Damned Heretics

Condemned by the established, but very often right

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blog

Qualified outsiders and maverick insiders are often right about the need to replace received wisdom in science and society, as the history of the Nobel prize shows. This blog exists to back the best of them in their uphill assault on the massively entrenched edifice of resistance to and prejudice against reviewing, let alone revising, ruling ideas. In support of such qualified dissenters and courageous heretics we search for scientific paradigms and other established beliefs which may be maintained only by the power and politics of the status quo, comparing them with academic research and the published experimental and investigative record.

We especially defend and support the funding of honest, accomplished, independent minded and often heroic scientists, inventors and other original thinkers and their right to free speech and publication against the censorship, mudslinging, false arguments, ad hominem propaganda, overwhelming crowd prejudice and internal science politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, health and medicine, diet and nutrition.


Henry Bauer, Peter Breggin , Harvey Bialy, Giordano Bruno, Erwin Chargaff, Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Crick, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw, Freeman Dyson, Peter Duesberg, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, John Fewster, Galileo Galilei, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Edward Jenner, Benjamin Jesty, Michio Kaku, Adrian Kent, Ernst Krebs, Thomas Kuhn, Serge Lang, John Lauritsen, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling, Eric Penrose, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick, Sherwood Rowland, Carl Sagan, Otto Rossler, Fred Singer, Thomas Szasz, Alfred Wegener, Edward O. Wilson, James Watson.

Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

Skepticism is dangerous. That’s exactly its function, in my view. It is the business of skepticism to be dangerous. And that’s why there is a great reluctance to teach it in schools. That’s why you don’t find a general fluency in skepticism in the media. On the other hand, how will we negotiate a very perilous future if we don’t have the elementary intellectual tools to ask searching questions of those nominally in charge, especially in a democracy? – Carl Sagan (The Burden of Skepticism, keynote address to CSICOP Annual Conference, Pasadena, April 3/4, 1982).

It is really important to underscore that everything we’re talking about tonight could be utter nonsense. – Brian Greene (NYU panel on Hidden Dimensions June 5 2010, World Science Festival)

I am Albert Einstein, and I heartily approve of this blog, insofar as it seems to believe both in science and the importance of intellectual imagination, uncompromised by out of date emotions such as the impulse toward conventional religious beliefs, national aggression as a part of patriotism, and so on.   As I once remarked, the further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.   Certainly the application of the impulse toward blind faith in science whereby authority is treated as some kind of church is to be deplored.  As I have also said, the only thing ever interfered with my learning was my education. My name as you already perceive without a doubt is George Bernard Shaw, and I certainly approve of this blog, in that its guiding spirit appears to be blasphemous in regard to the High Church doctrines of science, and it flouts the censorship of the powers that be, and as I have famously remarked, all great truths begin as blasphemy, and the first duty of the truthteller is to fight censorship, and while I notice that its seriousness of purpose is often alleviated by a satirical irony which sometimes borders on the facetious, this is all to the good, for as I have also famously remarked, if you wish to be a dissenter, make certain that you frame your ideas in jest, otherwise they will seek to kill you.  My own method was always to take the utmost trouble to find the right thing to say, and then to say it with the utmost levity. (Photo by Alfred Eisenstaedt for Life magazine) One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny, and is likely to interfere with happiness in all kinds of ways. – Bertrand Russell, Conquest of Happiness (1930) ch. 9

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Belief)

Expanded GUIDE TO SITE PURPOSE AND LAYOUT is in the lower blue section at the bottom of every home page.

Celia Farber profiled as articulate, ‘obsessive’ AIDS ‘anarchist’ by NY Observer

Detailed front page story stays away from saying she is wrong

Deft sketch portrays her as basket case study of her theme of censorship

Whatever you make of it as science politics, Sheelah Kolhatkar’s take on Celia Farber today (Wed Jun 28) in the elitist pink gossip sheet of the chattering classes in Manhattan draws an accurate picture of a tough minded but supersentient being who has suffered the tortures of the damned for twenty years in pursuing the off limits topic of whether HIV is valid as the key to AIDS.

On the night of Saturday, June 10, the controversial journalist Celia Farber was holding court at a quiet cocktail party in a roped-off section of the Roosevelt Hotel bar in midtown Manhattan. “What does an animal do when they know they’re going to be killed?” she asked, her voice taut, as a handful of people looked on. “They play dead.”Ms. Farber was in the midst of an anecdote about one of her preferred subjects, her persecution at the hands of a vast network of enemies, and its effect on her writing career. “I’ve been there,” she continued. “You lose interest in doing well; you stop caring about being successful.”

The author of this tragicomedy, the slim, brunette Kolhatkar, is a young beauty who while at the party mentioned in the piece admitted to this writer that she was so devoted to her work writing up various figures in circles of publishing power and influence in Manhattan that she finds herself dreaming about it, and she does a very sophisticated job, handling Farber with care and the perceptive ear of a good theater critic.

