannot be arranged as a means of hiding homicides.

[COLGATE4]

17. This is the type of mindless paranoia

which regularly appears on FR. The five Latin American leaders in question have all developed very different types of cancer. The fact that the Stasi purportedly caused leukemia in political prisoners under their total and complete control in prison through massive amounts of ionizing radiation in no way tends to support the novel idea that the U.S. can create different diseases in different leaders (i.e. thyroid cancer in one person, colon cancer in another, etc.)

[zeemike]

20. Which leads to other forms of paranoia...

Like bieng afraid someone will call you a conspericy theroist or label you as nutty...the only safe thing is to believe only those things approved by the media and the official story.
It makes cover up and crime so easy that way.

[COLGATE4]

53. I rest my case

[The Doctor.]

74. You never made much of a case to begin with.

Aside from that, the poster is absolutely correct. If you had a 'case' you could explain how they were not.

The more I see how incompetent the nay-sayer's arguments are, the more certain I can be that there is cause for investigations.

[cali]

77. wowzer. that's some twisted "logic"

it's incumbent on those making the claim or even asserting the likelihood to supply credible evidence. Is it possible? Sure, just about anything is. Is it probable? Probably not.

[The Doctor.]

82. You would have to be able to grasp logic

in order to reach the conclusion that it was 'twisted'.

That you can't explain how it is 'twisted' is proof enough that you do not.

[Dreamer Tatum]

151. Logically speaking, you are dividing by zero.

"How do you know it didn't happen" and "it could have happened" are not valid rhetorical terms. You would need to cite some credible evidence which, among other things:

A. Proves that one can induce Chavez' strain of cancer in another human;
B. Proves that Chavez couldn't have gotten cancer on his own (good luck with that one - in case you didn't know, cancer is sort of common)
C. Proves that it was the United States that did it, subject to A and B above.

Among many other things you will have to prove.

Were I you, which I am thankful that I am not, I would wonder why the KGB gave Chavez cancer, as that is the group that has most recently and effectively induced it in another human.

So, either start working on your proof, OR START WORKING ON YOUR SCIENCE FICTION NOVEL.

[Dreamer Tatum]

153. Oh, and you would also have to prove...

...that Chavez didn't give himself and others cancer using that same technology you hint at, so he could frame the US and draw the ire of mentally weak people.

[The Doctor.]

166. You're not reading the thread you're in.

I'm not out to 'prove' anything. The facts exist that already 'prove' what I've stated. Whether or not his cancer was induced by clandestine means or by too many cheese-fries is something none of us know.

[Dreamer Tatum]

167. Oh, this is just wind-peeing then. Thanks for the heads up. nt

[The Doctor.]

73. The only thing that is 'mindless' is dismissing possibilities with no proof

one way or the other.

Plenty of idiots dismiss a very real and actual 'conspiracy' that is happening daily in this nation. I wonder if you are someone that has 'bought into' that conspiracy theory that almost every other DUer has as well?

Do you doubt that conspiracies exist?

[Confusious]

88. The Unicorn defense?

You can't prove unicorns don't exist = "dismissing possibilities with no proof"

So if you dismiss the statement "Unicorns exist" you're "dismissing possibilities with no proof."

[Boston_Chemist]

101. Wasn't Stalin's modus operandi to label dissenters as insane? nt

[The Doctor.]

112. Nice try.

Well, not really.

This is about 'feasibility', not 'fantasy'. If you can't make that distinction, then this isn't a discussion you probably want to have.

But let me try to help out anyhow:

There exists evidence that anyone with the proper resources can inflict cancer upon whomever they choose.

There exists no evidence of invisible unicorns to begin with.

Your very impotent attempt to conflate the two is kind of embarrassing. To you, not me.


Dismissing the possibility without evidence to the contrary is blatantly naïve and prejudiced. The best anyone can conclude without direct evidence is 'I don't know, but it's possible'.

So I'm going to ask you; given that we know for a fact that cancer can indeed be inflicted on a person and that there are entities in control of the vast resources that would love to see Chavez and others dead, can you admit to the possibility that the CIA or other extra-legal entities might attempt to use such techniques to dispatch foreign leaders?

[bitchkitty]

97. Spend a lot of time there? n/t

[bemildred]

16. He sure likes to jerk our chain, doesn't he? nt

[Taverner]

21. Wow. Just wow.

Now that you put all the pieces together like that...it is probable...

[GETPLANING]

22. Read "Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man"

The possibility that right wing agencies are poisoning or otherwise sabotaging the health of leftist leaders is not far-fetched at all. In fact, I believe it is likely.

[DeSwiss]

23. +1000

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

30. Sadly, I have to agree.

Here's a very good and brief animated summary of the book narrated by John Perkins:

[fascisthunter]

102. Funny How Most on this Thread Don't Know about This...

... and it's not like this wasn't talked about here already.

[harun]

204. They've been doing it for at least 50 years. Most in this thread seem to buy in to the

Corporate Propaganda though.

[Festivito]

24. Can't just keep giving people heart attacks. Ahem-Thurgood-ahem-Marshall.

The little people might become suspicious and start thinking conspriacy.

