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.

House of Numbers doc will expose non-science of “HIV=AIDS”

Young filmmaker to hit festivals with high quality inspection of NIAID baloney factory

Will this initiative finally prove the downfall of Anthony Fauci and Robert Gallo, or will it be ignored?

Reasons to think it might break through in post Madoff era

There is good news for paradigm heretics in HIV/AIDS. Brent Leung, 29, has finished House of Numbers, his documentary on the disputed causes of AIDS, and its world premiere will be presented at the Nashville film festival on April 19th, followed by a screening in Boston on April 21st. On April 23rd a second screening in Nashville will be followed by a discussion panel. Also expected, a showing at the deadCENTER film festival in Oklahoma City in June.

In ‘House of Numbers,’ an AIDS film like no other, the HIV/AIDS story is being rewritten. This is the first film to present the uncensored POVs of virtually all the major players; in their own settings, in their own words — it rocks the foundation upon which all conventional wisdom regarding HIV/AIDS is based. ‘House of Numbers’ could well be the opening volley in a battle to bring sanity and clarity to an epidemic gone awry.

<I>The new documentary is not a new version of the 1957 Jack Palance movie, though this poster would do fine</I>
The accomplished film is sure to bring renewed attention to the corrupt scientific and political foundation of the troubled field. Its trailer (at the House of Numbers website just being put up) is good enough to suggest it will have major impact, winning mainstream media reviews and with the eventual help of YouTube, may trigger the official reassessment of HIV/AIDS so long overdue.

The HIV/AIDS can of scientific worms

As readers of this blog know very well, but to recap for newcomers, the conventional but improbable wisdom in HIV/AIDS is that the modern plague is caused by a retrovirus, HIV, which is infectious, and must be medicated with drugs of unproven benefit that are severely damaging in their own right.

That this theory is not only unproven after two decades but entirely contradicted in the scientific literature is a truth not generally known or appreciated by even the most assiduous readers of the New York Times, whose neglect of the topic may be the Gray Lady’s most shameful secret.

The Times’ fellow traveling support of the status quo in HIV/AIDS is partly responsible for the scandal that despite well over thirty books on the topic, most of the general public have never heard of the possibility that HIV does not cause AIDS, and that almost all responsible officials, editors, doctors, health workers, and patients dismiss the idea out of hand.

However, apart from the CDC trained Times medical correspondent Larry Altman, who should have known better, it must be allowed that the Times reporters and editors are merely following the lead of the scientists and bureaucrats in the field.

Never a good answer

For in a remarkable display of unprofessional behavior, luminaries such as Robert Gallo, Mathilde Krim, Anthony Fauci, John Moore and David Baltimore have seen fit to reject the contention that HIV could be the wrong culprit for AIDS without ever coming up with an effective answer to the critiques in Cancer Research and the Proceedings of the National Academy that Peter Duesberg wrote twenty years ago, and has added to ever since.

Instead, the public is asked to accept that “overwhelming evidence” proves otherwise than Duesberg’s impeccably reasoned, severely peer reviewed, multiple cannon broadsides, sustained over 22 years and never answered, let alone refuted, in the same elite journals in which he published, and supposedly rebutted only in other venues either not peer reviewed or where discussion was brought to a premature halt by editors, such as John Maddox of Nature, who believed that Duesberg did not have a “right to reply”, because his conclusions were “dangerous” to the public he was trying to save from the error.

The planet’s most improbable hypothesis

In other words, as we have exhaustively investigated and confirmed here, in company with many other respectable skeptics and sites (see blogroll list on right), the belief that HIV is the cause of AIDS, and that it is infectious and spreads around the world, is a highly improbable working hypothesis which has been artificially maintained for over 22 years by people professionally invested in the paradigm, led by senior scientists in the field abetted by Anthony Fauci of NIAID, the notoriously well tailored bureaucrat who has successfully imposed a sort of press silence on the topic for the same period.

All this is well known to readers of this blog and all careful students of the topic, who are aware that it is a sociological and political problem rather than a scientific one, where the science itself could be easily be sorted out in short order by any honest committee, or Senate or White House staff investigation.

Leung takes the lid off on Friday April 17

How much of all this lurid and worm infested story will be exposed by Brett Leung’s House of Numbers, we don’t yet know, but the trailer (which can be viewed here) is promising. It includes Peter Duesberg, the chief academic critic of HIV/AIDS, and Celia Farber, the most doggedly persevering of journalists in covering this topic, who published the definitive piece in Harpers two years ago flagging the core problem of rank moral and scientific corruption in the field.

John Moore, the Cornell scientist who has made a name for himself by verbally violently attacking any criticism of HIV=AIDS in the Times and elsewhere as “deadly quackery”, also appears. The smooth faced and cheerfully unbowed non-Nobelist Gallo is featured, also, as is Nobel winner Luc “By itself HIV does not do damage” Montagnier. Presumably the wily Anthony Fauci knew better, since he wisely turned down our offer last year to interview him as a “hero of AIDS’, though we hope he accepted the intrusion.

(Update) List of Interviewees in order of appearance:

Mark Conlan, Dr. John P. Moore, Dr. Donald P. Francis, Dr. Hans R. Gelderblom, Eleni Papadopulos, MSc; Dr. Robert Gallo, Street Interview England, Street Interview Australia, Dr. Kary Mullis, Dr. James Chin, Dr. Peter H. Duesberg, Dr. Reinhard Kurth, Dr. Niel T. Constantine (voice over in testing), Dr. Harold Jaffe, Celia Farber, Neville Hodgkinson, and Dr. Luc Montagnier.

Sadly, as this update shows, it seems they didn’t corral Fauci, the wily eminence grise and official enabler of corrupt HIV=AIDS politics. But one way or another, this movie seems likely to cover the ground more effectively than ever before. Pouria Montazeri’s camera work is evidently good enough to ensure enhanced credibility for critics such as Duesberg and Farber on that basis alone, and in our experience Leung’s artistic approach in documentary making is spot on – giving a big platform to both sides and allowing the newly well informed audience to make up its own mind after all have their say.

In current era, movie could be influential

So could this film make any difference? Could this presentation, if it is as effective as it looks judging from the trailer, burst the protective bubble of HIV/AIDS paradigm defense? There have been good films before, after all, and they are now very accessible on YouTube and other Web sites.

We think that the answer is yes, and it is not impossible that House of Numbers could be the tipping point in the torment of AIDS science and medicine. Its excellent production values will make the presentation very credible, and Brent Leung has the chops to pull off the trick required to persuade in documentaries which expose flaws in a general belief, namely, to be both even handed yet ultimately damning.

Not only that, but the time is right. The economic crisis and the advent of the Obama administration have exposed a long list of hidden corruptions in business and politics, and the NIAID led media propaganda machine which has long shut out alternative views and maintained the fiction that the scientific leaders of HIV/AIDS can be trusted without review has lost much of its power, although now desperate to maintain funding.