She is noticeably polite about Farber’s iconoclastic view on HIV?AIDS, and after the obligatory quote from Moore’s Op Ed piece, gives no extra space to Celia bashing by calling on the likes of a John Moore or Martin Delaney, the paradigm palace guard who can be counted on to make cheap cracks deploring Farber’s misguided resistance to the authority of the HIV?AIDS scientists who are in fact the chief suspects in this case.

The gossipy but telling piece feels to us like a wry Manhattan inner circle assessment of another member of the media power club, who however renegade in her work is not treated here as someone to be trashed as beyond the pale. Although she may be taken aback at being sketched as unremittingly doleful, we hope it will be a pleasant surprise for Farber to read this, when she does – at the moment she has fled to the country with her family and a robot is answering her email.

For while the elephant in the room is largely overlooked as usual, the “blonde, thin AIDS anarchist” is framed in a worldly manner that leaves plenty of room for the possibility that she may be right to champion the censored side of the issue – that is, it does until the very end of the article. Then in a rather abrupt windup it seems to us that Farber is finally patronized as an obsessive who according to her friend and one time editor Bob Guccione of SPIN and Gear has spent a little too much time on “her holy quest”. And in Sheelah’s own view, Celia is a born agitator who would be “lost without her battles”:

When asked how the endless contrarianism might have impacted Ms. Farber professionally, Mr. Guccione, another believer in the “fostering debate” approach to publishing, said: “I think she has paid a terrific price.” He continued: “You know, the flip side of that is, I think she spent too much time dwelling on the AIDS beat. It’s been a holy quest for her.”In any case, Ms. Farber would be lost without her battles. She said that she’s always been fascinated by Stalinism, Communism, the Holocaust, witch hunts; she visits “as many dictatorships as I can.” ”

Seems to us this is going overboard, like the headline – Celia is a paradigm revolutionary in our book, not exactly an anarchist. She is fighting spurious and abusive authority, not all authority, all the time. But perhaps the writer is handicapped by the almost universal inability to conceive that the whole world is wrong on HIV?AIDS. What’s nice is that she dosn’t push it. On the other hand, she doesn’t justify Celia’s quest either.

For most of the deft article as we read it she is respectful of Celia’s work and of her pain, though she doesn’t seem to be entirely clear that Celia was and is not always as she is painted here. Celia’s present preoccupation with the hostility aroused by her work quoted throughout the piece is to our ear the sound of nervous fatigue, coming after twenty years where huge demands were made of the talented author with very little recompense, by the standards of the market today.


“And this may be the genius of the piece: by depicting so well the plight of a literary victim, it makes exactly the point that Celia wants to demonstrate in her work, which is that it is the censorship which is killing people.”


Sheelah hints at the financial stress over the years mentioning Celia’s jobs as dishwasher etc but she doesn’t seem to realize that this sacrifice is far from over. Celia is suffering from nervous exhaustion after two years of superhuman effort with not enough emotional and professional support from colleagues or editors, let alone proper pay for her efforts and talent. This is the price demanded of those who flout the current media-science-industrial complex, at least in HIV?AIDS.

That is why the charmingly unpretentious picture of Celia by Melanie Flood accompanying the article (titled Celia Farber in her apartment on the Upper West Side) looks a little more bedraggled than a personal publicist would like (on the Web only — in the print version, where the inside full page is headlined “Celia’s Offensive”, nice pun, the photo looks absolutely beautiful, for some reason). Here is another one of Celia two years ago, looking a good deal fresher at a HEAL gathering in Manhattan, where her colleague in paradigm dismantling, scientist Harvey Bialy, gave a lectern-pounding reading from his “Oncogenes” book. It was the night she heard from Lapham that her piece was accepted.

Here at least she does get credit for her achievements. The “rag tag band” of dissenters would still look like 9/11 conspiracy theorists except for two things that have emboldened them recently, Kolhatkar reports. These are Farber’s twin literary successes – the big piece in Harper’s March issue and now her new book that is just out (July 1st publication date, but already available for three weeks on Amazon), a collection of her key pieces on HIV?AIDS.


Commercial interruption: Let’s hope a lot of people buy “Serious Adverse Events: An Uncensored History of AIDS”, as they should – it is a great read for any nonscientist (or scientist) who wants to catch up with this scene, unique in its vast social and political distortion of sense and science, which Celia describes with a true writer’s thoughtfulness and clarity in vivid story telling from the front lines.

The paperback, which has the cover design of a literary classic and deserves it, includes the first draft of what she wrote for Lapham, a lovely, telling piece which centers on Peter Duesberg’s travails as well as his science; the biographical part was eventually displaced in Harper’s by the newer topic of cooked and lethal AIDS drug trials. It’s worth the price of the book – but so is every well told, illuminating chapter, in which science derailed is described with the clarity of an on-the-scene report from a critical observer.