[hack89]

132. Thurgood Marshall died at 84 - two years after he retired from the Supreme Court. nt

[msanthrope]

170. Why do you bring facts into this? nt

[hack89]

172. Bad habit of mine - sorry. nt

[msanthrope]

177. Don't apologize!! It just adds to the general amusement of threads like these! nt

[The Doctor.]

197. 'The Earth revolves around the Sun'.

There's another fact. How is it anymore relevant?

[Festivito]

182. Still sticks in my craw that something caused him to retire when he did.

That was the turning point of power on the Supreme Court, and lead to the selection of Bush, and then, finally, to the biggest theft in history.

With that much money involved, the originating attack could have used more inquiry.

I did know when posting that he died years later. The point of the thread is about making people terminally ill.

[hack89]

183. The cause was simple - he was old and sick!

And he didn't die years later - he died two years after he retired.

[Festivito]

185. You do not address what is said, and, besides, two years is years later, specifically two.

Perhaps you have a lot of trust in that first Bush administration.

[hack89]

186. He had a long history of illness - his death was not sudden

how many decades before his actual death did they start making ill? It was a long slow process.

[certainot]

26. plane crashes are so yesterday

[saras]

27. The acceptance of the "conspiracy theory" meme REQUIRES shitcanning this.

It's conspiracy theory until the mainstream media discusses it, which means, for example, that manipulation of the mainstream media is always, by definition, conspiracy theory.

On the other hand, since the US has a long, well-established in fact history of exactly this sort of behavior, there's nothing whatsoever unbelievable, suspicious, or paranoid about it. It's a simple question of whether we can find a solid trail of evidence, whether we find evidence of a deliberate smear campaign by Chavez and others, including lots of Americans, or we have to simply leave it at "unproven".

But the entire DU rule privileging the notion of "conspiracy theory" makes discussion of many real, documented political phenomena impossible until the mainstream media catches up, if ever. And in this case, if the whole discussion is wasted on whether it's a legitimate subject of discussion or not, it's unlikely that there will be a lot of dispassionate examination of the evidence, or exploration for new evidence.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

31. It seems the phrase "conspiracy theory"

somehow received a connotative makeover after JFK's assassination and has since been all too often used pejoratively as a means of stifling any serious discussion of certain topics/theories and dismissing those who pursue these discussions as nuts.

Not to suggest that there aren't nuts who put forth absurd "creative speculation" -- we all know there are.

George Carlin speaks to conspiracy toward the end of this excellent brief video:

[boppers]

41. Speculation without evidence that a court will accept: Conspiracy Theory.

Speculation with evidence that a court will accept: Conspiracy.

It's quite simple, really.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

47. Not sure where you got that...

...but you may want to review the definition of the word conspiracy:

1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
3. Law An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.

source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/conspiracy

----------------------------------------

How do we know what a court will or will not accept if the evidence for the speculation is never presented to a court? And what if the speculation alleges the perpetrator acted alone as the official JFK assassination narrative did, and further, the accused is killed in police custody before he can be tried in court, as Lee Oswald was? Do you call that a conspiracy theory?

The evidence for the false flag criminal conspiracy known as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident was never formally presented in court either -- does that mean it's still a conspiracy theory? McNamara admitted in his 2003 documentary "The Fog of War" that the attacks by North Korean war ships never occurred.

[Under Dog]

180. Using the expression "conspiracy theory" is guised censorship.

Good post Mr. Jefferson. Cancer, AIDS, SARS, Ebola, etc. have been used as bioweapons for years and just becaused the mainstream won't talk about it doesn't mean it does't exist. The mainsteam media are a major source of the problem.
You might recall that Chavez's doctor [of 10 yrs] some weeks ago fled to America claiming he was in fear of his life.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-15413115
If you watched the segment of the Men Who Killed Kennedy, Judyth Vary Baker talked about plots to infect Castro with cancer:

Yes, I believe it quite plausible that our dirty government was behind this just like it had been in dozens of other cases. People need to wake up and try to understand what the "real" agenda is.

[Behind the Aegis]

28. Needs a fitting for a sombrero del papel de aluminio,

[BadtotheboneBob]

46. LOL!

... thanks for the first laugh of my day! Very funny...

[hang a left]

94. easily amused?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

29. Perhaps for the time being we can only wonder...

... if our CIA or some other US government agency has had a hand in causing these cancers, but we don't have to wonder if our CIA does this kind of thing. They have a well established track record of highly ILLEGAL covert ops involving the murder and attempted murder of uncooperative foreign leaders -- and this is NOT creative speculation.

[L. Coyote]

93. "Covert Ops" are covert because they are illegal!

Otherwise, they would not need to be covert!

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

117. Here's the definition...

...for covert ops:

An operation that is so planned and executed as to conceal the identity of or permit plausible denial by the sponsor. A covert operation differs from a clandestine operation in that emphasis is placed on concealment of identity of sponsor rather than on concealment of the operation.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/covert+operation

I don't see anything in the definition that necessarily makes a covert op illegal.

If a very wealthy individual wishes to acquire a piece of property and covertly goes about making inquiries through a proxy because he doesn't want the owner/seller to know he's interested, is this illegal?

[unionworks]

32. COINTELPRO

Under Nixon, the possibility of giiving the "Black Panthers" cancer was considered. This was real, so obviously they had the means to do so.