In such a dispute where a common assumption of media and officialdom is challenged by outsiders, nothing is more persuasive than a good film, where credibility can be directly assessed by the viewer presented with the living images of the critics and their opponents, with all the telling tics and inadvertent giveaways that have to be seen to be appreciated.

If the film lives up to its trailer, we can imagine Fauci, Moore and Gallo all buying larger suitcases and air tickets for points south of the border, given that they may, if they decide to stay on and stick it out here, be forced to wear much the same grimace as Bernie Madoff as they thread their way through shouting reporters and cameramen on their way into Senate hearings.

Addendum:
Review at Red Dirt Report

47 Responses to “House of Numbers doc will expose non-science of “HIV=AIDS””

  1. Nashchap Says:

    You certainly got a lot of mileage from a short trailer. FYI- the “wily” Dr Fauci does appear, “wily” or not.

  2. Truthseeker Says:

    Well, Nashchap, we are waiting with bated breath to find out what you thought of the film, if you have seen more than the trailer. Or are you simply reading from the list of interviewees in order of appearance that we found and inserted as an update? Apparently not, since you say Fauci does appear, and he is not on the list. Please confirm.

    It seems however that you are too shy to state your opinion in public, assuming you have one. For example, you do not state whether “wily” or “not wily” is your personal pick for the renowned Dr. Fauci.

    Could this be because you are too close to the great man, and therefore fear that your answer might be too revelatory?

    If so, we hope that you are not too chicken to think about exerting a good influence on your colleague, whose redemption is not too late if his repentance is sincere.

    Perhaps you can persuade him or his sister to urge him to come clean after he retires, which presumably will be soon. This is often the case with scientists, who typically seem to find God as they approach the great bridge to the Unknown.

    We are hereby granting Dr Fauci the stature of scientist even though we are not impressed with his performance to date in admitting that the premise of his work and bureaucratic career is long exploded by Peter Duesberg, and we suspect that he is subject to personal bias in this regard, which is by definition unprofessional if he is indeed laying claim to the title of scientist, and not scientific bureaucrat.

    We hold back nothing in our admiration for his skill and cunning in that latter regard, of course, which is why we characterized him as “wily”. So do you agree with that characterization or not?

    Seems to us that a man who bases his enormously successful career as a civil servant on showing the greatest lack of public responsibility possible in what is a matter of life and death for so many members of the public who pay his salary and yet retains the trust and admiration of everybody from President Reagan who called him a hero to the host of gays who happily imbibe the drugs that NIAID recommends under his command must be wily indeed.

    But perhaps you know him better and have a different opinion.

  3. pat Says:

    it is here:

    http://houseofnumbers.com/about-house-of-numbers/the-interviewees

  4. Truthseeker Says:

    Brent Leung promised yesterday that list of participants would be up today, thanks, and it sure is impressive – all the usual suspects plus!

    The post will be updated, or another one added, to comment on this splendid rosta. A key player who has seen the entire film reports that it is highly effective in playing the establishment speakers against each other, so that their paradigm claim crumbles of its own accord, without needing Duesberg or Celia Farber to do much more than poke through the remains.

  5. cervantes Says:

    TS, I’m afraid your optimism has outpaced what appears to be a heavily weighted roster in favor of The Paradigm. For instance, it appears (from the lists provided so far) three champions of truth, Drs. Gordon Stewart, and Etienne de Harven, and Prof. Charles Geshekter – all having superb credentials, and many publications to their credit – are not in the movie. They would of been of immense credibility as to their being ‘on the spot’ from the start.

    In addition, the many Fauci Allies with star-quality science credentials, going back to the 1970’s, having numerous awards (no matter how erroneously awarded as time has shown), stacks the deck it seems to me.

    As you say, the movie has the Fauci Crowd squabbling on many facets – but this is also true of our fellow dissidents. Well, we have to see the movie, but will anybody in the new Obama Administration do so? Doubtful. Particularly, since the new Prez seems to be upping the ante to over $30 billion Federal dollars per year. And we all know money talks.

  6. cervantes Says:

    ps: Here is what the spokeslady for Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, who receive vast $millions from Bill and Melinda Gates, said recently (pertinently, a couple people recently commented to me that “well, if Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffett give $billions to defeat HIV, how can they be wrong – since they are so smart.” How is anybody going to get the Gates and Buffett to see this new movie?):

    “We are especially pleased to see that President Obama’s FY 2010 budget proposal repeatedly notes his commitment to increasing support for foreign assistance and global health programs, as well as preventing and treating HIV domestically and abroad,” said Pamela W. Barnes, President and CEO of the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, in a statement.

  7. Truthseeker Says:

    Yes, agreed, anyone who contemplates the list of organizations that propagandize for the current paradigm in AIDS (HIV=AIDS) will soon give up any idea that any individual or group without system power can make any difference in moving this mountain, whatever education of the public takes place through this video. Given his “whole host” of responsibilities the chances of Obama watching this movie seems close to zero, also, unless for some reason someone close to him (eg Michelle) takes it seriously.

    And short of Presidential attention, it’s not going to go anywhere in terms of system power redirection. But Obama is someone who once fully briefed on the need for reform tends to take action, so if it does reach him it seems likely to result in a competent review of the situation.

    The University of New Mexico site named AIDSInfoNet.org is interesting on this basis, since it gives a long summary list of the organizations involved in AIDS, at this page of INTERNET BOOKMARKS FOR AIDS, and the total is over 750 listings of web sites related to HIV and AIDS.

    For some reason the list includes several good dissident sites, in its Section 8. DISSIDENTS (AIDS doesn’t exist or hiv isn’t the cause), such as David Crowe’s Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society, Peter Duesberg’s site, labeled here Infectious AIDS: Have We Been Misled?, and the highly informative Rethinking AIDS Website (Virus Myth) , currently being updated, though not many of the dozens of others relevant sites listed in our front page right hand margin blogroll are included. In fact, most of the section is made up of dissident rebuttal sites such as the strenuously misleading AIDS Truth, The Scientific Evidence for HIV/AIDS.

    The main point however is that it lists 750 sites, so the Web propaganda advantage of the paradigm supporters according to this measure is about 747 to 3, and if John Moore of Cornell hears of it, it will probably soon be improved to 750-0.

  8. yello Says:

    Completely unrelated Sirs, but pertinent.

    http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/openaccess2.htm

  9. Truthseeker Says:

    The above comment is mysterious indeed. The link is not explained. Unrelated is the opposite of pertinent, and it is not clear if Sites is meant instead of Sirs.

    If this is intended merely to take up our time with a puzzle to which there is no solution, we suggest that a more entertaining one is to answer this Mensa question: Of what one other word is “insatiable” an anagram?

  10. yello Says:

    My apologies for linking to the main page Sir.

    Here is a proper direct link

    http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

    Abstract in totality.

    Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
    pp.7-31 (25) Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen

    “We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy
    (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.”

    A quick google search reveals “Banalities” TruthSeeker sir, but other improper anagrams within “insatiable” include “bin”, table, bat, nasal, sable, etc.

