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.

HONOR ROLL OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTHSEEKERS

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)

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

Science Guardian Comment Troll Trap

May 27th, 2009

All comments which cannot answer the question from the host, What possible value of any kind can this drivel have for any sensible reader?, will hitherto be displaced here unless any respectable reader objects
========================================

For those in the world, if any other than the authors, who want to know what tripe was posted on the Celia comment thread in the week of May 21, 2009, here is the thread with the erased posts included.

These inane gems, proof positive of the sheer idiocy and irresponsible adolescent carelessness of the pinheads who don’t wish to advance science and truth even when the health and sometimes lives of millions of gays and blacks are at stake, serve to show the world how abysmally mediocre are the minds and hearts of their silly authors, so we will keep there here as a reference for a time.

They cannot be allowed to dilute the extremely high quality of comments on this site from responsible thinkers who can read and understand the literature of HIV/AIDS and use their time to try and correct the situation, of which one cause is precisely the immaturity and thoughtlessness shown in these posts:

———————————————————–
Maria angus Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 9:32 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Martin, keep it simple please.

We are for free speech, and apparently you don’t like a strong woman speaking out, even if she is completely agreeing with you! Pointy-headed scientists have gotten us in all kind of trouble with their “studies.” Celia and all of us reject their studies, because they are inherently biased. Anyone who takes funding from Pharma, or from the government, is completely biased and cannot be trusted. That is the gist of your argument, and I agree! Scientists have all kinds of “theories”, like evolution and global warming and cigarettes causing cancer. But they can’t prove any of it! Just like all their “studies” and electron micrographs of HIV don’t mean a thing. Who cares if scientists have extended the life expectancies of AIDS patients by decades? We still don’t like scientists, and we don’t like their results. Democracy means that everyone should have an equal voice, and my voice counts as much as yours! Don’t call me a bird brain, unless you are willing to apply the same to yourself. We are both using the same God-given arguments.

So, stay strong! Freedom of speech means the freedom to be wrong. But, we are right! I forgive you, because you are doing God’s work to defeat the scientists. Make no mistake- Celia needs all the arguments she can get! We don’t have science on our side, so we must use what we have! We don’t need science to tell right from wrong. We know in our hearts that using drugs to fight HIV is wrong.

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

Maria angus Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 9:41 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

It is time for the whole community to unite. IF you are not a cheerleader for BIG pharma, admit that their studies are false. Somebody said this is war, so forget about the propoganda coming from science. The beauty of Gallo’s egg is that there is not one shred of scientific evidence. Facts would only clutter up this report.

Celia gets it. So you are either with us or against us. Brothers and sisters, now is the time for solidarity. Don’t call each other names. Instead, let’s get together and show the world what we are about. The truth is only what we perceive it to be, and know it in our hearts. We are democracy in action, and against all elitists.

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

Truthseeker Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 4:23 pm e
Those last two comments by Maria are the kind of thing that wastes everyone’s time and brings the site into disrepute, so they will have to be erased shortly. However, we admit that we agree that some people in the HIV skeptic fold are less respectful of standard science than they should be. That is, they feel that the research done may not be interpreted correctly by the leaders of a field. None of them, as far as we know, thinks with their emotions in saying this.

Maria appears to have discovered the art of satire, whereby you exaggerate someone’s position to make it appear foollish But there isn’t a shred of truth in her attempted irony when applied to Celia or any other follower of Peter Duesberg or any other good scientist. Celia is the last person to question science, and nor are we doing so at this site, which is dedicated to comparing scientific claims with scientific evidence in the scientific literature.

What Celia questions is not science but scientists who talk nonsense, make hollow claims and don’t accept the lessons taught by their own research, which is that the HIV paradigm is a hot air balloon that was shot down in 1987 by Peter Duesberg, then and often since.

Duesberg used the research papers of the HIV enthusiasts against them, and in fact was kind enough not to deny the evidence they asserted even when he could also show it was coming from studies that were very badly done and whose results were therefore unsubstantiated.

That is the whole point of Duesberg’s evisceration of the claptrap that is HIV science. He showed that by their own lights, and according to their own papers, their fond and well funded theory doesn’t hold up. They themselves disprove their own hypothesis.

We have demonstrated this on Science Guardian often enough to suggest that Anthony Fauci and John Moore and even Robert Gallo could well be dissidents themselves. Luc Montagnier of course is a dissident, who has long held that HIV by itself is not sufficient to cause AIDS, and therefore may not be the cause at all. Of course, since he was silenced with a Nobel Montagnier hasn’t expressed himself along these lines very often.

The trouble with Maria’s strenuous efforts at satirizing Duesberg, Celia and all those who have detected the bad science of HIV/AIDS is that she uses it to include misleading statements, such as

Who cares if scientists have extended the life expectancies of AIDS patients by decades?

This is an example of the misinterpretation of results. The only reason that HIV/AIDS patients are doing better than before is because their current drug regime is less lethal. The dose of AZT has been reduced by 75% from the glory days where it killed off patients in two or three years (compared to HIV supposedly in an average of ten years!) when they had already damaged their immune systems severely with designer drugs. Nowadays they live longer, therefore, that they did before, ceteris parabus.

However, the current drug regime is keeping up a (un)healthy rate of mortality. About 16,000 die of HIV/AIDS each year in this country.

It is interesting to compare this rate with countries in Europe, where the tests are more selective than the Robert Gallo tests used here. They number in the hundreds or less, last we heard. In the US far more people are reckoned HIV positive because the Gallo test is used. A more accurate test is used in Europe.