[Behind the Aegis]

33. You have a source?

[dipsydoodle]

34. Chavez muses on US Latin America cancer plot

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has questioned whether the US has developed a secret technology to give cancer to left-wing leaders in Latin America.

Treated for cancer this year, Mr Chavez was speaking a day after news that Argentina's president had the disease.

Fernando Lugo of Paraguay, Dilma Rousseff of Brazil and her predecessor Lula have also had cancer.

Mr Chavez said this was "very strange" but stressed that he was thinking aloud rather than making "rash accusations".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-16349845 29 December 2011 Last updated at 00:22 GMT

[joshcryer]

36. Wow, "it's probable." "Has credence."

Guys, Chavez dying would be a political disaster, the US wants Chavismo dead, they don't want its leader to be idolized and Chavismo policies to become perpetual. If Chavez died before the elections which he stands a large chance of losing, it would be a monumental failure if the US was somehow "behind it." Chavez dies, martial law is implemented, full on police state is pulled, elections suspended, etc.

[txlibdem]

38. Kinda like in Honduras, right?

eom

[boppers]

39. ...and the MOSSAD brain rays.

Weird egomaniacs flame out in quite odd ways.

[dotymed]

58. I hate to sound like a repig, but do you have any

coroboration for your Chavez-election defeat? I have heard nothing about the probability of Chavez losing the upcoming election. No R/W sources please.

[joshcryer]

105. Personal opinion, following the elections closely.

HCR (Henrique Capriles Radonski) has higher popularity, is governor of the second most populous state, and is running a unification campaign that Hugo Chavez has been cow-towing to in his speeches. The cancer has put Hugo out of the limelight so he's not able to make the kind of speeches he used to make, it's really bad for his campaign.

Venezuela has the cleanest elections in all of Latin America, an electoral defeat would send a resounding referendum against Chavismo. What many people don't realize is that Chavez was originally elected due to high crime rate (about 4k people a year), since his two wins that figure has blown up 4-fold. Iraq is safer.

The Venezuelan's love Hugo because he's a master at rhetoric (even if he says stupid crap sometimes), he used to do cadanas for 6+ hours straight. If Hugo is absent for the campaign, especially as things start to get really hectic (after MUD's primaries are over), it's going to be really interesting.

Put it this way, HCR is almost tied with HC (Hugo Chavez), and he has a purely grassroots movement, whereas HC has the full disposal of the government coffers at his disposal. That's a really big deal.

[Judi Lynn]

106. Chavez’s Approval Rating at 71.5% in IVAD Poll, Ultimas Says

Chavez’s Approval Rating at 71.5% in IVAD Poll, Ultimas Says
QBy Charlie Devereux - Dec 10, 2011 8:27 AM CT

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s approval rating rose a half-percentage point to 71.5 percent in November from the previous month, Ultimas Noticias reported, citing a poll by Instituto Venezolano de Analisis de Data, or IVAD.

If the election, scheduled for Oct. 7 of next year, were to take place today, Chavez would defeat Henrique Capriles Radonski, the current favorite to win an opposition primary, by 55.5 percent to 31.8 percent, the Caracas-based daily said, citing the poll.

The Caracas-based polling firm’s survey of 1,200 people, taken between Nov. 21 and Nov. 28, had a margin of error of about 2.4 percentage points, Ultimas Noticias reported.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-10/chavez-s-approval-rating-at-71-5-in-ivad-poll-ultimas-says.html

[joshcryer]

107. That's the biggest outlier of them all. And IVAD didn't release the poll data.

But I think you know that as we both likely use the same sources.

[joshcryer]

109. Here's every poll released over the past year:

https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=c3c85cae5fedc6cd

[treestar]

40. What would be the use in that?

Each country has other people in it to become the leaders even if the current leader dies. This is stupid. Cancer is not something that can be induced in other people. Even if that were possible, it could be someone else. And it's not like we don't have military and bombs and all that. Or that we don't probably give or lend money to those countries.

This is American Derangement Syndrome, nothing less.

[boppers]

42. Cancer *can* be induced.

Claim that they have a frail heart, and X-ray them.

Daily.

For their "health".

Bingo.

[treestar]

43. Who would be subjected to daily x-rays?

Even so, that would not necessarily cause cancer in every individual. The cause of cancer is unknown more or less. If we knew what caused it, it wouldn't be so incurable. Any doctor who wanted daily x-rays would be suspected of malpractice.

It still would be pointless to kill off Latin American leaders. What purpose would it serve? There would be new leaders. Even the EVUL US has nothing to gain.

[txlibdem]

44. X-rays are not the only delivery method

All the CIA needs to do is to introduce a single cancer cell into his mucous membranes, lungs, or blood stream.

A tainted ice cube in his favorite beverage.

Tainted pollen sprinkled on his rose bushes (or whatever equivalent for the target).

Direct injection via a number of ways. Remember the diplomat who was injected via the tip of an umbrella? He was injected with radioactive material and died painfully but the concept holds.

Shaking hands with a tainted member of a crowd, then if he touches his mouth, eyes, nose or ear canal it could be introduced into the body.

Etc., etc., etc., about a thousand other ways.