  11. Carter Says:

    “A key player who has seen the entire film reports that it is highly effective in playing the establishment speakers against each other, so that their paradigm claim crumbles of its own accord, without needing Duesberg or Celia Farber to do much more than poke through the remains.”

    I can attest to this after seeing it twice already. Quite remarkable in it’s effect.

    Also: At last count I believe the are around 50 dissident websites. Where did you get 3 or are you just being facetious?

  12. Truthseeker Says:

    “A quick google search reveals “Banalities” TruthSeeker sir”

    How entirely lame of an otherwise brilliant correspondent, to use google to solve an anagram. Now you have spoiled the fun, evaded the challenge, left your brain and our brains untested and unexercised, and joined the great 21C trend toward abandoning all mental functions to the microchip.

    You are in company with the donkey friend who sent me the answer to “carpethau” (only one word is an anagram, according to Mensa) in an email so that I read it before realizing he had forgotten his instructions NOT to give me the answer if he did it first.

    Both were serving very well as an amusement while I lacked anything better to do. Now both are gone. What do you suggest we do while waiting in line at the supermarket? Talk to the supremely attractive blonde behind us? Maybe you have a point. But having an anagram puzzle handy is one of the best ice breakers we know of, as long as you haven’t yet succeeded at it yourself.

    Now all we can do is lie, and as you know, the dangerous principle by which we live is to tell the truth to strangers, to save their admittedly often worthless lives – in our opinion, a worthless life is one lived without using the mind the Universe bestowed upon you, especially when reading or watching the media.

    Such as the Village Voice, whose front page article this week After the Fall will be excoriated here as soon as we can gather the fortitude to pick it up with a pair of tongs and examine it more closely. We had to interrupt our reading of its confused account of the black orphans that were the unprotected subjects of drastic AIDS drug testing in order to avoid nausea at the inability of one Elizabeth Dwoskin, the supposedly investigative reporter author, to credit any of the material that the genuinely investigative reporter Liam Scheff gave her, to the effect that her premise that “medical science considers that doubts that HIV causes AIDS to be long settled” is so far from the truth that her entire analytically challenged effort to look behind the New York Times is worthless.

    We find the experience of reading a supposedly investigative report that attempts to trump the Times by a supposedly investigative reporter who fails to pursue the idea that scientists can mislead the Times and the public doubling revolting on multiple levels, even it is wasn’t obvious that this poor woman is not up to the task intellectually anyway. The Voice is a sad remnant of its former self, which having got rid of Jules Feiffer, Tom Tomorrow, Ward Sutton, Nat Hentoff and Sydney Scanberg is not even worthy of the great name it still operates under.

    “At last count I believe the are around 50 dissident websites.”

    Yes, and a good new one is the ex-LA police detective Clark Baker’s blogspot, ExlibHollywood, which has no inhibitions about declaring the HIV=AIDS system a giant “fraud”.

    We were merely counting the dissident sites on that list above, not all of them in the world. Our blogroll on the right on our front page gives a whole section of them, among the 500 urls listed. to which we must add Clark Baker’s and a few dozen more.

    Including Celia Farber’s new literary site, The Truth Barrier which reveals this week that the mighty R. Crumb had noticed the problem with HIV=AIDS and was a great admirer of Christine Maggiore, and was saddened by her death. His handwritten eulogy was mailed to Celia, who has reproduced it.

  13. Truthseeker Says:

    Amusing review in the Truth Barrier, A Denialist Reads Seth Kalichman by champion debunker Claus Jensen skewering the hapless Dr Seth Kalichman’s absurd book on those who have considered and rejected the rationale for HIV=AIDS, Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy.

    The irony of a psychologist who purports to study “AIDS denialism” as a psychological aberration but suffers from logical and perceptual denialism and worse himself is not lost on Jensen (“Kalichman states explicitly that he is not interested in the scientific debate since his side is self-evidently right.”) After several earnest paragraphs whereby the reviewer attempts a sober framing of the specimen he is about to dissect (““AIDS denialist” is a misnomer for people who question different aspects of the theory that HIV causes AIDS.”), Jensen is unable to restrain his scathingly witty sense of the human comedy at work in Kalichman’s floundering attempts at rationalizing the evidence-based HIV=AIDS criticism as motivated by mistrustful homophobia etc.

    Kalichman has obviously gone to extraordinary lengths to preserve the even-handedness of the objective observer, but he is also one of those rare scientists who are able to reinvent a genre when the unique character of the subject-matter requires it. I have read a lot of stuff written by psychologists on the Hitlers and Jack the Rippers of the world, and I have never come across a professional who felt compelled to call his profiling of such people “ad homonym attacks.” Was I, the AIDS Denialist, perhaps worse than Hitler? My head was spinning….

    Suspicious even of myself, I decided to put Kalichman’s analysis to the test by asking my astrologer if he could recognise this pinpoint psycho-profile of the archetypal AIDS Denialist in my birth horoscope. The result was astounding; not only did my astrologer find many of the most criminal qualities represented in my horoscope, he also found them in an impressive 97.4% of 11 control horoscopes randomly chosen among members of Congress. Was this mere chance, or could it be a government conspiracy?

    Kalichman’s answer seems to be affirmative, depending of course on which government we are talking about. Who but a denialist would violate the intuitively a priori principle according to which mistrust of AIDS drug-friendly governments is a sure sign of the pathological conspiracy theorist, whereas drug-skeptical governments, like the one led by Thabo Mbeki in South Africa, are self-evidently corrupt to the core and subject to the subversive influence of denialist cabals?

    According to Kalichman and fellow trackers of denialist activities, denialists ply their trade across the ideological spectrum, from global warming skeptics to animal rights proponents. The omnipresence of denialists is a bit of a wet blanket, but Kalichman doesn’t let his readers down entirely. The parallels between Holocaust Denialism and AIDS Denialism are particularly striking, he tells us. Both groups think they are the sole bearers of truth; both groups deny their opponents basic civil liberties while believing their own are being infringed on, and both groups engage in hateful character assassination and name calling. Other eerie parallels include both groups making documentaries and publishing magazines.

    That clearly is shocking behaviour. In the face of such perversity and rampant paranoia, it is readily understandable why all objective scientists must make special provisions to include “ad homonym” attacks and call for amendments to the Constitution, so that evil AIDS Denialist leaders can be imprisoned if they persist in their psychopathic plots against the world’s minorities.

    But terrifying as all of this is, it is not new. Kalichman had promised me that I would be central to this story. I wanted to read about ME. So where was I? Where were the case studies, the interview sessions, the AIDS Denialist on the couch — all the juicy parts of psychology? I could find none of it.

    In the book’s preface, Kalichman tells of his harrowing descent into the wacky world of AIDS Denialism. Always fearing for his sanity, he courageously embarked on personal visits and maintained “complicated” (i.e. pseudonymous) relationships with various denialists. So why had they all vanished from the book and been replaced throughout with run-of-the-mill debunking of perceived pseudoscience? Kalichman states explicitly that he is not interested in the scientific debate since his side is self-evidently right. He is, like me, fascinated by the denialists themselves. But all that remains in the book of the carefully cultivated complicated relationships are a few scattered quotes, most of them taken from the Internet.