Interesting, isn’t it? Robert Gallo may be directly responsible for the deaths of many US gay men who might otherwise have been treated appropriately for whatever ails them, but are counted HIV/AIDS patients and dosed with and done in by the unpleasant and eventually fatally debilitating AIDS drugs.

And poor Gallo still missed out on the Nobel after all he has achieved!

Maria angus Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 8:09 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Wohhhh!

Truthseeker, I thought you wanted to be open and transparent. You know full well that Farber is not a scientist, you are not a scientist, and we have absolutely no science on our side. I thought you wanted a free and open debate. But you don’t want anyone to raise a question even slightly different than your own? What are you afraid of?

You say you are going to erase my comments because they are slightly different than your own? C’mon. You know that drugs have kept men like Magic Johnson alive for decades longer than ever. Do you forget when AIDS mortality was measured in months, not in decades?

If you want a scientific debate, our side would lose hands down. It is only by the appeal to the heart, and to the good book, and by slinging ad hominem that we have a chance! If you were not calling people names, we would have no argument at all. That is why I am cheering you on. Bravo! You are making a great cause with absolutely no evidence! That takes balls. You have the balls to quote Luc Montagnier, then turn around and claim that he can no longer be trusted because he has been bought off with a Nobel Prize.

Then, you claim we should listen to Duesberg and Karry Mullis because they have Nobel prizes! Which is it? Should we listen to Nobel laureates, or dismiss persons because they have been bought off with Noble prizes as establishment stooges?

You are great truthteller! No one else could see so clearly that we must reject all scientific evidence, yet claim he is still scientific! I understand. Your rantings against me are part of your stick. In fact, I am you and you are me! Everyone can see that it is you who put me up to this post so that you can react against it.

But again, to be clear, you are absolutely rejecting every shred of scientific proof. Celia has rejected science. I reject science. That is the only way for our cause to prosper. We must reject the elitism of science. Everyone who has seen HIV under a microscope has been bought off by Big Pharma! It is for the greater good that millions of lives that could be saved by HIV drugs must be sacrificed.

Clearly, you are doing Gods work. You do not want people who could be saved by anti-HIV drugs to be saved. You do not want my posts, or anyone who dissents from you even when agreeing with you, to be read. You are part of a new establishment (actually, a very old establishment) that would prefer AIDS patients to die.

Farber has seen the light. We cannot use science to advance our cause. We can only use blog posts and detective “investigations” to ignore science.

I have seen things clearly, and I am your greatest ally. Celia, do not let them silence my voice. You will need it.

Yours, in God’s grace,

Maria

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

Maria angus Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 8:38 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

I admit it. Secretly, I hate my husband for giving my baby AIDS. I don’t want him to live, so I have been fighting the AIDS establishment. Clark Baker has inspired all of my writings. He wanted someone to blog against, so I agreed.

I am ashamed, and I now admit that I believe it is God’s will for AIDS victims not to be saved by drugs. It is an abomination.

I hope the whole denialist community will stand up and admit that this is what our group is all about. We don’t want people saved. We don’t want them to use their brains. We want to follow the Book, and suffer as was intended.

I know that Clark Baker will erase my comments. He put me up to this, but now he wants to eliminate my voice. Go figure.

But, while you can still read me, I ask for the denialist community to unite! We must reject science, and back Celia Farber!

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

jtdeshong Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 8:47 pm e
Watch this, I can do something NONE of the rest of you can do, and that is admit the truth!!
Houston is correct, the communication was to Brian Foley. However, I have been in contact with Brian Foley, (all us Pharma Shills know each other) and he OK’d me to post the info at my blog, dissidents4dumbees.blogspot.com, but he did not want it advertised that it was sent to him.
Now, Houston, can you admit your error? If you read the Farber article in Harper’s, Farber did indeed claim not once, but twice, that Canada rejected Nevirapine not once, but twice. Farber claims the rejections were in 1996 AND 1998. Yet the truth, above, shows that Canada rejected Nevirapine only ONCE in 1996 and allowed the drug in 1998! Do you understand the difference?
As for Maria Angus, I thought she was an idiot from previous posts, but boy, she is not taking any crap from you fucktards!! I may actually have to respect at least one denialist! Keep it up, Angus, and I might just send you a little stipend from my monthly Big Pharma payoff!!
JTD

ClarkT Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 9:21 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Friends,

I don’t agree with what Maria Angus says, but surely we should defend to the death her right to say it. This poor woman has been through so much. Our community has nothing to hide, so why don’t we let Maria have her say?

As a former detective, I believe she is on the right track. Surely, Farber wrote her article as a journalist, not as a scientist. We should embrace what Maria says. As a detective, I want to know what is in people’s hearts, not what some scientific study says. Look at all the harm science has brought us. Global warming, cigarettes, cancer, evolution. We just don’t need science. That good old time religion was good enough for Moses, and it is good enough for me.

Maria has said that God intends AIDS patients to die. Surely, she is right. Look at the facts. Africa’s population is out of control. How else can the world be brought into balance? We can’t afford to spend thousands of dollars per person to save these people. Tiny Tim had to die to decrease the surplus population. So was it then, so is it now.

We are nothing if we are not inclusive. We must allow the poor suffering Maria her say. I vote that we do not remove people’s blogs just because we disagree with them. We show our integrity and our metal by giving a voice to the voiceless. Maria says we must reject science, and embrace Farber. She is right. We know it in our hears.