[COLGATE4]

54. Do you really believe that cancer can be caused this way????

God help all the surgeons who regularly operate on malignancies (or do you believe that they never cut themselves while poking around in a tumor). This is truly fodder for FR.

[treestar]

57. Cancer is not a communicable disease

If the CIA was going to do a thing like this, it would be a bacteria. Something like anthrax.

Though there is no proof this has ever happened. What diplomat was injected with the tip of an umbrella?

[boppers]

118. *With exceptions

Cervical cancer from HPV comes to mind..... but you can't just take a cancer cell from person A, and give person B cancer (unless, of course, they were genetically identical).

And it wasn't a diplomat..... I believe this is a conflation of two, unrelated, incidents:
Umbrella, ricin (conventional) poison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgi_Markov
Ex-intelligence, radiation poisoning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Alexander_Litvinenko

[Snake Alchemist]

59. You can't be serious. n/t

[NickB79]

72. You seriously think cancer can spread like that?

Quick question: why do you think a single cancer cell from another person could "infect" a human body, but you are required to take a lifetime regiment of anti-rejection drugs if you get an organ transplant?

Also,

"Direct injection via a number of ways. Remember the diplomat who was injected via the tip of an umbrella? He was injected with radioactive material and died painfully but the concept holds. "

That wasn't a radioactive material, but ricin poison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_umbrella

[AlphaCentauri]

61. Researchers have induced cancer for ages

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2071065/pdf/brjcancer00501-0169.pdf

[boppers]

119. ...in very specific kinds of genetic strains.

They even have whole lines bred to get cancers.

[Richard D]

62. Also

A tiny tiny speck of plutonium in a meal.

[AlphaCentauri]

63. Alexander Litvinenko?

[NickB79]

68. Notice he didn't die of any form of slow-progressing, long-term cancer like these leaders have

But rather died rapidly from acute radiation poisoning.

There is simply no known way to induce these forms of cancer with modern medical technology and radioactive materials that we know of. X-ray exposure will cause specific types of leukemia; exposure to highly enriched radioactive material will cause obvious signs of radiation poisoning long before cancer sets in (and it would again not be the forms of cancer these leaders have).

It's all utter bunk from a scientific standpoint.

[The Doctor.]

78. For someone who claims 'bunk', you sure don't know how radiation affects the body.

You don't need a high enough dose of radiation to create radiation sickness in order to induce cancer in somatic cells. Also, any somatic cell in the body is susceptible to the many stochastic effects of radiation, not just blood cell.

A single atom of plutonium has a 98% probability of causing at least one lung cell to mutate into cancer. A very small dose of plutonium can induce cancer without ever causing other symptoms.

To suggest otherwise as you have is scientifically naïve.

[boppers]

213. "A single atom of plutonium has a 98% probability"...

Uh, no.

1. The atom would have to decay. You didn't specify which Pu... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_Plutonium If it was, say Pu-238, it would have to be in your body for 80 years to have a 50% chance of doing anything. Anything at all. Pu-240 would have to be in your body for 6,563 years.
2. The decay products would have to hit the nucleus in a cell in a damaging way.
3. The resulting, damaged, nucleus must be damaged in an incredibly, highly specific, way as to:
a) Appear like a normal cell to natural defenses.
b) Reproduce at adverse speeds.
c) Have an negative effect on the carrier.

98%? No. Much more like 0.000000001%. That's how we can all live bathing in radiation, and breathe radioactive air, and eat radioactive food, and drink radioactive water, and survive.

[The Doctor.]

215. A quick question...

"Just how large a sample is 6,563 atoms of Pu-240 to the naked eye?"

You're correct, of course. I can understand how a literal "three or four" atoms would be a ridiculous longshot depending on the circumstances, but I was speaking materially rather than literally. I was under the impression that it was more potent, and I'll have to have a look, but I have a hard time believing that one would need to administer a banana-sized suppository of Pu-anydamnnumber in order to induce cancer and/or death.

Since we went into probablity, I'll have to ask this: "If you have 6,563 atoms of Pu-240 in a living human body for a year, what are the chances of contracting cancer.... in all probability?"

[boppers]

216. Well, chances are, you would have some decay in that case.

There's still the whole problem of that decay actually causing cancer. Most genetic damage results in a non-viable cell, not a viable, reproducing one.

Got to get around these bad boys, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tumor_necrosis_factors

[NickB79]

65. Which causes very specific types of cancer, such as leukemia.

All of the cancers these Latin American leaders have contracted have never been associated with exposure from ionizing radiation such as X-rays.

[cstanleytech]

49. Like boppers said it can be induced but other than that I really dont believe thats what has been

happening because if they wanted these people dead there are other faster and more sure ways of doing it and cancer isnt one of them.

[valerief]

99. But it doesn't have to be fast, just fast enough. Besides, it may serve as a warning to

other potentially leftist leaders. Even ones in our own frontyard.

[cstanleytech]

100. Sorry but thats way to much out in Roswell area for me

really without something other than speculation from Chavez, I mean heck you might as well blame a butterfly over in africa as being the cause of the outburst in tornadoes we had this year because its just as likely.

[valerief]

104. Of course, it's speculation. That's all we have. nt

[truthisfreedom]

45. From a technological standpoint, sounds about right.

Not that I'm a fan of Chavez, but from time to time he seems to have his head halfway screwed on.