    In a last desperate attempt I went to the lengthy section in honour of Peter Duesberg, the Godfather of AIDS Denialism. Kalichman proudly features a photograph of himself standing next to Duesberg; proof of his bona fides as embedded reporter. Could it be that Duesberg had agreed to let Kalichman perform an autopsy on him? Had Duesberg conveyed to Kalichman his entrenched mistrust of the government, Africans, homosexuals and his dear wife — perhaps even that he had been dabbling in animal rights? That would be a scoop.

    Alas, no such thing was forthcoming. Instead Kalichman abandons everything he has been building up to in the first part of the book and diagnoses Duesberg as “bitter”. Shoot, bitter wasn’t even on the infinite list of denialist flaws!

    Even more inexplicably, Kalichman devotes most of this section to arguing that Duesberg is not the victim of a government conspiracy. Why does that need to be argued? Doesn’t it go without saying that conspiracies are figments of overwrought imaginations? And why is it imperative on Kalichman to reclassify Duesberg psychologically as an angry-for-no-good-reason academic? Is it to ensure that Duesberg can be charged criminally? Had the lawyer personality now taken over from the psychologist in this schizophrenically composed book? I don’t know, but I do know that next time I am looking to get psychoanalysed I’ll go back to my astrologer.

    Looking back, I think I can guess Kalichman’s secret. Sometime in the course of his netherworld journey, he discovered that AIDS Denialism was a paranoid fantasy, a figment of an overwrought imagination bearing no resemblance to the real people with whom he imagines he has been interacting. The realisation never quite surfaced in Kalichman’s conscious mind — and besides he had already made his book deal — but once upon a midnight dreary he awoke from some fanciful dream and could sleep no more. Instead he went and pondered his quaint volume of pure abstraction. He pondered his book and he pondered his shadow floating on the floor. Then, not knowing why, not knowing how, but knowing that he must, he wrote a single line of neither reason nor rhyme:
    “This book is a psychological autopsy”

  14. MacDonald Says:

    Truthseeker, Sir,

    What an excellent review of that erm… excellent review! although you cut it a bit short for my taste. But I wont get into a review of the review of the review. Jensen’s workman prose and cheap literary allusions don’t hold that much interest. Besides Jensen has made a mistake that discredits him entirely, not least because he refuses to correct it: He claims that Kalichman is a social psychologist, when in fact Kalichman is a clinical psychologist with an appointment in social psychology.

    I see you’ve linked the exlib in Hollywood blog. It strains credulity even more than the causal connection between HIV and AIDS that Clark Baker was ever a lib. though he might be residing in Hollywood. What’s of interest is his post about HIV/AIDS being too big to fall. You may recall that I’ve said the same thing here, and that you appeared to not understand it. Perhaps Baker’s article will serve to make it a little clearer.

  15. Truthseeker Says:

    That HIV/AIDS is too big to fail is a truth as universally acknowledged as that any young man with a future must be in need of a wife. So why would we deny it? Well, for one thing, even such a universal truth is subject to entropy and decay, just as Jane Austen’s principle has been seen to crumble in the modern era.

    One day it will be universally acknowledged that the real absurdity is that a silly claim made by a rogue scientist in the heat of the political and career moment got any traction whatsoever, let alone took over the world. But then, it points to the alarming fact that the Age of Information has quickly become also the Age of Misinformation, and will so remain in large part until we teach all kids how to question the authority of a source by examining the consistency and sense of its pronouncements.

    Such a course should probably be part of every high school curriculum. But even then, one can imagine the herd instinct ruling most conventional wisdom, since no one has time to question everything. All we have ever suggested is that intelligent but panicky gays and other numbskulls who should know better who are told they will die because they have registered positive on a test for the one time but expired presence of a supposed disease agent in their otherwise healthy bodies should at that moment wake up and double check the reasonableness of this assertion, which is prima facie hollow, since the test is for antibodies which have never before been thought of as disease agents.

    Even high school kids ought to be able to see through that one, once they are taught to ratiocinate.

    The question of course is when the prima facie absurd idea that HIV causes immune collapse will be abandoned. First, the principals of the horrid affair may have to retire, and possibly even die off before anything can change. Secondly some kind of sea change in general mentality will have to take place, the kind of change that we can predict for example in attitudes to having children ie that this is not automatically a blessing (Congratulations!) on a planet of limited resources ie not too soon, given human nature. Thirdly, some leader will have to trigger the change.

    Well, now we have Obama, who as we have pointed out, and whose track record so far proves, is of semi divine nature and origin. Who is to say that he cannot achieve this miracle? Is it likely that we will ever have someone who is better qualified? A black/white President, who can actually ratiocinate competently, who is respectable in every respect, who has taken charge of the world, who has his own children to protect, etc etc the list of requirements is long but every line checks off for Obama.

    We confidently expect that if anyone can get Obama’s attention on this matter, Fauci will be carpeted in short order, his complete incompetence at explaining any convincing rationale for HIV=AIDS will quickly become apparent to the penetrating Obama gaze, and the great ship of fools brought to a halt while its direction is reassessed, the first step being Obama sending Air Force One to bring Duesberg in for a special briefing.

    Are we too optimistic?

  16. Baby Pong Says:

    TS,

    Okay, you inspired me, so I emailed Obama and was careful to put in the Subject: PERSONAL — DO NOT LET YOUR SCIENCE ADVISOR HAROLD VARMINT SCREEN THIS EMAIL.

    I told him to check out the new film House of Numbers and to visit your blog and Henry’s and rethinkingaids.com. So I’m sure that very soon now that penetrating Obama gaze will fix on Fauci and cause him to burst into flames like in the 50s flick Village of the Damned.

    And Peter, you make those plane reservations now! (Due to the country’s economic condition it would be impolitic for Obama to send Air Force One just to pick up Peter. That jet has very high operating costs).

  17. MacDonald Says:

    That HIV/AIDS is too big to fail is a truth as universally acknowledged as that any young man with a future must be in need of a wife.

    This truth was not universally accepted a mere couple of months ago, when the Seeker suggested that Obama could simply redirect funding and the economy would suffer nary a dent. And yet the expression “too big to fail” is used of financial institutions so large and ramified that they alledgedly would pull down all if they were to fall. Below is the end of the exchange to refresh memories:

    MacDonald Says:
    February 9th, 2009 at 5:07 pm

    The reason they have always been so fiercely against allowing the door to alternatives to open even a tiny crack is that this sequence becomes inevitable, once started.

    Yes, the paradigm tumbles at the tiniest crack in the dam, but the system I am talking about is the whole financial system, throughout which HIV/AIDS, which is but one prominent manifestation of a reigning paradigm, is rooted. This system will also fall apart sequentially, when HIV/AIDS falls.

    The Anointed One, who sees immediate economic miracle-working as his Cross to bear, is therefore not likely to consider chasing the merchants out of the temple, much less tear down its pillars even if he were chained to them, which it appears to some that he is.