As we say, the Observer piece falls apart at the end, we find, though others may read it differently. The last paragraphs shortchange Farber’s intellectual cause by reducing it to reflex anti-fascism and saying that she has taken refuge in appealing merely for free debate. Here given Celia’s deep moral sensibility and her outrage at the deaths of patients, and her twenty year championing of Duesberg’s consistent position that there is nothing in the HIV argument, we expect that she will feel insulted and cheapened.

By focusing her outrage on her opposition’s desire to silence dissent rather than on the actual scientific arguments, Ms. Farber finds protection under the idea that no subject or theory, regardless of its implications, should be taken off the table; continuing to ask the questions can be more important than answering them.

But even if it finally does go off the rails in this way, perhaps due to hasty editing, this is in many ways the first intelligent, worldly article about the leading HIV?AIDS lay critic and her cause, and it is certainly unfair to expect a young woman however smart who is unfamiliar with the field of unscience involved to catch up with the real situation in only three weeks.

All in all, for a gossip piece this is a brilliant encapsulation of a unique spirit and her predicament, even if the forces that have led to it – and the validity of her cause – are not fully depicted by the profiler. Truth to tell, it seems pretty clear that in her extended conversations and emailing with a very thorough reporter her subject neglected the issue herself.

And this may be the genius of the piece: by depicting so well the plight of a literary victim, it makes exactly the point that Celia wants to demonstrate in her work, which is that it is the censorship which is killing people.

AIDS Anarchist Farber

Hops Back in Whirlwind

By Sheelah Kolhatkar

On the night of Saturday, June 10, the controversial journalist Celia Farber was holding court at a quiet cocktail party in a roped-off section of the Roosevelt Hotel bar in midtown Manhattan. “What does an animal do when they know they’re going to be killed?” she asked, her voice taut, as a handful of people looked on. “They play dead.”

Ms. Farber was in the midst of an anecdote about one of her preferred subjects, her persecution at the hands of a vast network of enemies, and its effect on her writing career. “I’ve been there,” she continued. “You lose interest in doing well; you stop caring about being successful.”

Most of the 15 or so at the party were members of Rethinking AIDS, a group of scientists, writers and others who propagate the radical idea that H.I.V. does not cause AIDS. One of Ms. Farber’s beliefs, for example, is that the scientific explanations for the AIDS epidemic are corrupted by drug companies that seek to show that AIDS is amenable to drug therapies—profitable ones.

Their esoteric ideas have far-reaching implications, to say the least. If H.I.V. doesn’t cause AIDS, then “safe sex,” drug “cocktails”—in short, everything that the medical establishment says about prevention and treatment—is wrong.

Not unsurprisingly, the group is small, marginalized and the object of intense criticism in public-health circles. (They view themselves as AIDS “dissenters,” while their critics refer to them as “denialists.”)

Ms. Farber is a central figure among the AIDS “dissenters.” She isn’t a scientist herself; instead, she champions the scientific work of Peter Duesberg, a cancer researcher at the University of California at Berkeley. Ms. Farber sees herself as some sort of modern-day Clarence Darrow to Mr. Duesberg’s Scopes—an advocate whose lonely battle will be vindicated through the prisms of history and science.

Her two-decade career has been dominated by her efforts to keep debate about the dissenting AIDS theory alive, and nearly every piece she publishes on the subject triggers a seismic backlash. An Op-Ed piece in The New York Times on June 4 accused her camp of “Deadly Quackery”: “The truth is that H.I.V. does exist, that it causes AIDS and that antiretroviral drugs can prevent H.I.V. transmission and death from AIDS,” it read. “To deny these facts is not just wrong—it’s deadly.”

One could argue that Ms. Farber gave her life for her obsession with the cause. A few months ago, she and her ragtag band of colleagues might have been considered, by some, to be one step away from the conspiracy theorist’s asylum, next in line behind the 9/11-was-an-inside-job crowd. But they’ve been feeling emboldened by two recent successes: the publication of Ms. Farber’s first book, Serious Adverse Events: An Uncensored History of AIDS, by the independent press Melville House; and, perhaps more significantly, the appearance of a 15-page article by Ms. Farber in the March issue of Harper’s Magazine.

Indeed, as one party attendee pointed out, not everyone in the media world regards Celia Farber as a petrified animal. “There are so many people who admire her,” said Thor Halvorssen, a personal friend of Ms. Farber, who was there solely to lend her moral support. He paused. “[Former Harper’s editor] Lewis Lapham, for one.”

UP CLOSE, MS. FARBER, 40, HAS A DAMAGED, fragile air. She is tall and exceedingly thin, with limbs that look as if they might snap to the touch. Her facial features are dramatically chiseled, with large brown eyes topped off with carefully tousled blond hair. “After all these years, the spotlight is on me,” Ms. Farber said, sipping a glass of white wine. “It’s come at the same moment when I’ve ceased to care any more. There comes a point where I don’t crave respectability, I don’t expect to get it from the outside.”