[Freddie Stubbs]

48. If true, kudos to President Obama

[dotymed]

52. Yep,

murdering popularly elected Presidents of sovereign nations is a good thing.

sarcasm....

[The Doctor.]

79. Ah, another brainwashed minion of the M$M.

Or were you being sarcastic?

[dotymed]

50. TPTB in America, and the elitists everywhere would stop at

nothing to re-take Venezuela and South America. I agree with President Chavez that the "law of probabilities" are drastically against these left ruling leaders acquiring cancer at closely the same time. "We" have proven that there are no boundaries when it comes to restoring elite rule, especially in area's where natural resources are abundant.
As for the technology? I think that administering a substance that would trigger an unchecked growth of cells (cancer) would be simple compared to the tecnology that we are already aware of.
To these greedy, sociopaths any means justify their ends.
Yes, young, healthy Evo be very cautious. IMO, (even with the knowledge that the victors write history), this will be considered by historians as one of the darkest times in world history. Comparable to the "Dark Ages," a struggle for the future course of our world. Unless Americans take to the streets by the millions and demand fairness and equality we will have a future of even worse wealth distribution and serfdom.

[LeftishBrit]

51. Very unlikely IMO

Cancer rates have been generally increasing in Latin America over the last 20 years or so. It's not just the leaders! In Latin America, cancer is the 2nd commonest cause of death. The increase is thought to be due to a combination of (1) reduced childhood mortality, so more people reach the age where cancer is common; (2) high smoking rates; (3) fairly high rates of exposure to environmental pollutants, especially in the workplace.

Cancer takes a long time to develop, so exposing left-wing leaders to carcinogens would be a fairly ineffective way to kill them - and requires a lot of ability to predict who is likely to become a leader in 10 or 15 years, say.

So all quite improbable.

In general terms, being a political dissident (as several of these current leaders were) in Latin America under the juntas tended to lead to consequences, from poverty to torture, that are bad for current and future health; so it may indeed be that their risk of cancer was increased by a general earlier undermining of their health. Not specifically intended to give them cancer, however; and not directly inflicted by America.

[COLGATE4]

55. Their minds are made up. Don't confuse them with facts.

[The Doctor.]

83. Whose minds are 'made up'?

Let's have some examples of those who have 'made up their minds' that the US is inducing cancer in SA leaders.

[The Doctor.]

149. Not necessarily.

http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/young-woman-developed-cancer-weeks-after-going-gulf-beach-doctor-believes-due-direct-exposure-chemicals-dispersants-vocs/

Yes, "Within weeks".

Some substances are so toxic and in even in quantities too small for standard detection that they can cause the onset of cancer in very short periods of time. Just a few atoms of plutonium is virtually guaranteed to cause cancer in any part of the body they are introduced.

Good thing the US doesn't have access to such a thing... at least that's what I've been told.

[boppers]

214. Oooh, we're up to a *few* atoms?

See #213. It doesn't work that way.

[Snake Alchemist]

60. Seems like China would be a better suspect.

They seem to be the experts in carcinogens these days.

[jzodda]

69. This is a nutty thread

Reporting on it is fine but the comments make many here seem batshit crazy. I expect better from DU. We are supposed to be logical people, not loonies like on FR.

[The Doctor.]

80. Like what?

Let's have some examples of 'nuttiness' here.

[Dreamer Tatum]

128. How about the silly-assed "how do you know we DIDN'T" vibe coming from people

who would believe Chavez if he claimed he shits diamonds?

THAT is nuttiness.

If cancer can be "given" to someone, cite conclusive evidence or SHUT THE FUCK UP. (not necessarily directed at you)

[The Doctor.]

136. If you are that naïve of the science,

then I doubt there's much I could provide for you that would get you to understand.

It's very, very simple: Certain substances have a very high chance of causing cancer. Deliberately exposing someone to those substances consistently for even a short period of time will result in cancer unless the subject gets very lucky.

What I just stated is a simple fact based on the available science. I've posted a link elsewhere in this thread, but I don't lift a finger for people that start out from a position of deliberate ignorance. You could easily have discovered the above facts for yourself. Most high-school grads have enough exposure to that kind of information to already know this.

[Dreamer Tatum]

143. "Certain substances have a very high chance of causing cancer."

Yeah, like stuff he probably ate, drank, and smoked.

[The Doctor.]

162. That is correct. Some higher than others, of course.

I'm glad you're finally catching on.

[Dreamer Tatum]

163. I hope you are neither a lawyer nor a logician. nt

[The Doctor.]

150. And I'll add that it is completely rational to say "I don't know either way".

Because we don't.

The only people making unsupported assumptions are those claiming it couldn't possibly be the US. You simply can't know that, just like I simply can't know that it is the US.

[hack89]

87. Conspiracy Theories depend on scientific ignorance

the state of science education is shocking.

[The Doctor.]

137. In this thread it seems the scientific ignorance isn't on the side of those making speculations.

They don't seem to be the ones avoiding questions either.

[hack89]

139. When that speculation devolves into an Area 51 argument

then perhaps not. Speculating that the government has some secret ability to give people cancer is not science.