    Truthseeker Says:
    February 10th, 2009 at 2:22 am

    The whole financial system will fall apart if HIV=AIDS goes? Really? How big is it? $5 or $10 or even $20 billion a year? Peanuts compared to the financial system… Please clarify.

  18. Baby Pong Says:

    I received an email reply from President Obama this morning!

    “Dear Baby Pong,

    “I am in receipt of your email asking me to look into alternative views of AIDS. Today I did some web surfing and I am really stunned by the depth, breadth and insightfulness of the dissident position.

    “I am going to make a personal investigation into this, as I understand your warning that my advisors have reputational and financial stakes in the matter. I promise you that getting to the truth of this matter will be a priority for me.

    “Thank you for your contribution to democracy. It’s great when ordinary Americans like you can make your concerns reverberate in the halls of power. That’s what my administration is all about. We are open to the people, not just the special interests.

    “I will keep you posted on my investigation of this matter.

    “Sincerely,

    “Barack Obama”

    Isn’t this great? I feel so proud, knowing that a little Pong like me has the same access to the president as the heads of Glaxo, Roche, Monsanto, the Gates and Rockefeller foundations, Goldman Sachs, Citibank, GM, Morgan Stanley, and all his cabinet secretaries and think tank experts. What a wonderful democracy we have! :) :) :)

  19. Truthseeker Says:

    Pong, this is excellent news, though, we feel, quite predictable. The characteristic of a Great Leader, such as is our new World Headmaster Obama, is that he listens to the small guy. We might point out that this week, he was fully preoccupied with the secret affair of the Portuguese water dog offered by Senator Kennedy to his children, which according to our sources is finally accepted, as it should be since we hear from a reliable source that this breed is almost preternaturally intelligent. Yet even in these strained circumstances he was able to turn his attention to your important alert, and respond to it in timely fashion.

    Surely this is also the outcome of a streak in Obama’s character, namely, that he sympathizes with the underdog. We believe that he heard of the case in Canada where a 52 year old in the Attorney General’s office has been convicted of murder for failing to tell women he was “HIV positive”. Naturally Obama is concerned about this aberration of justice and scientific reasoning. He probably mentioned it to Michelle who is doing her own research on the subject. There is very little which will escape the attention of these all encompassing minds.

    TORONTO, April 5 (UPI) — Some Canadian legal experts say they are concerned about a precedent set by a man’s murder conviction for killing two sex partners by infecting them with HIV.
    Johnson Aziga, 52, of Hamilton was convicted on two counts of first-degree murder and 10 counts of aggravated sexual assault Saturday, following 2 1/2 days of jury deliberation, Canwest News Service reported. He is to be sentenced May 7.

    Alison Symington of the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network said the conviction was troubling.

    “Do we as a society think not telling someone you’re living with about a sexually transmitted infection is the equivalent of murder?” Symington said. “We really need to stop and have this debate.”

    Prosecutors contended two women, identified only as H.C. and S.B., were murder victims because, in effect, they were injected with a “slow-acting poison” since they didn’t know Aziga had human immunodeficiency virus, which can lead to AIDS.

    University of Toronto Professor Mariana Valverdes says risk of criminal prosecution may lead to more people hiding their HIV status.

    “It is much better public policy to institute universal measures of protection, rather than assuming that diseases spread mainly because of some people’s intentionally evil behavior,” she said.

    Crown Attorney Karen Shea said the government had to act against an individual “engaging in conduct knowing full well that he is endangering the health and lives of others.”

    Aziga, a native of Uganda who worked in the Ministry of the Attorney General in Ontario, was diagnosed with HIV in 1996. He was counseled not to have unprotected sex and to tell his partners of his health status, prosecutors said.

    Of course, this gentleman was an African of some kind and liable to be convicted of almost anything if he found himself in a North American court, so it is not necessarily a precedent for the fate of whites on this continent, who probably don’t even care, for that very reason. But President Obama as you know has one foot in both camps.

    We are already making enquiries as to who might replace the distinguished sartorial trendsetter at the helm of NIAID and whether he/she might see fit to finance this site to the tune of $10 million annually.

    Our first action of course when this proposal succeeds is to buy a decent defense for the unfortunate Mr Aziga. One witness we shall call is Peter Duesberg, whose testimony will deserve a fee of $1 million outright.

    This of course may have to come after Duesberg returns from Stockholm, having accepted the prize awarded to Luc Montagnier but then retracted and given instead to the distinguished Berkeley professor with apologies for the interruption of decency and professional values in science through which he had to suffer.

    That will be after the arrest of Anthony Fauci and Robert Gallo at the airport fleeing together to Latin America with luggage which when opened is found to be packed with large denomination bills.

  20. MacDonald Says:

    I believe this remarkable instance responsiveness springs from President Barack Hussein Obama’s empathy with unfortunately named individuals. When his eye caught the name Baby Pong, inspired by the well-known Cambodian bar game, he felt compelled to do his utmost to comply with any request expressed by the creature bearing a cross so similar his own.

  21. Baby Pong Says:

    We don’t know where MacDonald gets the idea that our name is from a Cambodian bar game. It annoys us that anyone would imply that we like to hang out in bars in that dangerous, hyper-corrupt, sorry excuse for a nation.

    Now if he wanted to speculate that perhaps the name was the Yahoo chat nick of a girl in a Bangkok internet cafe, surreptitiously observed by us some years ago, and that it made us chuckle so much that we decided to steal it, that would be a better hypothesis, though equally false, as, in fact, this is the name on our birth certificate.

  22. Robert Houston Says:

    No doubt, as Baby Pong claims, “this is the name on our birth certificate.” In other words, somewhere on the document is the word “baby”.

    Truthseeker, in an innocent flight of optimism, has apparently been swept up in the fantasy of a genteel hoax perpetrated by Mr. Pong or Mr. MacDonald, or their close friend CJ, who may be having another episode of multiple identity disorder.

    Face it, the email from “Barack Obama” is a literary fabrication, albeit well-done, probably by one of the above if not by a friend of theirs. Is any reader really so naive as to believe that on such a sensitive issue the President would confide to a stranger with an infantile name that “I am really stunned by the depth, breadth and insightfulness of the dissident position”?

    Only in your dreams.

  23. MacDonald Says:

    The esteemed Mr. Pong must surely be aware that our speculations concerning his birth certificate, placing him in the vicinity of Cambodian bars wherein one might imagine exotic games are played, was merely a smokescreen to delay the NSA team, which is at this moment preparing to carry out operation Find Baby Pong. We would much prefer they direct unmanned drones to the neighbouring hyper-corrupt sorry excuse for a nation instead of the famed Internet cafés of Bangkok and the enterprising young girls known to frequent them.

    On a related linguistic note, I can inform that the Thai girls (and boys) often derive their nicks from the first syllable of their real names. Thus, if the local physician, Dr. Pornsac, should decide to adopt a Yahoo chat name, the result would be even more curious than the sign now on display over the door to his practice. likewise, the Thai girls (and boys who pay Dr Pornsac to change them into girls) will often add to a single syllable of their names another syllable or two to create an impression of international sophistication. For example, the syllable “Nat” is easily turned into Natalie or Nadia, “Aon”, to Angelina etc. We are still trying to figure out if this was what happened when the Pornstar Laundry across the road was named. All we can safely say at this point is that, judging by the appeareance of the owner, the place is very aptly named.