(Warning: Apparently the writer is essaying a satirical post, inspired by Maria Angus, but like her is still developing basic skills in this demanding form. We look forward to the time when ClarkT’s contributions will also be worth keeping, rather than being summarily erased, see below. – Ed.)

ClarkT Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 10:42 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

You know, the one thing the denialist community should have in common is inclusiveness. We are asking other people to be open to new ideas, and new paradigms… to step outside the box.

Maria had the courage to step out of the box, and had new ideas. But truthseeker doesn’t want to be open to new ideas. He just wants to continue the old tired ideas of this group. That AIDS is hopeless, and can’t be helped by drugs.

Let’s challenge our assumptions. Let’s welcome Maria.

So far the group has treated her like she has some kind of disease. They are treating her.. like she has AIDS!

Surely, we can be bigger than this. Let’s embrace Maria’s new ideas. She is the true Galileo of our group. She is speaking truth to power. I agree with her… it is time to reject science and try something new. Support Celia Farber!

(Warning: Apparently the writer is essaying a satirical post, inspired by Maria Angus, but like her is still developing basic skills in this demanding form. We look forward to the time when ClarkT’s contributions will also be worth keeping, rather than being summarily erased, see below. – Ed.)

Truthseeker Says:
May 26th, 2009 at 11:40 pm e
You say you are going to erase my comments because they are slightly different than your own? C’mon.

No, your comments are going to be erased because they are silly, and in them you cannot even keep your satirical facts straight, and thus they are an utter waste of even Web space, infinite though it is and which is freely available here for all who have something cogent to contribute, but not to silly people, who have nothing to contribute, and who post bird brained drivel that even Monty Python would consider silly.

We don’t mind carrying nonsense here if it is amusing, however cretinous, as per DeShong, who is of course a sheep in wolf’s clothing, bringing the established wisdom into disrepute with every post. But your comments are just silly, and this site is only open to silly geese if they are sincere and witty to boot. You are not yet either, although practice may raise your standards, in which case you will be welcome, even though misguided, for the site exists both to entertain and to instruct.

So unless someone sensible speaks up on behalf of keeping your last posts here on the grounds that they, like DeShong’s masterful work, only bring the established regime into severe, if not fatal disrepute, they will be sent into the ether to roam the universe like ghosts of their former empty selves.

This is actually a service to you as well as to us, since you will be prompted to find some other use for your life other than trolling.

ClarkT Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 12:09 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

TS, you make no sense. Your postings are completely illogical and are rants. I am complementing you. You have a masterful strategy, just like Gallo’s egg, which makes no earthly sense. But, as you say, it is the most interesting reading on AIDS recently. It is interesting because it is illogical.

We both have been private investigators. Why not just admit your strategy is to completely bluff and befuddle? You have a good strategy, and I’m totally behind you and Farber.

Why not put it to a vote? I’m certain that your postings will win as the most illogical and unscientific. I salute you, because it would be easy to accept the mainstream consensus that science is for scientists. you’ve raised a whole new paradynm, that truth is irrelevant. I agree with you, and salute you for the mish-mash of untruths that you are.

We must support Celia. We can’t do that with science. It is time we use our real strenght, and attack science altogether.

I’m only following your lead. Please, honor the freedom of speach without which we are nothing.

(Warning: Apparently the writer is essaying a satirical post, inspired by Maria Angus, but like her is still developing basic skills in this demanding form. We look forward to the time when ClarkT’s contributions will also be worth keeping, rather than being summarily erased, see below. – Ed.)

Robert Houston Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 1:13 am e
This site is being overrun by devotees of AIDStruth who pretend to be what they are not. On the one hand, those depicting themselves as a “denialist”, the favorite pejorative of the HIV/AIDS dogmatists, are obvious imposters trying to depict AIDS rethinkers as anti-science wackos – the apparent agenda of “Maria angus” and his/her new nom de plume of “ClarkT”. (By the way, T is not the middle initial of Clark Baker.) Such comments are totally dishonest and intended only to malign all who dissent from the HIV paradigm. For that reason, I agree they should be erased.

Celia Farber has taken a rational position, quite different from what “Maria” and “Clark” allege. It is that she is not a scientist, but a journalist. Unlike most journalists who write about AIDS, she has given attention not only to the dominant, government view of AIDS but also to the remarkably under-reported phenomenon of there being another scientific side that includes distinguished scientists and even Nobel laureates who have pointed to other plausible causes for AIDS besides HIV. That does not make her anti-science but rather an upholder of the classical tradition of debate in science rather than regimentation.

Mr. DeShong, on the other hand, is honest about his views but pretends to be a simpleton. Is he really so dense that he can’t conceive that different things could happen in the same year? I have provided evidence that in 1998 Canada did two things at different times regarding Nevirapine (Viramune): 1) Early in the year it rejected the manufacturer’s 1997 submission (it was “judged to be inadequate” according to the Deputy Minister of Health); 2) It yielded to political pressure and in September 1998 gave the drug “conditional approval”, i.e., approval in the absence of adequate evidence, something never before granted in Canada.

Truthseeker Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 7:44 am e
Sad though it is to erase evidence of the misspelled inanity of these footsoldiers of HIV maintenance, which has never before been made so apparent, we are forced to do so by the simple fact that responsible investigators who wish to correct the grievously misleading paradigm of HIV=AIDS in AIDS need to print out Comments here, and should not be handicapped with surplus copying, as is possibly the intention of the self-exposing HIV nitwits above, laughable though they are. Or rather, perhaps not so laughable, given that they knowingly support a misapprehension that costs many gays and blacks their health and ultimately in some cases their lives, and thus can be reliably estimated to be murderously anti-gay and anti black, as well as against truth, beauty and science.