[The Doctor.]

146. Which is a deliberate strawman on your part.

I asked you a question before. You avoided it. Here it is again:

"Is that poster's assumption that the most resourceful government in human history would possess a technology if it existed not a reasonable one?"

No one is claiming that the government has a secret base with aliens living there. If they do, I don't care because that's off the current topic. What people are claiming is that the technology to deliver cancer exists (which is indisputable without the disputer looking a fool), and that if any technology exists, it would be the US government that is most likely in possession of it.

I'm really having fun with this. I thank you for finally answering the other question. I just want to know if you think the above assumption is unreasonable.

[hack89]

148. They are claiming that a covert method of giving people different kinds of cancer exists.

that no one else in the world knows about. That is area 51 speculation.

Is it possible the US government has such technology - yes. Is it probable? No.

[The Doctor.]

152. How can 'no one else know' about something I just described?

Plutonium exists. Rectal scopes exist.

"Poof!" Now you know it exists too. The question is merely whether or not such a delivery system (or even a different one) has been employed.

Neither of us know one way or the other. What is it about uncertainty that makes you so uncomfortable?

[hack89]

154. So we are back to the CIA putting plutonium up Hugo's ass. OK nt

[Dreamer Tatum]

155. No wonder my plutonium dildo can't seem to get patented.

It gives you CANCER!

[The Doctor.]

164. That is surprising to you?

You would be dead of radiation poisoning within a week if you used something like that.

Again, I'm glad to see you're catching on.

[Dreamer Tatum]

165. So we have ruled out a plutonium enema and/or dildo for Chavez.

Yeah, we're really narrowing this down.

[The Doctor.]

174. No, we have done nothing of the sort.

Who knows what his sexual habits are. Maybe we replaced his shipment of regular dildos with plutonium-tipped dildos. (I won't tell if you won't)

[hack89]

176. We know his sexual habits - fucking the people of Venezuela for his own gain. nt

[The Doctor.]

187. Yet you cannot demonstrate this with anything but homegrown corporate propaganda.

[hack89]

201. Their skyrocketing crime and inflation rates speak for themselves. nt

[The Doctor.]

206. And your source for this is what now?

[hack89]

208. Are you serious? This is common knowledge.

10 seconds on Google will give you multiple cites.

[The Doctor.]

210. "Citations"

Not that it's a big deal to me, I knew what you meant. I just like to be corrected and do others the courtesy when I can.

There would be 'sites' that have the information, but one 'cites' a 'citation'.

As for the sites that cite the issues in Venezuela, there are plenty enough that are overblowing the reality of the situation. Sure, there's crime, but wherefore? The country has seen poverty rates go down, so something else is up and that doesn't mean it's Chavez' fault.

I know you think otherwise, but your habits make you very transparent. I'm not the only one who knows what you're doing here.

[The Doctor.]

161. That's a silly thing to believe. You should really make up your mind.

It's very amusing watching you flail like this. I'm glad you at least have acknowledged the possibility that the CIA has managed to do something like this, but to seem so certain of it makes you look like a loony-toon.

None of us here knows whether this was the case or not. You should really calm down, you appear to be losing your mind.

[hack89]

173. Not flailing. Just laughing. You are sooo serious. nt

[Confusious]

92. I must have found the wacky corner of DU. nt

[valerief]

98. I always figured the U.S. "cancered" troublemakers to the Empire. nt

[Dont call me Shirley]

103. Cancer is a virus and vruses are easily weaponized.

[LeftishBrit]

131. Cancer isn't a virus

You can't catch cancer from other people.

There are a very few cancers that are associated with viruses, but not the vast majority, and not the sort these leaders have.

If cancer were a virus, we would probably have come up with much more effective ways to treat/prevent it by now.

[Sanguineneck Hank]

116. I thought conspiracy theories were against the TOS

But I guess they're fine as long as Chavez says it

[dipsydoodle]

130. It was a joking remark which the BBC link makes perfectly clear.

Its not a conspiracy theory inasmuch he actually did say it.

I must confess I sometimes wonder if he says thing just to get a joke number of responses here on DU.

[hack89]

133. The Chavistas at DU don't appear to be joking. nt

[The Doctor.]

138. There seem to be a number of people that are willing to acknowledge certain realities.

Like that the US is highly resourceful, has tried and often succeeded at assassinating other leaders, that many of the corporations that are allied with the government want him dead, and then the fact that only popular leftist leaders seem to be contracting cancers.

That doesn't mean anyone is certain the US has done this, no one can be.

My observation is that there are many here who are desperate to remain oblivious to how the US 'does business'. The truth is pretty big and scary, so it's understandable how seemingly rational people would go out of their way to obfuscate, dissemble, and mischaracterize these types of discussions.

If there were no merit to such speculation, then why do so many of you 'usual suspects' feel such a strong need to jump in and derail it?

[hack89]

142. Because it has high entertainment value?

I didn't hang around the old 911 Forum because I wanted to derail the truth - I did it because it was fun as hell going toe to toe with serious industrial strength woo science. What made it even more fun was how serious and indignant the truthers would be when we refused to accept that the evil BUSHCO brought down the WTC with all kinds of secret technology that defied physics.

[The Doctor.]