  24. Baby Pong Says:

    No Robert, the email is genuine. I traced the IP address to Washington DC. If it’s a forgery, it would have to have been sent by some tricky person in the Wash DC area. Everybody knows that the people in Wash DC are serious honest public servants and not tricky.

  25. Baby Pong Says:

    Speaking of pornstars, MacDonald, it’s sad to hear this morning that Marilyn Chambers has died.

    They are doing an autopsy. How much you wanna bet they’ll try to conclude she had Hiv?

    Unrestrained sexual pleasure MUST have consequences. That’s why they invented the phony “syphillis,” the fraudulent dogma that prostitutes have more cervical cancer than do nuns, and that’s one of the multifactorial reasons the authorities invented “Hiv.” Orwell made a good attempt to explain this in 1984. A more complete explanation is that “unprotected” sex gives one a fleeting glimpse of the greater existence beyond this mundane earthly one, an existence in which all consciousnesses are one.

    This terrifies the ruling class, as their wealth and privileges derive from people (and themselves) believing that we are all individual organisms, not facets of one organism. Otherwise, how could they attempt to justify, to themselves and to others, their hogging of the world’s wealth while so many are poor?

    When they kill someone with the Hiv tests and drugs, or poison a healthy Hiv + dissident for political purposes, they need to be able to believe that they are killing a stranger, not an aspect of themselves. So, to keep the charade going, they devise subtle ways to promote the idea that sexual pleasure (i.e., universal knowledge and insight into the reality beyond this earthly existence) is harmful, even fatal. From priests to microbiologists, they all follow the same well-funded agenda. Circumcise that thing, wrap it in plastic, abstain…whatever it takes to kill the pleasure.

    We feel sad about the loss of Marilyn, and wish that we had had the opportunity to know her better.

  26. MacDonald Says:

    We have noted with sadness that the sacred function, which always involved some kind of offer, sacrifice or ritual in appreciation of spiritual pleasure incarnate, has been commercialized. We do not know of Marilyn Chambers, although a friend recently introduced us to a website with some remarkable Japanese girls whom we wouldn’t mind getting to know a little better. However, generally speaking, the script, acting style and artistic concept of these movies have never really caught on with us. In fact, we were invariably put off whenever in our distant youth we encountered women who thought that emulating these actors would increase our susceptibility to their charms.

    We are in full agreement with the Pope that genital plastic wrappers are a diabolical invention – and completely unnecessary if we are to believe the Tradition of Wise Women, whom the Church and the medical profession have jointly crusaded against for centuries now. Allegedly there are several herbs and other measures, including bodily awareness, which function as well as latex and synthetic hormones. Although our memories of the days when we would frolick in patures green are quite hazy, we seem to remember that on the few occasions when we agreed to experiment with “safe sex” the unifying purpose of the exercise invariably turned to ensuring that the darned thing was still in place and undamaged.

    The Perth Group, whom we hold in high esteem, claim there is ample evidence that frequency of intercourse correlates with frequency of cervical cancer. We remain unconvinced that the correlation translates into a causal role for semen, or the act of love-making itself. Other studies have shown a high correlation between various health benefits and frequent nocturnal exercise. For our own part,we would quite often feel nauseous, but we attributed that chiefly to over-consumption of alcohol, the dreadful chemical waste products women apply everywhere on their bodies and, in especially the case of new partners, the nervous tension and cramped positions that would follow from having a someone lying next to us in such a confined space.

  27. Truthseeker Says:

    “Truthseeker, in an innocent flight of optimism, has apparently been swept up in the fantasy of a genteel hoax perpetrated by Mr. Pong”

    Houston, really, as Mr Pong has insisted, this is surely no hoax. There is certainly no reason why Barack Hussein Obama should be prejudiced against his correspondent simply on the basis of his name.

    Are you not aware that the influx of persons from outside Scotland into the United States has increased dramatically in the last half century, and that names such as “Robert” and “Houston” are no longer exclusively occupying the upper strata of this country? There are in fact over 4 million Mr Pong references in Googleland right now, and possibly half of them are in the US, according to a search for “Mr Pong in America”.

    You don’t seem to understand that so vast in Mr Obama’s perspective and so wide the horizon of his attention that he is up late every night after reading his daughters a bedtime story combing through his email just in case he missed anything important owing to the prejudice or inattention of his underlings.

    A man who can send a destroyer to rescue a single American sea captain from the hands of Somali marauders is one who is quite capable of sending a SWAT team to Anthony Fauci’s office at NIAID in the late afternoon once Mr Baby Pong above has visited the White House to brief him in person, as we expect shortly.

    Why else has Dr Fauci been seen recently reading leaflets from Rio De Janeiro hotels while having coffee in the NIAID cafeteria?

  28. MacDonald Says:

    We hasten to correct ourselves on a single point: Although we did feel nauseous, that goes without saying. What we meant to convey was that in addition we felt nauseated at times.

  29. Baby Pong Says:

    I seem to recall emailing the Perth Group to challenge them about the cervical cancer association. I believe they mentioned it due to their lack of knowledge about the fraudulent nature of the 19th century research that supposedly established it. A researcher in the UK whose name I don’t recall investigated this and concluded there was never any evidence for an association, it was essentially fabricated out of whole cloth for political and religious purposes.

    That was then and this is now (to quote some Aids religionist expert at the Parenzee trial if I recall correctly). It would not surprise me in the least if TODAY’S prostitutes have way more cervical cancer than nuns do. Because they are exposed to the carcinogenic chemicals in condoms far more than nuns are exposed to them. Condoms have dozens of carcinogens in their “lubrication” and in the latex itself. And many prostitutes today are getting 6 or 7 fresh condoms in them every day, making for a very dangerous exposure to carcinogens.

    Of course the medical establishment that terrifies these poor girls into using these deadly condoms has a convenient scapegoat when the girls get cervical cancer — HPV. And anyway, the girls deserve to die, cause they’re WHORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRES and love sex!!!

  30. Truthseeker Says:

    How sad if true, and also, distasteful to contemplate if one is a non specialist. The unfortunate thing is that all these topics are somewhat off putting to the average imagination and therefore ignored and evaded for the most part, and avoided by editors. So the medical establishment gets a free pass on whatever it cares to peddle to the public. What is less obvious is how this principle applies to almost everything in medicine. Whether it is squeamishness, fear, laziness or irresponsibility on the part of most people, we like to leave medicine to the experts whom we pay to handle the problem for us, and this is what allows them to get up to more mischief behind the curtain than would otherwise be possible. Nowhere does this consideration apply more than HIV/AIDS, of course, and it is one huge factor in the continuing survival of its outlandish claims.

    The House of Numbers appears to solve this problem by focusing on scientific theory and a whole group who can’t get their story straight.