So pffft, when we return from breakfast in the Rainbow Room.

ClarkT Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 8:38 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

And so the inquisition continues…

Our movement was started to question assumptions. Now, when our assumptions are questioned, we do not embrace the questioner, we torment them. This group started out claiming we are Galileo, but we have instead become the inquisition. Poor Maria stood up to truthseeker, and he could not stand to be questioned. Instead, he force fed her the orthodoxy that rethinkers have embraced.

Maria is like Dr. Semmelweis, who stood up to the orthodoxy of his group. Maria wanted the disinfectant of truth applied to Rethinkers. She took a fresh approach. Isn’t that what we are all about? I thought this group wanted to look at all points of view.

Well, now rethinkers have shown themselves to be a church devoted to one orthodoxy. They are going to erase my thoughts, and those of Maria, and anyone else they don’t like. Shame! I hope some of you read this before the self-appointed popes of rethinking take down the 95 thesis from the door of our church.

I had been solidly convinced. I thought rethinkers were a breath of fresh air. Now, they have proven that they don’t practice what they preach, and that they will torment even a poor woman who has suffered enough.

Throughout history, Ignorance has been Bliss, Freedom has become Slavery, and War is Peace. I’m glad truthseeker has opened my eyes so that I can see that I was brainwashed to enter this group, and to deal with them seriously.

Before Big Brother erases my words, I urge all rethinkers to rethink. If truthseeker is so afraid of my words, he must be hiding. He has convinced me to abandon the group. He has proven even to me that the scientific method is the only way. Galileo, Semmelweis, Luther and other great thinkers would surely stand up to truthseeker to declare, “Here stand I. I can do no other. HIV causes AIDS, and the earth moves too.” Celia, we truly want to support you. But please call off your truthseeker attack dog.

I was willing to be your best ally. But I cannot put up with the censorship of truthseeker. I urge all rethinkers to depose truthseeker, and expose him for what he is.

(Warning: Apparently the writer is essaying a satirical post, inspired by Maria Angus, but like her is still developing basic skills in this demanding form. We look forward to the time when ClarkT’s contributions will also be worth keeping, rather than being summarily erased, see below. – Ed.)

ClarkT Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 8:51 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

One thing truth seeker states is true. There are a large number of real lives at stake, and this is very deadly business. Rethinkers must rethink the blood on their hands. Millions of lives can be saved with drugs. Withholding drugs from desperately ill people is contrary to our values.

At first, you had me convinced. But, now that I see your methods, I’m going back to promoting good treatment for minorities and for everyone who has been tragically harmed. This is not an armchair exercise. This is real, and you are debating the lives of real people.

Dr. Semmelweis stood up to save real people who would have died from infection. Galileo risked his life to show the people of his time the truth. Darwin was ridiculed, but he paved the way for modern biology. All of them depended on the scientific method to save lives.

It is time for rethinkers to rethink. Question authority, all authority. Especially authority that denies scientific method. The forces of anti-science threaten to throw back AIDS patients to the dark ages. Don’t let so-callled “truthseeker” tell you how to think. Think for yourselves. Celia, it is not too late. Embrace your real supporters.

(Warning: Apparently the writer is essaying a satirical post, inspired by Maria Angus, but like her is still developing basic skills in this demanding form. We look forward to the time when ClarkT’s contributions will also be worth keeping, rather than being summarily erased, see below. – Ed.)

ClarkT Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 9:25 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Sadly, if my words are erased, the rethinking movement is admitting that they are over. They can’t stand to allow anyone to have a thought or speak a word out of lockstep with their own. They have become what they say they despise- despots against truth.

I dare you to leave my posts up, and to stimulate a real conversation between members of our group. Many people have had it with the strong-arm tactics of the “truthseeker.” If he was a real truthseeker, he would seek to convince people with logic and facts.

Truth is beauty, and beauty is truth, and it is beautiful to save the lives of desperately ill people. Why not allow a real debate? Let people say what they really think? Do the afflicted want real medicine, or do they want vitamins?

The vast majority of people suffering from AIDS are begging for medicines. Parents of AIDS victims beg the government to invest more to find better cures. AIDS activists have spent decades fighting the indifference and neglect of the establishment. You dishonor their struggle by excluding their voice.

I dare you to be true guardians of science. Leave these words on your post, and have a real debate. If you take them down, you are admitting you can’t stand the truth. The purpose of this group will evaporate,

Signed, a former rethinker who has rethought,
Asking his community to join in genuine re-examination,

Clark

(Warning: Apparently the writer is essaying a satirical post, inspired by Maria Angus, but like her is still developing basic skills in this demanding form. We look forward to the time when ClarkT’s contributions will also be worth keeping, rather than being summarily erased, see below. – Ed.)

Maria angus Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 10:55 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Clark, it takes a big man to admit that you are wrong.

I can see that you put a lot of thought into rethinking AIDS. I think we all have to be open to new ideas, and understand when we are wrong. If even Clark can admit that he is wrong, we really have made progress.

Let’s open ourselves to a whole world of ideas. Yes, let’s even consider that sometimes drugs work. Would any of us want to live in a world without penicillin? Aspirin? Even herbal drugs are drugs. Not all drugs are the result of pharma-fascists. Heck, my doctor took a huge paycut to do research, because he felt that was in the best interest of mankind. Govt doctors at NIH and the VA make a fraction of what they could make outside.

Let’s give everyone their due. That way, we can all learn.

