I restricted myself to providing factual and statistical information, and attempting to make honest interpretation of it all.

"you have laboured tirelessly but pointlessly to try to "prove" that HIV is a gay disease and a disease of black people"

I can clear that up right now. It is not. You must have misunderstood me.
I would only go so far as to say that outside Africa it is predominantly a disease of gay men, and inside Africa is where most of its victims are found.

"your efforts at distortion" I am not aware of any.
I only joined this latter part of the thread because you were making misleading statements (Jan 10th and 11th)which I made efforts to clarify.

"you complained that the majority population were being unnecessarily and wastefully "bothered" by HIV/AIDS education programs "

The WHO, who know more about this than all of us put together, say that more lives could be saved if programmes were focused on high risk groups. Why would I contradict WHO? Why do you?

"You opined that maybe your effort as a teacher had been wasted educating "normal" (my word, your meaning) people about the dangers of HIV"

I teach classes. I teach them all the same thing. The gay lads have mostly not even come out at school age. Where do you get these ideas?
Is it voices?

"you expressed resentment that you weren't able to tell stidents not to have sex with black people - as if that would keep them safe."

Only abstinance is safe. Everything else is a risk.That is what I tell them.Why do you say I do otherwise?
As with drugs, where I can talk about one drug carrying more risk than another, I do think knowledge is better than ignorance. That BBC link I think said that someone born in Africa is about 30 times more likely to be infected. I am uncomfortable about witholding significant information. I said it was not a big issue for me, and suggested there might be social or political justification for witholding it.

Now, you neglected to point out where I preached vile prejudice and harm. A quote would be helpful.