  31. Robert Houston Says:

    Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Pong have raised some worthwhile concerns.

    Peter Duesberg has demolished the hypothesis that human papilloma virus (HPV) causes cervical cancer (Inventing the AIDS Virus, pp 110-114). Nevertheless, Merck is raking in big profits by pushing their anti-HPV vaccine Gardasil on pre-adolescent girls, though it’s only active against 4 of the 40 strains of HPV. An alternate approach that’s unpatentable and thus of no interest to drug companies is the use of cruciferous vegetables, particularly broccoli, a normal serving of which provides therapeutic levels of indole-3-carbinol (I3C), as well as sulforaphane, both anticancer factors. According to a recent review, “trials in humans suggest that I3C supplementation may be beneficial in treating conditions related to human papilloma virus infection such as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia…” (J.V. Higdon et al. Cruciferous vegetables and human cancer risk. Pharmacol Res 55:224-236, 2007).

    A little known problem with condoms is that they can release small amounts of nitrosamines.
    One study found these were usually above recommended limits but of unknown health consequences ( W. Altkofer et al. Migration of nitrosamines from rubber products – are balloons and condoms harmful to human health? Mol Nutr Food Res 49: 235-8, 2005).

    Truthseeker suggests that I doubted Pres. Obama’s email on grounds that the name Pong was not WASPish. In fact, there is a Pong restaurant near where I write in New York city and some half dozen Pongs in the Manhattan directory. It was the name “Baby Pong” that seemed unlikely to command such immediate attention. In fact, the name “Ralph Nader” has received no acknowledgement from Pres. Obama despite 5 letters since last September.

    Mr. Pong countered that he traced the “Barack Obama” email to an IP address in the Washington DC. This would be very difficult to do, without the cooperation of several agencies. Even if it were a low-level White House intern who concocted the email to humor Mr. Pong, it’s still a hoax. In fact, I know of only three people with the talent and orientation to produce such an email: CJ, Truthseeker, and Thabo Mbeki, the former President of South Africa. Of these CJ seems the most likely and there’s reason to believe he knows Mr. Pong’s email address.

  32. MacDonald Says:

    Mr. Houston,

    It is our firm belief that there is a fourth person of extraordinary talent and even more extraordinary inclination, and that it is he who has perpetrated the hoax, if indeed the mail qualifies as such. That person is… no not the butler but none other than Mr. Pong himself, who is quite clearly an embodied entity distinct from CJ and myself.

  33. Truthseeker Says:

    No, this is no hoax. We (the full Nature-Science Guardian Beneviste Memorial Assessment Committee) have thought about this possibility at length, since it is always wise to try and avoid being fooled by what one reads on the Web (this site excepted, of course). But our committee has concluded, as reliably as committees always do, that the idea that this is a hoax is almost hoax-like in its unlikelihood.

    We have the following reasons to think so:

    *Barack Obama is not the kind of person to allow hoaxes in relation to the White House.

    *The President is a man who is entirely open to new ideas.

    *The President is always speaking out on behalf of the little guy, and castigating the powerful.

    *The President is always supportive of the powerful when necessary to provide them with large amounts of Federal money to save the little guy.

    *President Obama believes in the institutions of government doing their job properly on behalf of the little guy and any suggestion otherwise will catch his attention immediately.

    *The President comes from a background of food stamps and is aware of how important it is that honesty reign at the highest levels of government to protect the little guy,

    *The President by virtue of background and upbringing has one foot in the crumbling white elite social milieu and one foot in the milieu of advancing blacks, and is especially alert to any threat which oppresses both.

    *It was not first brought to our collective attention on April 1.

    Where is Gary Winnick today?

    By the way, talking of outrageous claims on the Web we recommend to the attention of all interested in the money making that goes on behind the scenes the following interesting thread of Comment on an Observer piece on Global Crossing, the forgotten Enron of the optical fiber bubble. Did Terence MacAuliffe really turn $100,000 into $18 million courtesy of Gary Winnick?

    Enquiring minds need to know. We of course have no idea whether such scurrilous allegations have a shred of truth to them or not. All we do know is that the New York Observer is still one of the few places where top media scribes freely castigate their peers in finance, business and government for letting down the little guy, though we are not sure that any headline as outspoken as that one (GARY WINNICK SHOULD GO TO JAIL: an example of callous, cold-blooded greed (Editorial)) would still be printed today. Anyhow, modern sums lost in the excesses of Wall Street so far exceed the totals misappropriated by this relative piker that he and his ilk must be delighted by the camouflage provided by the Crisis. One trusts, of course, that they are not taking advantage of it with new depredations. That would be very irresponsible.

    Meanwhile, Mr. Winnick had tried to cover his political bases. Terry McAuliffe, Bill Clinton’s best friend and chairman of the Democratic National Committee, turned a $100,000 investment in Global Crossing into $18 million. Global Crossing donated over $200,000 to Governor George Pataki and New York Republicans, and Mr. Winnick himself gave $20,000 to New York State Comptroller Carl McCall, who just happened to invest $63 million of the state public-employee pension fund in Global Crossing. That money is now gone; Mr. McCall, trying to cover his back, claims he is outraged and will sue

    So what happened to Gary Winnick? His Wiki bio notes that he generously gave $25 million to help out his employees who lost their 401k all in his downfall, but there seems to be some feeling among independent commentators that this was inadequate by a factor of ten.

    Now it appears that the Freedom Tower stands or falls according to the reliability of the concrete technology introduced in its structure by his new company, iCrete.

  34. Baby Pong Says:

    Robert,

    Who is “CJ”? I want to know the full name of this tricky dude who may have fabricated that email, possibly getting us all excited over nothing.

  35. Robert Houston Says:

    Christ Jesus?

    Sorry, that would be just another name for Barack Obama, at least according to Truthseeker.

    CJ is a Danish scholar and writer of remarkable skill who was educated (as was Truthseeker) at a leading university in Scotland and has resided in recent years in Thailand. As mentioned earlier on this thread, he recently published an incisive review at The Truth Barrier, Celia Farber’s splendid new literary website.

    My eqrlier mention that he may be experiencing “another episode of multiple identity disorder” was a reference to the possibility that he has assumed the name of “Barack Obama” as his new web “handle.” I’m told that some time ago, as managing editor at another website, he went by the name “Otis.”

    It should be noted that Mr. MacDonald also seems to have the literary skill to have written the April 12th “Obama” email to Mr. Pong, and MacDonald now says that Pong would also be capable. Of course, a literary master such as Truthseeker could well have done the job. With all this talent, there’s no lack of suspects. However, speaking for the “Nature-Science Guardian” Committee, Truthseeker has released their conclusion that the email from “Barack Obama” is unlikely to be a hoax.

    Whoever wrote it certainly deserves a commendation for a remarkable piece of work. If indeed it was the President, then Science Guardian has a major news scoop: that in terms of sympathy for AIDS dissent, Barack Obama has become the Thabo Mbeki of North America!

    Just how likely is that?