Rethinkers must be broad thinkers. That is why Clark’s comments must be left up on this posting. If rethinkers take down real thought, then we have failed.

If Big Brother censors Clark, I hope the rest of the rethinker movement will have the decency to resign.

Signed,
A reformed rethinker, who wants the best for all AIDS patients,

Maria

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

Sadun Kal Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 12:23 pm e
What is this? Is this the latest silly divide’n’conquer operation attempt of the “scientific” “AIDS” establishment? How widespread is it? I notice that the mysterious newcomers like “Maria Angus” are also on Facebook and other blogs. Maybe somebody should really try to keep a track on what’s going on. It can turn into an opportunity to demonstrate the ridiculousness of these people if exposed properly.

Roberta Swan Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 1:22 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Sadun, I couldn’t agree with you more.

We don’t need the “scientific” people on this site. Of course, Maria does make a good point. We would be a lot more credible if we opened ourselves to all possible points of rethinking.

I don’t think we should stand for censorship. This blog is open to the public. We have nothing to hide. So, why shouldn’t everyone put their point of view in? Why would we want to demonstrate anyone’s ridiculousness? Wouldn’t it be better to listen to what people have to say, then reason together? Through reason, we might come up with an even better idea. After all, the point is not who is “winning” or “losing.” The point is how to get to the best truth, and to help the most AIDS patients. So, let’s not lose sight of our true purpose. Transparency, democracy, equality, good treatment for all patients in need.

If more “scientific” people joined our blog, isn’t that an opportunity for us? We have a chance to present our point of view, and to convert everyone to supporting Celia. That is the main point isn’t it? We all want the best care for AIDS patients, and we all want Celia to win.

It took a big man to admit that he is wrong. I think we should all commend Clark, and follow his example. We are the true guardians of science, so we want scientific people to join us. If even Clark can change his mind, the rest of us can follow his example.

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

Roberta Swan Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 2:00 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

No litmus test.

What I envision is a community of persons concerned about the real welfare of AIDS patients. Why do we need labels that divide? Galileo simply called himself a “scientist.” Sure, scientists can disagree, but we all want the welfare of AIDS patients. We want our friends stricken by disease to get better. Surely, the more points of view the better. All real scientists are “rethinkers”- they are always rethinking their hypothesis. Somethings get proven, such as antibiotics are good drugs against bacteria. We look at the moon using a telescope, and at HIV under a microscope.

So, why don’t we welcome all people of all ideas who want to help AIDS patients? Why not listen to their views? The more scientific, why the better! We can reason together.

We don’t need a litmus test. Clark realizes he was wrong to try and impose his one idea on the whole group. I give him credit that he now realizes we need all kinds of scientists to fight this global epidemic.

I welcome everyone to this principled dialog who comes in earnest, and in good faith.

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

Roberta Swan Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 2:22 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

The brotherhood and sisterhood of humankind.

Truthseeker seems to have rethought his position. That shows courage, and integrity. He has not taken down the blog posts as he said earlier. Instead, he seems to have been converted by Clark. We can all work together, but first we must listen to each other. All advances in humankind started by rethinking. But deeds, not thoughts, are most important. New ideas must be tested, investigated, studied, then rethought again. That is what we are all about.

We need to thank the scientific men and women of our age who sacrifice a lot to undertake studies to help our brothers and sisters with AIDS. Scientists in general work for peanuts, and it is a very difficult life. Getting grants to have the opportunity to test and then rethink ideas is very hard work.

It looks like all the people of this blog finally agree. Rethinking, testing, investigating, and science, all go hand in hand. Perhaps we should think of giving an award to a scientist we disagree with. That would show we are open minded. Clark is a big man for admitting he is wrong. That is a great example.

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

Maria angus Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 3:18 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Roberta, you are really onto something. I admit, I was angry when I first joined this blog, but apparently Clark and Celia now see that they should not be fighting scientists. They want to be accepted by scientists, so first we need to work with them.

The scientific method is wonderful. We can test different hypothesis, and find out which one is true. We can weigh all the data. Right now, the data indicate that HIV fulfills all Koch’s postulates. But, if someone has a better idea, they can test the other idea and show that something else fulfills Koch’s postulates.

A friend of mine told me that pharma and the NIH would love to fund well-thought out studies that show anything new about AIDS. If someone wants to investigate, they simply have to write up a good rationale and show preliminary data. If someone really thinks vitamins would work, they just have to show the data. Pharma would love to sell anything that might improve the situation.

So, I guess being friends with scientists is the way to go. That Semmelweis society gave the award to Celia, even though their members don’t agree with her. Why don’t we turn around and give a “clean hands rethinking” award to a member of Semmelweis? That would help restore balance to the Universe.

But, no one should force anyone to give awards. Forced awards would have no real meaning. If someone wants an award back, why not? If we give an award then change our mind, I guess it would show we were just rethinking. That is our trademark, and we should encourage other groups to re-think too.

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

Maria angus Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 7:57 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

So, you lack the courage of your convictions!

Clark Baker took down 15 posts he does not agree with. Shame! He says he wants people to examine all sides of a discussion, but he could not take the pressure from a weak and tired anguished woman. I hope all remaining rethinkers will rethink if they want to tolerate censorship of our blog site. Is this a public blog, or is it just a podium to manipulate and retaliate?

True rethinkers want to hear all sides. They don’t want Big Brother Baker telling them what to think.

Fortunately, I saved all of the posts, and we’ll repost it widely. What does Baker want to hide from you now?

I dare you to keep this post up! Celia Farber isn’t afraid of the truth, and neither are the rest of us! We will defend Farber from her real enemy: Baker!