Ms. Farber sees AIDS through the lens of totalitarianism (American society in general, American science specifically and the National Institutes of Health all earned the label). To engage with her is to enter a surreal plane where her intensity threatens to overwhelm. Dozens of e-mails arrive in the night filled with angry rantings, impassioned pleas, links to articles and letters to the editor—all offering a glimpse into the emotional seesaw that is her existence. She seems riven by anxious energy, and her long fingers tend to flutter around her temples like butterflies as she speaks.

At the Roosevelt, she was seated on a couch next to her friend Mr. Halvorssen, a preppy libertarian with a cowlick, whose preoccupations that night included the evils of communism, political correctness, environmentalists and the charges against the Duke lacrosse team.

“I’m an unusual subject in that for years it’s been written that I’m in denial of reality, a mass murderer …,” Ms. Farber said.

At that moment, Barry Farber—Ms. Farber’s father, the anti-communist and conservative radio host who ran for Mayor of New York in 1977—ambled over with a big grin, his tie askew.

“We’re talking about your daughter!” Mr. Halvorssen said to him.

“Ah, my favorite subject!” Mr. Farber said in his Southern drawl. He collapsed on the couch and started punching at his cell phone.

“If you are deprived of respectability over time,” Ms. Farber continued, “what happens is, it’s wounding—but eventually you get freed of the addiction to respectability. I think a lot of media people crave respectability.”

Her friend wasn’t buying it; he thinks she is too timid and insecure. “How often in the past two years have you pitched a story?” said Mr. Halvorssen in a scolding tone.

“Um … ,” Ms. Farber said, “I have pitched stories, probably …. ”

“She just does not do it!” Mr. Halvorssen said. “She could get $20,000 a story, she’s so good. But she just. Does. Not. Do. It. She’s still bleeding. If we could just cover these wounds …. ”

“I said this to Lewis Lapham, actually,” Ms. Farber said: “‘You are interfering with my persecution complex!’”

“You see this?” Mr. Halvorssen said. “She has a Joan of Arc complex!”

“A persecution complex does not develop out of nothing,” Ms. Farber said.

AIDS “HAS HAD ME IN ITS JAWS FOR 20 YEARS, and I’ve occasionally tried to get away from it. And I have found that there’s not nearly as much free will as you’d think,” said Ms. Farber. “I am not obsessed with it. I probably seem to be obsessed with it—people probably think, Can’t she shut up about AIDS? But in actual fact, I’ve been trying to, for a long time. But some portion of the culture keeps coming to me and asking me to please address it again.” Ms. Farber, however, is unable to “shut up about” AIDS for very long.

Celia Farber is a New Yorker by birth (she now lives on the Upper West Side). Her mother was a Swedish Pan Am stewardess and a nurse; her father is of Russian Jewish ancestry and grew up in North Carolina. She lived from age 11 to 18 in Sweden, which she described as an oppressive, overly socialist, weird place. She joined the alternative-rock scene, and when she returned to New York she enrolled at N.Y.U. and drummed in bands.

She began writing her infamous AIDS column, called “Words from the Front,” at Spin in 1987.

It was in the midst of the so-called “AIDS war,” when public fear (Ms. Farber likes to call it “mass hysteria”) about the disease was at its peak and there was a scientific space race underway to understand it. But: “I didn’t come in and say, ‘I wanna write about AIDS!’” Ms. Farber said. “I wanted to find something out, ideally something that really needed to be found out and nobody else had found out. That was my thing.”

Her pieces, many of which are collected in her book, raised questions about whether H.I.V. was the sole cause of AIDS, about the side effects of the AIDS drug AZT and about the severity of the AIDS epidemic in Africa. Her second installment was an interview with Mr. Duesberg, who is also known for his hypothesis that AIDS is caused by heavy recreational and anti-H.I.V. drug use rather than H.I.V. itself. Mr. Duesberg was shunned by the scientific community after publishing his theory that H.I.V. cannot cause AIDS; Ms. Farber has been aligned with him ever since.

Needless to say, many in the medical establishment, as well as gay and AIDS activists—and Ms. Farber’s own colleagues at Spin—found her columns destructive. Spin’s publisher, Bob Guccione Jr., personally shepherded her pieces into the magazine. “There was always a sense of violence and sabotage,” Ms. Farber said, adopting the cadences of a grizzled war reporter. “There were times when Bob and I had to actually walk the boards to the printer—there were people, copy editors and fact-checkers, who hated the column so much they would cut things out.”

There was also another matter: Ms. Farber was romantically involved with Mr. Guccione, which created resentment in the office. This culminated in 1994 when an employee named Staci Bonner filed a sexual-harassment lawsuit against the magazine and Mr. Guccione.