159. And you've been very entertaining. Thank you.

'Delusional' is another trait I sometimes find amusing.

Like when someone is presented with hard science, creates outrageous strawmen in order to convince himself he's 'disproven' something he has not, misrepresents the arguments he was actually presented with, and walks away claiming he has foiled anyone's speculation.

Having seen your inept attempts to 'disprove' compelling facts and reason, your claim here is also very amusing.

Maybe I'll post another thread about the nano-thermite that was found throughout the debris and watch the sad attempts to cover it up unfurl all over again.

[hack89]

175. There are entire web sites devoted to the "hard science" of creationism

you have posted a couple of actual medical facts, mixed in a big dose of "the CIA has killed a bunch of folks" and "if anyone had the capability it would be the US government" and with a straight face said that Hugo might be right. That the CIA has the ability to selectively give different people different types of cancer.

And you wonder why no one is convinced.

[The Doctor.]

188. So 'creationism' and 'nuclear physics' share the same footing for you?

That's Outside the realm of 'insane' and bordering on 'psychotic'.

Are you really willing to become so divorced from reality to score points? Apparently so.

[hack89]

191. No - it's the bizarre logic that stitches together

a couple of actual facts into an elaborate conspiracy theory.

[The Doctor.]

192. You mean like the conspiracy theory that so many DUers have bought into

about that whole 'CO2' causing global climate changes?

There are some 'actual facts' that stitch together quite a tapestry there.

I'm sure you don't buy into that sort of thing either.

[hack89]

198. The fact you can't tell the difference is telling

global warming is well supported in the scientific community. The ability of the CIA to covertly give unpopular foreign leaders a variety of cancers is not. It is the definition of woo science.

[The Doctor.]

200. That went clean over your head.

No 'hack', the 'conspiracy' is the one where powerful interests are 'conspiring' (and spending vast sums of money) in order to cover up or cast doubt on the fact of human-caused climate change.

So do you buy into that conspiracy as well?

[hack89]

203. I like to stick to science and real facts

I don't have a conspiracy driven world view.

[The Doctor.]

205. So, you don't believe the energy industry has conspired to cover-up

or otherwise prevent the truth of man-made climate change from being realized?

That's beyond naïve.

[hack89]

207. I was thinking more about the CIA sticking plutonium up Hugo's ass.

because some conspiracies are rational does not mean ALL conspiracies are rational.

I have no doubt that energy companies are doing everything in their power to undermine belief in climate change. I wouldn't call it a conspiracy - they are very open about it.

[The Doctor.]

209. Secrecy is not a requirement of a conspiracy.

I'm glad you understand that conspiracies exist.

[hack89]

212. Never said they did not

Last edited Mon Jan 2, 2012, 12:23 PM - Edit history (1)

I just understand that some rational thought is required to separate possible conspiracies from bat shit crazy ones. You seem to lack that ability.

[The Doctor.]

217. Which is of course bullshit.

Otherwise you could point to at least ONE post there I made an irrational statement.

You can't, because you know you could never explain how or why it was 'irrational'.

[Dreamer Tatum]

147. Spreaking of desperation...

...there is an equal, if not larger group of people who insist that the US has turned off the
earthquake machine and turned on the cancer delivery device. Guess the heat was on
after the tsunami and Katrina, huh?

[The Doctor.]

158. The more derision you resort to, the more weak you appear.

It's kind of sad, actually. Once again you're not merely conflating two very different suppositions (One being ludicrous the other being demonstrably feasible), you're also deliberately distorting the latter for the sake of characterizing it as fantastic.

'Turned on the cancer delivery device'?

The fact that no one has claimed there exists what you perceive as some diabolic machine that 'delivers cancer' pretty much illustrates that you deliberately stray from reality to avoid confronting the rational positions of people that aren't afraid to examine possibilities.

In short, you're weak. I'd like to see you prove otherwise by acknowledging that cancer can indeed be 'induced' by technology where earthquakes cannot. But you won't because your ego is frail and you are most certainly afraid of certain realities.

Otherwise why the futile attempts here?

[Dreamer Tatum]

160. Sorry, but anytime I see "prove it ISN'T true," I ridicule, as anyone should.

If cancer can be 'induced,' then I submit that Hugo Chavez, having better access to his own butthole than
anyone in the world, probably injected cancer into himself.

Can you prove that he didn't do that? It's certainly feasible.

Comments?

[The Doctor.]

189. Therein lies the proof of your dishonesty.

I haven't said that it's true simply because you can't prove it isn't.

I have said that you can't know that it is not true.

You're obviously a waste of time. Bye.

[Dreamer Tatum]

190. Man, could you ever benefit from a few courses in logic.

Seriously, you're embarrassing yourself.

"You can't know that it is not true." Know how many arguments ever been successful using that logic? Zero. None. Nada. Zilch.

But I can absolutely see how someone ill equipped to think logically would also assume that anything Chavez says must be true, or even plausible. You two have fun.

[Occulus]

195. Don't carcinogens cause cancer?

Isn't that why they're called "carcinogens"?

The only arguments against the idea I'm seeing here are those against it being possible, not "true". While I have very little doubt that it is, in fact, possible (if perhaps difficult) to inflict cancer on someone via some method of inducement (much like how you can poison someone with ricin via a syringe disguised as an umbrella), I would want some piece of evidence that it in fact happened before I went making the claim that it did.