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

Maria angus Says:
May 27th, 2009 at 10:15 pm e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Drivel- you have met the enemy, and he is you!

Ts, alias Clark Baker, you are the ultimate drivel. Look at all the earnest truthful bloggers who tried to reach out to you, and find common ground. That common ground should be the best interests of AIDS sufferers. But you are not interested in the true welfare of AIDS sufferers. You are only interested in stirring dissent- in pitting groups against each other. I feel immense sorrow for you.

Why not join the real re-thinkers? We are eager to hear all points of view, not just what your censorship allows. Come, my fellow re-thinkers, arise! You have nothing to lose but your chains. We all support Celia Farber in her real quest to examine all sides of AIDS. We are not interested in Clark Baker-imposed monolithic silence.

Let’s welcome everyone into a real discussion. Clark, you took over Semmelweis. Now, we are going to take over rethinking AIDS. Because, our core value is to re-think, to question authority, and accept whatever benefits AIDS sufferers most.

Who elected Clark the despot? I call for a recount. I call for re-thinkers to wrest this website away from Clark Baker, to take over his treasury, and to elect truly democratic and transparent re-thinkers.

I urge all true re-thinkers to save these words before Clark wipes them away. You can erase the words Clark. You can’t erase the truth.

Impeach Clark. It is the only way.

(Warning -this is an attempt at satire, a form of pointed humor which the commentator apparently only recently discovered and is practicing hard – Ed.)

jtdeshong Says:
May 28th, 2009 at 4:29 am e
For the last time! Canada did NOT reject Nevirapine twice! Only ONCE! In 1996. NOT in 1998. Here you go…
#1 http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2094790
“Nevirapine (NVP) is a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) that is used to treat adults and children with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The drug was licensed in Canada in September 1998…”
Yeah, PubMed is not nearly as reliable as your on line wikipedia bullshit.
#2 http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/AFEDA.htm
“BURLINGTON, ON — Sept. 17, 1998 — Health Canada has approved Boehringer Ingelheim Canada Ltd.’s anti-HIV drug Viramune(R) (nevirapine) for use in combination with antiretroviral agents when treatment is warranted.”
#3 http://www.catie.ca/catienews.nsf/9d6a0a99ab2787c985256b9c005b053b/1a173c10bc31ccdd852566800054cc33?OpenDocument
“On Friday 03 September, 1998, Canada’s Health Protection Branch (HPB) granted a conditional Notice of Compliance to Boehringer Ingelheim’s anti-HIV drug nevirapine (Viramune).”
That is from Canadian AIDS Treatment Info Exchange
Not to mention the email directly from Canadian Health Branch.
I’m sure you will wanna stick to the on line encyclopedia that hack Farber used, however.
God, you guys are as lazy as Farber!!!
JTD

Truthseeker Says:
May 28th, 2009 at 2:42 pm e
“The new application submitted in 1998, mentioned in the manufacturer’s letter, was required because its previous submission in July 1997 was rejected as “inadequate” by early 1998.

According to a statement of 22 April 1998 from Canada’s Deputy Minister of Health: “On July 2, 1997, the manufacturer filed a response… In the absence of scientific evidence…the data available for Viramune are judged to be inadequate to support the clinical benefit of the drug.”

DeShong, can you not read?

Your comment will be removed to the Comment Troll Trap unless you have a very good reason to explain why you do not accept the statement above, and inadequate prescription lenses is not going to be good enough.

jtdeshong Says:
May 28th, 2009 at 9:36 pm e
Typical! That makes me very happy actually. It just proves that you can not deal with the truth. The fact that you would take three links that directly contradict your lies, and completely substantiate that I am right, just validates everything about this site that I have said all along!
Why would you delete three links, one to PubMed, one to Canadian Infectious Disease site and one to Canadian AIDS Information Medication site, that all prove that I am right and TS and Houston and therefore Farber, are wrong? hehehee
As long as we both know that I am correct, is all we both need.
Thanks for acknowledging this fact!!
J. Todd DeShong

jtdeshong Says:
May 28th, 2009 at 9:37 pm e
jtdeshong Says:
May 28th, 2009 at 4:29 am e
For the last time! Canada did NOT reject Nevirapine twice! Only ONCE! In 1996. NOT in 1998. Here you go…
#1 http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2094790
“Nevirapine (NVP) is a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) that is used to treat adults and children with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The drug was licensed in Canada in September 1998…”
Yeah, PubMed is not nearly as reliable as your on line wikipedia bullshit.
#2 http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/AFEDA.htm
“BURLINGTON, ON — Sept. 17, 1998 — Health Canada has approved Boehringer Ingelheim Canada Ltd.’s anti-HIV drug Viramune(R) (nevirapine) for use in combination with antiretroviral agents when treatment is warranted.”
#3 http://www.catie.ca/catienews.nsf/9d6a0a99ab2787c985256b9c005b053b/1a173c10bc31ccdd852566800054cc33?OpenDocument
“On Friday 03 September, 1998, Canada’s Health Protection Branch (HPB) granted a conditional Notice of Compliance to Boehringer Ingelheim’s anti-HIV drug nevirapine (Viramune).”
That is from Canadian AIDS Treatment Info Exchange
Not to mention the email directly from Canadian Health Branch.
I’m sure you will wanna stick to the on line encyclopedia that hack Farber used, however.
God, you guys are as lazy as Farber!!!
JTD

jtdeshong Says:
May 28th, 2009 at 9:39 pm e
Oh, yeah, this also proves the rumors I have heard lately.
Clark Baker does own this site now!!
I always knew this site was a sell out!!
J. Todd DeShong

Maria angus Says:
May 29th, 2009 at 12:40 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Censorship! Dear re-thinkers, I have been censored. Clark continues to edit out any idea he doesn’t like. That is the antithesis of rethinking! It is the antithesis of thinking!