Ms. Farber had by then gone freelance, gotten married to someone else and given birth to a son just that year. In a time line she provided in an e-mail, she wrote: “The years 1994-1997 were consumed with fighting the charges which culminated in Federal Court, 1997. Hospitalized briefly for suicidal urges. Lost 25 pounds. Lost will to live. Betrayed by best friend at Spin (plaintiff).” She said the trial “absolutely leveled me—it was the darkest, scariest, most traumatic, merciless, brutal thing I’ve ever seen or imagined; it took me 10 years to even begin to want to live again.”

Shortly after that, she went to Los Angeles and spent three months shadowing O.J. Simpson for Esquire, which resulted in a sensational cover story in 1998. She wrote for Mr. Guccione at his new magazine, Gear, and had an AIDS column on the Web site Ironminds. She separated from her husband. She organized a concert called “Rock the Boat,” which was intended to raise awareness about alternative AIDS theories; the concert fell apart, and Ms. Farber said that “financial decimation” followed. She worked at a series of odd jobs—in hotels, trade shows, making candles, catering, dishwashing.

Around 2001, Tina Brown commissioned her to write a story about gene therapy for Talk. The piece was killed. She said that she has been broke, and has given up on journalism, ever since.

(There was one bright spot: Ms. Farber said in an e-mail that after she wrote a piece for the New York Press about Bill O’Reilly’s sexual harassment case in 2004, the founder of American Apparel, Dov Charney, called her up “yelling about the whole fake feminism ordeal.” Mr. Charney had been dealing with his own harassment accusations, and he hired her as a “consultant and writer.” Ms. Farber referred to Mr. Charney as her “secret benefactor.”)

She speaks of her Harper’s article as if it was a divine accident, but in reality Mr. Lapham was the puppet master. After meeting him at a party several years ago, Ms. Farber said he urged her to pitch him stories. “He said, ‘I really need someone to write about science for me,’” Ms. Farber recalled. “He said, ‘I really have a sense that it’s kind of … ,’ and then he paused, and I said, ‘Diabolical?’”

She eventually proposed a piece about the same H.I.V.-does-not-cause-AIDS virologist she’s been championing since Spin. “I had no intention whatsoever of writing about AIDS in Harper’s,” Ms. Farber said, somewhat implausibly. “The original story was about Peter Duesberg’s cancer theory. And I remember saying to Lewis Lapham: ‘The AIDS question—we’ll just fly right over that, right?’ And he said, ‘Yeah, we’ll fly right over that.’” (Mr. Lapham declined to speak to The Observer.)

Ms. Farber turned in that piece, which appears as the first chapter in her book. Mr. Lapham handed the text over to an editor, Roger Hodge, to edit. While it was being worked on, news of a problematic AIDS drug trial appeared in the press. Ms. Farber brought it to her editor’s attention and said that she was urged to look into that story: “I felt like, ‘Oh, God, what a pain in the ass. I don’t wanna go into that extraordinarily difficult, impossible, explosive, life-destroying stuff!’” Ms. Farber said. “But you don’t say that to your editors.”

The piece that ultimately ran was an awkward marriage of the two stories. Predictably, it triggered a considerable level of anger directed at Harper’s. Letters were published both in support of the article and taking issue with some of Ms. Farber’s contentions. The AIDS researcher Robert Gallo and doctors from the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, among others, wrote in protest.

Ms. Farber said that she’d tried to warn Messrs. Lapham and Hodge of her reputation and biases. “In this discredited little cadre of scientists, I’m their champion,” she said she told them. In an e-mail, Mr. Hodge, who is now Harper’s’ top editor, wrote: “Yes, we knew what we were getting into.” He also wrote: “Celia is an excellent reporter and I hope she brings us more good stories in the future.”

It’s not entirely surprising that a figure such as Ms. Farber would appeal to a particular brand of right-thinking liberalism, the type embodied by Mr. Lapham’s former magazine. By focusing her outrage on her opposition’s desire to silence dissent rather than on the actual scientific arguments, Ms. Farber finds protection under the idea that no subject or theory, regardless of its implications, should be taken off the table; continuing to ask the questions can be more important than answering them.

When asked how the endless contrarianism might have impacted Ms. Farber professionally, Mr. Guccione, another believer in the “fostering debate” approach to publishing, said: “I think she has paid a terrific price.” He continued: “You know, the flip side of that is, I think she spent too much time dwelling on the AIDS beat. It’s been a holy quest for her.”

In any case, Ms. Farber would be lost without her battles. She said that she’s always been fascinated by Stalinism, Communism, the Holocaust, witch hunts; she visits “as many dictatorships as I can.” She described herself alternately as a lapsed hard leftist, a proto-anarchist, a libertarian sympathizer and a “bit punk.” When asked if she somehow took pleasure in the turmoil triggered by her journalism, she said: “I would vastly prefer a quiet life, without roiling bands of furious AIDS activists—I mean treatment activists—smearing my name all over the world. I mean, I don’t like it. I don’t take it lightly.”