[Dreamer Tatum]

196. The Chavezistas won't go so far as to say it DID happen.

They insist that it CAN happen, and Judi Lynn has terabytes of data indicating every American fart ever expelled south of Texas, so it's up to you to connect the dots and arrive at the inevitable conclusion that the United States gave Chavez cancer.

Which is a logical nightmare, of course, but since to believe in Chavez without critical thought or reason is to jettison logic altogether, we sort of have to grade Chavezistas on a curve.

[BeHereNow]

141. This is the funniest thread on DU in a LONG time! Thanks Hugo!

Gotta hand it to Chavez, he never fails to stir up a wild debate!
My belief?
I put nothing past the PTB.

BHN

[Steerpike]

168. On the up side...

It's probobly a Bush era policy that President Obama has chosen not to discontinue.

[Mudoria]

184. He could get a job with Comedy Central

[0rganism]

202. what, did we sell them cigarettes?

OK, Hugo, whatever you say...

[Fool Count]

218. There are two questions here really:

1. Would US give cancer to foreign leaders they don't like, provided they had covert means of doing that?
2. Do they have the means of doing that?

I defy anyone to answer question 1 in the negative. Given the historical pattern of behavior, there is no
doubt in my mind that they would do it, if their leaderships perceived that it would serve US national
interest in any way.

The answer to the second question is less definitive. We know that cancers can be caused in animals and
humans by exposing them to various carcinogenic substances, viruses and ionizing radiation. We know
that radioactive elements (i.e. Polonium) were used by foreign intelligence services (FSB) to assassinate
people (Litvinenko). In that particular case the doze was enormous and it killed the target within days of
exposure. Still it was detected only because the exposure happened within a technologically advanced
nation (UK) which had the equipment and the expertise to detect it. One hundredth of the doze would have
been beyond even the most advanced detection capabilities while still likely sufficient to cause significant
radiation damage to the target. It seems reasonable to assume that US intelligence (CIA) could possess
similar or better capabilities than FSB.

Taking that together, I fail to see any factual basis for deriding Chaves' question as paranoia and dismissing
it out of hand. We have a clear motive, a pattern of behavior and, very likely, the means. The only argument
against it appears to be "US would never do such a hideous thing". This argument does not stand, simply
because we do know from history that US did worse.

[katsung47]

219. slow poison

A great possibility is "slow poison".

Slow poison (12/6/03) (continue to message 181 and 182)

When I thought over what happened to the sandwich and beef soup. I recalled an article in Readers' digest. It was a story about a defect Russian pilot.

Lt. Viktor Belenko drove a Mig-25 to Nakodate, Japan on 9/6/1976. The Mig-25 was the most advanced fighter in Russia at that time. US experts flied to Japan, dismantled the plane and had a thorough examination. They returned the dismantled Mig fighter to Soviet Union about ten days later. The defect pilot, was under "witness protection" and lived in somewhere US.

I noticed the article talked about that once authority had suspected this was a fake defection because the expert found some most important part of technique were missing in the plane. The article also talked about that Belenko refused a huge rewards. (millions of dollars) He said he wanted to make a living by his own hands. That his defection was not for money but for opinion. It's real incredible for money oriented intelligence, I think.

The thing impressed me most was the pilot was poisoned when he was hidden in witness shelter. Belenko was still young but he was bald. The medical examination concluded that it was caused by slow poison of a kind of rare metal. (I forgot the name of that metal) The article, of course, alleged it to the work of KGB. I don't believe it. Few people would know where the pilot was if he was under "witness protection". And it was easy to identify the person who had access to pilot's food. (Slow poison took a long time work.) Most likely he became a Quinea pig for intelligence in test of slow poison. When he was of no use but a burden for them.

There are many such examples. The most known one were former Phillipine President Marcos, and former Iranian Tsar Barlivie. When they were rulers they were loyal ally of US. Once they lost power and had to drift abroad they became a political burden of US. Because they were ousted by their own people. Barlivie even couldn't find a shelter in US.. They both died in a short time. ( in about three years or less?) Marcos died of kidney failure and Barlivie died of cancer(?)

There are many advantages of slow poison murder. 1. Work covertly. All death are like a natural one. (like diabetes, kidney failure, cancer...) 2. Control the death on will. They can make target getting sick by slow poison, once the death is neccesary for Feds, what they have to do is just increase the dose, the target died to intelligence' demand without causing a suspicion. 3. Deniable. If the lethal dose is 100 gram, they can dilute the actual poison dose at 1 gram each. So it's safe for them even if they were caught. Because it' s not lethal. 4. It's hard to track because the dose each time used is a tiny one.

see 181 and 182 at: http://katsung47.yuku.com/forums/66

[agnesangst]

220. they did it to arafat!

traces of plutonium were found on him and this is under criminal investigation in switzerland.also remember karen silkwood.it seems we've been radiating people for some time now-and must have become quite proficient in it.chavez should listen to castro-he's a sly old fox,otherwise he certainly wouln't have lived so long.the cia has admitted to trying to off him several times.so why does anybody think this is such an off the wall idea?