Please, let us welcome all points of view to the table. Since Clark started to censor me, I’ve done some research. I’m astounded! Look, the best studies available have shown a large number of deaths due to denialism. Our community needs to look at this point of view:

Durban Declaration

Durban Declaration, signed by 5,000 people including Nobel Prizewinners, directors of leading research institutions, notably the National Academy of Sciences, The Institute of Medicine, the Max Planck Institutes, The European Molecular Biology Association, The Pasteur Institute in Paris, The Royal Society of London, The AIDS Society of India, and The National Institute of Virology in South Africa.

In particular, let me quote:

“The evidence that AIDS is caused by HIV-1 or HIV-2 is clear-cut, exhaustive and unambiguous, meeting the highest standards of science. And also, HIV causes AIDS. It is unfortunate that a few vocal people continue to deny the evidence. This position will cost countless lives.”

People’s lives are at stake! Yours, mine, my husband’s my baby’s. For the love of God, let’s look at all the evidence, not just some. Let’s not call each other names. Let’s look at the facts.

Celia, we are behind you, and your freedom of speech. But don’t the 5,000 signers of the Durban declaration also have freedom of speech? Freedom isn’t free. Freedom isn’t for just some of us, and not all of us.

Friends, don’t let Clark silence true dissent. Celia stands for dissent. I stand for dissent. Let’s have an honest discusssion.

Truthseeker Says:
May 29th, 2009 at 1:24 am e
A note to onlookers who may be unaware of the true depth of misinformation being conveyed by the scientific propaganda of HIV promoters in AIDS, large and (in this case very) small: they are indeed forced to fall back on the Durban Declaration as their supposed proof of the “overwhelming evidence” that HIV causes AIDS, since there is no science in the peer reviewed literature that supports the claim, although this small problem doesn’t prevent it being assumed and presumed in every establishment member’s paper on every AIDS topic.

The Durban Declaration was a statement (misquoted above) subscribed to by every scientific worker that could be scraped up by the leading HIV promoters in AIDS, including people in their labs and in other labs and elsewhere in science who had no knowledge of the issue for reasons sometimes including that they were in a different field entirely and had never read the reference literature scotching the HIV claim.

Having collected (we assume) the 5000 signatures they published the statement, seemingly unaware that it was itself prima facie evidence that there was no scientific proof and or even convincing evidence for the claim that HIV caused AIDS. If there were, of course, there would be no need for a statement of this kind, asserting religious faith in a scientific hypothesis.

The fact that the statement was an advertisement and was not a peer reviewed statement in a respected scientific publication matched the ruling principle in all these efforts to keep the utterly incredible HIV paradigm in place, despite its overwhelming rejection in peer reviewed articles in the most respected journals in science, articles which have never been answered with one word by opponents in the same peer reviewed venues.

What is that principle? It is that there is no possibility of effective rebuttal of the peer reviewed rejection and condemnation of the idea that HIV is a cause of AIDS in peer reviewed journals.

So all the argument against this refutation, which has held since 1986, has to take place outside the realm of peer review, in newspaper advertisements, articles written by friendly journalists largely ignorant of or purposely ignoring the science, Op Ed editorials in the New York Times and elsewhere, and on the Web in sites run by paradigm promoters, such as AIDSTruth.org, and in pages put up on the Web by NIAID which are not peer reviewed and not even signed.

All intelligent people can see this reality, but not apparently, the vast army of scientifically illiterate HIV supporters such as Maria Angus, whoever this troll may be.

On the recent advice of Galen we may have to lower the trigger point of the TrollTrapper software a notch to ensure that such posts are now sent to the Science Guardian Troll Trap without any delay whatsoever if they continue.

Maria angus Says:
May 29th, 2009 at 12:42 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

We really need to improve our image. Celia has taken a pounding in the press. We need to show that we really want a discussion, and really rethink the issue. WE can’t have stuff like this going on:

Quotes The New York Observer re Denialist Farber:
It is ludicrous for Farber to suddenly proclaim in 2006 that she is only the messenger. She has written on and argued for the denialist position for at least a decade and half. She wrote about nothing else in SPIN Magazine for years. There was never any question that she was espousing her own views. No one should be surprised by this new claim of being the messenger though. Her writing has been blatantly dishonest and misleading from day one. Like her apparent mentor Peter Duesberg, she simply ignores the principles of science, hiding all evidence contrary to her views while spotlighting the few specks of data that seem, at least to the untrained eye, to bolster her case. I have come to believe that HIV denialism, like Holocaust denialism, is a mental illness deeply rooted in problems accepting authority and an inability to admit error. Though sometimes harmless, in matters as grave as AIDS it has become criminal behavior resulting in the loss of thousands of lives.

——————————————–
Celia Farber’s claims of objectivity and commitment to journalism – that her job is to “ask questions” – is about as sincere as Pat Robertson claiming the same of the homosexual lifestyle. At least Robertson wears his bias proudly on his chest.