Then she thought for a moment. “I think I was built to take it,” Ms. Farber said. “I just had a very, very unsparing childhood. And I was never any ‘the world is my oyster’ kind of person. Things were always tough, and I developed kind of an identity, I guess, where maybe I relished something about the dynamic of being attacked. It’s a really good question …. It traumatizes me very much. Less now than it used to. I find it boring now. Very, very boring.”

58 Responses to “Celia Farber profiled as articulate, ‘obsessive’ AIDS ‘anarchist’ by NY Observer”

  1. Melanie Flood Says:

    Take my photograph of Celia off immediately. You stole it off the New York Observer’s website, and I still have not given you permission to use it.Thank you.

  2. Anonymous Says:

    C’mon Melanie, chill out. First you say:Give me attribution, as in:”I certainly would expect the correct photo credit, especially when using it without my consent.”Now you want:”Take my photograph of Celia off immediately.”Make up your damn mind girl. Have you ever heard of email.This coulda been settled days ago.

  3. Truthseeker Says:

    Make up your damn mind girl. Have you ever heard of email.

    Thanks, Anon, but that is not quite fair. Melanie Flood did email as requested, with a large bill (large to us – $150), and then again, to which we replied that we would deal with it as soon as the income of the blog rose above zero, and we could assess her fair share of the proceeds, or alternatively the loss she had suffered by having it displayed here, but pointed out that it was reproduced under the principle of fair comment, since we rather objected to her supplying the Observer with such a portrait, to which she replied that she didn’t take any responsibility for the portrayal or the selected photo among 300, she simply photographed her subjects as they were.

    We were about to reply to her position in email privately when she posted this comment in bold black, and have now done so, but we haven’t dared offer her lunch, which was the plan to mollify her while the income of the blog was somehow escalated to the heights necessary to pay her what she wished, even though we think it is far in excess of any benefit we gained from it, and we would even argue that she owes us one for the exposure and the credit and the attention drawn to what is in fact an interesting photo, though inappropriately portraying Celia in a manner that shortchanged her achievement as a relentless, heroically determined investigative journalist who has spent twenty years battling the biggest boondoggle in scientific and medical history, one which has ended the peace of mind, health and even lives of countless innocents, but not yet conquered her with its censorship and violence.

    Since Melanie has explained that she takes no responsibility for the choice of this photo from among 300 she supplied the editors, we regret making her furious by blaming her for it in email, though we still think she might have thought twice about parking Celia on a bed looking dishevelled and worse, and confined her portraiture to poses which suggested the spine of steel which has seen Celia bloodied but unbowed after two decades of determinedly conveying the reality she has found on the front lines of this battleground.

    Here is a link to Melanie’s other picture of Celia put on the front page of the same issue of the Observer, though severely cropped: Celia photo by Melanie Flood. You can see other pics by this photographer on that Flicker site.

  4. john23 Says:

    ” AIDS Anarchist Farber” is the usual hatchet job by an establishment journo, pharma shill like Fumento

    Celia Farber: “I see the elephant, and I think the elephant goes a long way to explaining one’s obsession with the elephant.”

    If you study medical history you then you can see the Allopath Elephant http://www.whale.to/a/allopathy_h.html and you would be well surprised if they weren’t trying to kill us all off with the AIDS/HIV scam as Jon Rappoport worked out.

    If you look at allopathic vaccination from the beginning you will find out smallpox vax didn’t save one single life but killed millions over 200 years, 25,000 infants in 1880, for example http://www.whale.to/a/smallpox_hoax.html. Then they suppressed the simple cure for infections–Vitamin C, since 1949, also the Vitamin C cure for heart disease, and prevention of cot-death http://www.whale.to/a/vit_c_cons.html Letting 300,000 children die over 30 years purely due to medical politics, to put it politely. Then it is very easy to see they use vaccination for third world genocide http://www.whale.to/v/biowarfare.html

    while they have suppressed numerous cancer cures for 100 years http://www.whale.to/a/cancer_c.html

    also the cause and cure for alzheimer’s http://www.whale.to/d/alzheimers.html

    It is a testament to Pharma mind control that anyone believes a word they say about anything. All ‘new diseases’ are man made. Polio, a cover for DDT and vaccine poisoning http://www.whale.to/v/polio2.htm for example.

    You can see the log of human genocide attempts http://www.whale.to/b/covert_q.html

    So why anyone believes their lies over AIDS is a wonder to behold. AZT a cure for an infection? If they gave a rat’s ass over infections they would be curing them with vitamin C 57 years ago http://www.whale.to/a/levy4.html Ozone or herbs

    “He was one of my most dramatic recoveries with AIDS, and the reason I say that is that he was the most far gone. He was in the absolute, end stage — they have that wing in the hospital where they have given up on you. You can smoke pot and do anything you want. They had given up on him.”—Dr Shulze, who cured 16 from last stage full-blown AIDS. http://www.whale.to/c/shulze.html

  5. john23 Says:

    being a vaccine activist I had to investigate 200 years of vaccine history, along with all those diseases, as well as disease theory. It is striking to me how AIDS activists don’t generally seem to look outside the AIDS wood.

    Anyone who knows the true history of smallpox smallpox vaccine http://www.whale.to/a/smallpox_hoax.html will never be the same again. As I said before it was killing 25,000 babies every year at the height of compulsory vaccination in 1880. An easy stat to verify as the City of Leicester gave up vaccination for 30 years and was losing 2,000 less children under 5 compared to their high vaccination years http://www.whale.to/vaccines/leicester_h.html Also Leprsoy was introduced into Hawaii where 10% of the population came down with the disease http://www.whale.to/m/quotes14.html As late as 1890 75% of ‘vaccination’ was arm to arm. You can see a simple exposure in the Phillipines as late as 1920-1925 http://www.whale.to/vaccines/smallpox7.html

    The point to remember is they knew it was ineffective and dangerous 150 years ago, yet carried on regardless.

    The easiest one after smallpox is measles and measles vaccine http://www.whale.to/vaccines/measles.html Measles deaths had declined by 99.4% before vaccination, which is the usual story, and they suppressed the Vitamin A and Vitamin C cures that would have made vaccination unecessary and expose the fact measles deaths and morbidity was purely down to malnutrition, along with poor management, exposing vaccination as a hoax, again.

    Autism was virtually unknown before mass mercury containing DPT vaccination, now we have 500,000 people with autistic spectrum disorders in the UK alone, nearly all due to vaccination, including MMR http://www.whale.to/vaccines/vax_autism_q.html They have known this for decades, and now they have produced numerous fraudulent studies to suppress this fact, letting tens of thousand children develop autism every year.

    “Nancy Hokkanen came up with one of the greatest analogies ever to describe the autism and vaccine controversy and how it feels to us parents of kids with autism. She compared it to the Catholic Church’s cover up of decades of sexual abuse.”

    DPT vaccine and others like the Hep B are the main cause of cot-death, which was running at 10,000 every year in the USA, in 1984 http://www.whale.to/vaccines/sids.html You would be lucky to find a cot-death in an unvaccinated breastfed child, which bring me to the other Allopath crime–the covert promotion of bottlefeeding. You can see the Elite mindset when they promote 1.5 million third world deaths via Nestle http://www.whale.to/b/milk2.html

    No vaccination or bottlemilk–no sick children. No business.

    Also asthma is running at 1 in 5 kids, all due to vaccination and drugs like antibiotics http://www.whale.to/vaccines/asthma.html Also juvenile arthritis (300,000 US kids) and diabetes are soaring http://www.whale.to/v/quotes4.html http://www.whale.to/vaccines/arthritis.html

    The hep B vaccine is a noted baby killer and it is estimated to cause 60,000 cases of MS in France http://www.whale.to/vaccines/ms.htm

    With Shaken Baby Syndrome they decided to blame the mother for vaccine deaths http://www.whale.to/vaccines/sbs1.html one mother’s 2 kids died soon after vaccination (Sally Clark) yet a psychopath called Dr Meadows made up some spurious stat to send her to jail. She was released eventually when some of the truth came out (vaccines still escaped) and ended up killing herself. The point here is the fact Meadows KNEW as he sat on the government vaccine committee into vaccine injuries for at least 10 years.

    The big scare story is Spanish Flu http://www.whale.to/v/spanish_flu.html That looks to be vaccine induced. Same for Gulf War Syndrome, mostly anthrax vaccine http://www.whale.to/vaccines/army.html If anthrax or any other germ was a viable weapon then they would have given it to old Saddam to try out, but the only one to die of anthrax was a victim of the CIA. Smallpox isn’t that toxic, Sydneham in 1660 only had a death rate of 1-2%, yet they try to say it kills 30% now http://www.whale.to/v/smallpox2.html I suspect anthrax is the same.

    Don’t let’s forget their psychiatric drugs, 3.6 million US kids are on Ritalin, kiddy coke or speed. 1.3 million UK adults are addicted to benzos like Valium (way way worse than heroin to come off), and 1 million kids have been damaged in the womb by them–now on Ritalin no doubt. 25,000 people have committed suicide from Prozac http://www.whale.to/a/psychiatry_h.html and so on.

    Robert Whitaker exposes the fact all these drugs just make things worse http://www.whale.to/a/whitaker_h.html

    and nutritional medicine will do a proper job with any addiction or deaths, known for decades http://www.whale.to/w/nutritional.html and they also have a non-addictive safe detox http://www.whale.to/v/heroin_add.html Just one medicine.