Farber is a crank, a sad excuse for a journalist and unfortunately for the Harper’s fact-checkers, a patent liar – always has been on the HIV/AIDS topic. There are purveyors of misleading information – she is not one of them. Farber just outright lies. She treats scientific facts surrounding HIV/AIDS with the same care a termite does a piece of wood – she hacks it up, leaving nothing but a pile of unrecognizable shavings.
Many people have lost their lives by her words. She’s pathetic.
———————————————

(These statements by “Maria Angus” in the above two posts are entirely incorrect and misleading, and the quotation is not from the New York Observer but from some posting by an HIV defender.- Ed.)

Maria angus Says:
May 29th, 2009 at 12:54 am e

(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Clark can’t handle the truth!

I started out as a devoted re-thinker. But Clark has turned me back. I’ve never encountered such censorship and such bullying. I thought this was a community that cared about AIDS victims. Instead, it just tears apart anyone who deviates from Clark’s thinking.

Why not call it Clark thinking? Even Soviet Russia allowed more room for dissent than Clark.

Celia welcomes all forms of thought. She wants a real discussion. Celia, really fight back and disown Clark! Reach out to the true victims, not the posers, the bullies, the con artists. Let’s really re-think what AIDS means to our community, and our world.

Right on Celia! Denounce the so-called “truthseeker.” Ts is hurting your cause, and leading to the awful press you have suffered.

Maria angus Says:
May 29th, 2009 at 12:58 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Let’s start a fund to help AIDS victims.

Face it, rethinkers are spending enormous sums in litigation, in publicity, etc. Why don’t we use this money to actually help AIDS victims?

People will be much more likely to listen to us if we are really doing something to help AIDS victim. Every dollar we spend on helping AIDS victims will be much more helpful than empty words. Deeds, not words, convinces people!

Democracy. Let’s make the rethinking community truly democratic. Let’s have elections. Let’s depose Clark. Who made him dictator?

Anyone who reads this before Clark erases it, please think. We are a community. We must be open, transparent, decent and democratic. Then the world will listen to us.

Maria angus Says:
May 29th, 2009 at 1:02 am e
(Warning: This is a post by a troll, who is actually a member of the HIV defense army, though merely a private second class. – Ed.)

Why won’t the New York Post publish the truth?

Celia, your case is weakened when the Post only publishes one side. Why does the post refuse to take calls from anyone else? I’ve tried to correct some wrong statements in their article. As a journalist, Celia I’m sure that you always would consider every side of an issue. Why would the post publish a one-sided article without allowing the other side to comment?

Celia, I hope you have the integrity to ask the Post to pull the article. You can’t let anyone do such a one-sided piece. It harms your credibility, and it makes you look silly.

Your true defenders want all sides represented fairly. Isn’t that what America is about?

Truthseeker Says:
May 28th, 2009 at 4:34 pm e
Well, DeShong, sorry to say, the SG TrollTrapper software automatically kicked in just now and sent your Comment to the SG Comment Troll Trap.

We were shocked to see this happen so early but according to the software manual this reflects the Drivel Rating exceeding a certain ceiling score, which brings the TrollTrapper analysis to a sudden halt as the offending Comment is whisked away in the Monty Python style.

But we did call up Galen in the Medical Greats building in Heaven and ask him whether he thought the software was working OK or perhaps needed resetting, and he replied as follows (reading from his Book Two, On the Natural Faculties):

“When a man shamelessly goes on using circumlocutions, and never acknowledges when he has had a fall, he is like the amateur wrestlers, who, when they have been overthrown by the experts and are lying on their backs on the ground, so far from recognizing their fall, actually seize their victorious adversaries by the neck and prevent them from getting away, thus supposing themselves to be the winners. “

Maria angus Says:
June 14th, 2009 at 11:35 pm e
Michael Geiger wants freedom of speech, and so do I!

Ha! Clark Baker thought he had heard the last of me. But I have just begun!

Even Michael Gieger wants freedom of speech. Truthseeker should change his name to truthslayer. What kind of double speak is TS? He claims he wants a serious discussion, but then he eliminates all views contrary to his own.

It is time for all of us REAL people to unite! Why do we let these doctors poison our heroes, and conquer us by dividing us? Why are we debating science and studies and whatnot? YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH, SO-CALLED TRUTH SEEKER!

If you eliminate this blog, you are admitting to the entire world that you don’t want to hear the opinions of a strong woman, even one who agrees with you! You just care about your own top-doggness. You don’t care who on our side is crushed by your censorship.

Truthseeker, listen to Geiger or beware! He is not a man to fool with!

Maria angus Says:
June 14th, 2009 at 11:42 pm e
What kind of detective is Clark Baker?

This pathetic excuse for a man keeps censoring the truth from this blog. Here I am, trying hard to help Celia Farber, and this so-called detective can’t find his way out of a paper bag. Baker, I have tracked one of the doctors down, and I can deliver him on a silver platter to you! But noooooo. You can’t stand that a strong woman can do things for herself. You protest too much!

Yes, Clark Baker is Queen Gertrude, all rolled into one.

Now Clark thinks I am Todd DeShong! Well, maybe I am, and maybe I’m not. But riddle me this, Bakerman. Why did it take you a full month to come to this conclusion? I thought you were Sherlock Baker! Why didn’t you trace me from the beginning?

And why don’t I have freedom of speech? You yourself are the ultimate of riddles and double-speak. How dare you censor this side of my personality, and not the DeShong side?

Hey, Clark Baker clients. I have news for you. Clark Baker is incompetent, and if you hired him as a detective you deserve a full refund! Baker can’t even run a decent email trace! My mother could have done better than you, fool detective.

Signed,

Maria (aka Todd DeShong)


Bad Behavior has blocked 302 access attempts in the last 7 days.