    Another truly nasty one is the hysterectomy hoax http://www.whale.to/a/hysterectomy1.html
    and the heart bypass hoax

    the mammogrammy hoax has given countless women breast cancer as John Hofman exposes http://www.whale.to/a/mammography_h.html

    And don’t lets forget the fact Allopathy is the leading cause of death in the first world (780,000 USA) http://www.whale.to/a/dean.html especially when you add on the 500,000 cancer chemo deaths, and the AIDS drug deaths. Chemo deaths is easy to work out, they suppressed 2 dozen or so safe cures, and even they admit chemo is only of use in 5-7% of patients, yet given to 50%. Do the maths. Hardin Jones 30 years ago worked out you live 4 times as long doing nothing.

    They like to make out no non-allopathic med is any use unless it is a cure, yet they can’t cure most of the commonest cancers even for 5 years, and none 100%. Their best med at the end of the day is surgery for breast cancer. Hardly medicine. One of their biggst crimes was suppressing Laetrile, you can see their nature exposed there nicely, Mayo clinic. http://www.whale.to/cancer/laetrile.html

    A 60£ zapper will cure all cancers (and AIDS) bar leukemia and prostate http://www.whale.to/a/zapper_q.html

    Each year, 61,000 older adults develop drug-induced parkinsonism http://www.whale.to/a/drugind.html

    that is the kind of people running the AIDS Industry.

    Brice Taylor used to be Kissingers personal assistant:

    “They (The Council) also were very condescending to those individuals who didn’t eat properly or exercise. They take immaculate care of their bodies as far as health goes. They are fit and trim and they use natural medicines. The American Medical Association is fashioned to prescribe drugs and perform various treatments that although they may be unsuspecting, tend to weed out the weaker species. The Council views the AMA’s ‘modern medicine’ as barbaric. Their plans are to have mind-enhanced health associates, like some of the USC medical and dental graduates, who provide the new health care for the Elite, after the takeover. Precision surgery with laser technology will make the so-called “modern methods” of surgery obsolete. Miracle medicines and herbs (God’s pharmacy) will keep the body healthy. An understanding of the way the electro-molecular energy field around the body operates will allow the healthy body to be kept in perfect alignment creating perpetual perfect health or it can be brought back into alignment easily with the use of high-tech field variation equipment. This will be the modern medicine of the future and upcoming doctors will be trained in these methods in order to further the evolution of the Elite. The Elite plan to enjoy total and complete health due to their technology in electromagnetic fields.”—Brice Taylor (Thanks For The Memories p 283)

  6. Truthseeker Says:

    John, you are beginning to sound a little hysterical. The basic principle of vaccination is valid, is it not? If it wasn’t every epidemic would catch and kill everybody, wouldn’t it? What relationship do you have to this whale website?

  7. john23 Says:

    It is my website. That could sound hysterical if you believe in Allopathy. Eg in Vaccination, which seems to have a very strong hold on many people, many who should know better.

    If you get some diseases you don’t generally get them again (smallpox, chickenpox, measles eg), so vaccination is based on that one, the similarity ends there. Proven not to work way back in the 19 century as over 90% of the victims had been vaccinated.

    Also, many of the diseases are immune system elimination processes, eg measles http://www.whale.to/m/measles3.html

    You can’t vaccinate againts filth which was what smallpox was, essentially, made worse by poor diet and the Allopathic therapies of alcohol, mercury etc http://www.whale.to/a/allopathy4.html If the truth be know Allopathy spread smallpox with vaccination, kept it going for much longer, they also kept its dangers by only using dire medicine and suppressing the real cures, while they ignored/suppressed the real cause–poor santiation and poverty. They still, to this day, maintain the lie. Easy to see also with measles.

    Vaccination is based on the wrong disease theory–the false pasteurian monomorphic one. They managed to suppress the correct one by Bechamp http://www.whale.to/v/germ.htm Pasteur was a fraud and plagiarist, no surprise there http://www.whale.to/v/pasteur.html

    Any study of Natural Hygiene will erase any belief in vaccination and drug therapy http://www.whale.to/m/measles3.html

    as Trall said: “The Drug Medical System cannot bear examination. To explain it would be to destroy it, and to defend it even is to damage it.”—R.T. Trall M.D.

    Nothing has changed since then. They just got smarter.

    I always see the refrain–‘those who don’t study history are doomed to repeat it’. I just outlined, briefly, some suppressed medical history for you. If people knew that they wouldn’t be doomed to fall for their HIV/AIDS lies.

    The other factor people can’t see is Evil.

    “It is as hard for the good to suspect evil, as it is for the evil to suspect good.”- Marcus Tullius Cicero, Statesman, orator, writer (106-43 BCE)

    But that is another story.

  8. john23 Says:

    PS. That rant was more of a observation on the true nature of the enemy (know your enemy etc), but it will be too much truth for most people, especially if you are in the medical industry.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Bad Behavior has blocked 386 access attempts in the last 7 days.