  36. Truthseeker Says:

    If Robert Houston insists on misapplying his normally fruitful skepticism to the obviously genuine communication from our President, perhaps he should write to the White House for further confirmation. But on the other hand, if the outside possibility that it was a flight of humorous fancy proves to be the case, this would expose him to public comment as one who failed to see a joke, which is always the most embarrassing position for any critic, and most dangerous to his/her own credibility.

    Perhaps this site should feature a warning label to avoid mishaps of this kind. For the plain fact of the matter is that there is so much wrong which can only be properly pointed out with humor that the use of humor (occasionally rising to wit, though not often in the case of the blogger) is really indispensable and inevitable. Otherwise the truths paraded here would be too heavy a burden for most readers to carry, and the earnest and plodding if not somewhat befuddled truthseeking for which this site stands, alone and above its rivals, would be rejected as altogether too miserable a pursuit.

    But, as some bard had it, there is many a truth spoken in jest, and many a truth cannot be spoken but in jest, which is why we think of ourselves as the court jester of science, so far evading execution by the king by hastily claiming “we are not serious!” whenever we cut too close to the bone, metaphorically speaking (our metaphor is drawn from surgery, a medical practice which attempts a cure by cutting out cancerous growths).

    Luckily, many of the contributors here are witty indeed, and thus fly far over the heads of those who would otherwise sue this site for everything we have, and put us out of business.

  37. MacDonald Says:

    Who knows if Barack Obama can be miraculously raised a second time in the same century to confirm his mail to doubting Thomases? There is, however, another; a person of unquestionable integrity and limitless access, who could easily help us verify the document in question. Moreover, this is a person whose instant attention is commanded by Mr Truthseeker because of their shared background in the cradle of modern civilisation, from which benevolent Christianity once shone its rays in an eternal midday reign.

    I am of course talking about John Moore. If the Nature-Science Guardian Beneviste Memorial Assessment Committee would be prepared to test its conclusion at the Supreme Court of Truth in all matters AIDS, they could forward their deliberations to Prof. Moore and humbly ask his opinion. Should Barack Obama submit within a week to the AIDStruth column made famous by Padian and Rodriguez a grovelling retraction of his mail to Pong, claiming that he was unaware of its existence, and by the way he inherited it wholesale from the previous administration, we would have proof that it is real. If this doesn’t happen, we can safely assume that it was a clever hoax all along.

  38. Robert Houston Says:

    I defer to the higher logic of Truthseeker and MacDonald.

    Mr. MacDonald reasons that a statement by the President Obama at AIDStruth to the effect that he was unaware of any email by him to Baby Pong would be “proof that it is real.” This at least would be consistent with previous “clarifications” there by Drs. Nancy Padian and Benigno Rodriguez which they wound up casting even more doubt on the HIV theory.

    Truthseeker asserts that I am “misapplying…skepticism to the obviously genuine communication from our President.” On the other hand, I’m “one who failed to see a joke…” But isn’t skepticism the appropriate response to a claim that’s in jest?

    In actuality, I was merely trying to inform readers, some of whom may not be as sophisticated in this area as the witty contributors, that the purported communication on AIDS from Barack Obama praising “the depth, breadth, and incisiveness of the dissident position” was indeed a joke, i.e., a prank, or as I worded it, “a genteel hoax.”

    It was so well-crafted, however, as to be potentially credible to some. Thus, a note of skepticism seemed warranted, however unsophisticated.

  39. Truthseeker Says:

    Robert Houston’s ongoing inability to distinguish between a joke and a very serious communication from the President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, speaks well for the seriousness of his approach to life and the reassessment of conventional wisdom and its flaws in science and other topics of this humble blog, but in some circumstances the ability to make such a distinction is a vital component of discussion here between the almost wholly humorless blogmeister and some of the wittier contributors to Comments, so if we have influenced him by our own inability to manufacture witticisms of any merit or remember any but the most mundane jokes, we are sorry.

    We have done our best to relieve him of this handicap and still hope that this acknowledgment that it is probably mainly our fault will finally achieve success but we fear that his insistence that the claim that the email is genuine is no joke is incorrigible, since in the manner of most of the supporters of any paradigm, it appears that once he is committed to a line of thought he is unwilling or even incapable of considering an alternative, perhaps because like them it would be too great a reversal of his world view.

    The fact remains however that the considered reassessment of the Nature-Science Guardian Beneviste Memorial Assessment Committee, which met to specially review its decision in this case after learning that it had been questioned by no less a figure in scholarly circles than Houston himself, is that this exciting email is no joke, so we are glad that in this case we are all now in agreement, and can move on to debating its implications.

    For example, should we not advise the President what action to take to explore the matter and decide on an appropriate policy response? Or would it be better to turn to Michelle, who in matters of health and medicine almost surely wears the pants in the White House, especially if it involves delicate matters of racial injustice and paranoia, in this case justified?

    The immediate question is how to expand on the provision of information on this matter to the White House staff of our new First Family, who will of course be the first people charged with the duty of taking a look at the issue and the allegations of Pong. We would like to suggest that the intern assigned to the task should read the entire contents of this site, and all the links it contains down the right hand margin to other sites dealing with the matter.

    However, since this site finds the conclusion so obvious now it wanders freely into other fields where conventional wisdom is suspect or plainly wrong, and to make matters worse, too often features satire, sarcasm and parody (though never, of course, lies or deceits of any kind, unlike the misleadingly misnamed AIDS Truth, a site devoted to resisting skepticism about the HIV=AIDS paradigm and deploring any review as dangerous to the body politic).

    We do this to alleviate the sense of tiresome repetition and even boredom which overcomes all intelligent observers who have become too familiar with the issue to take it on straight any more. We can’t help trying to add humor or even wit to relieve the tediousness of encountering the closed minds of the victims of this global misapprehension, that is to say, the very people who need rescue, it may be better to recommend more earnest sites, even though Hank Barnes at You Betcha Life demonstrated that wit is the sharpest scalpel to conduct this intellectual surgery on the status quo for anyone who is the slightest bit receptive to the critique.

    We think therefore that one of the best sites to suggest is AidsPetition, which concerns the “Reassess AIDS” Petition to the United Methodist Church New York Annual Conference, especially this page WHY AIDS POLICY NEEDS TO BE AUDITED / REEXAMINED. We haven’t gone through it all in detail but it appears sound, and the outstanding virtue it has is that it is very matter-of-fact in tone, with all emotional or political overtones removed.

    Seems to us that this is the ideal level on which to write the follow up memo to Pong’s email.

  40. Carter Says:

    Sometimes I just wonder how could the gay community after years and years of abuse from the HIV/AIDS high priests and priestesses can continue on as business as usual and pray at the almighty altar.

    http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=90259

    Missing from this hack job reporting from New England’s largest GLBT newspaper is that there were a number of neutral audience members to had contributed kudos and comments of support to the attendees after seeing the film.

  41. Seth Kalichman Says:

    AIDS Denialism is alive and well, even when after leaders like Christine Maggiore die of AIDS. This small group of destructive conspiracy theorists and pseudoscientists are attracting a growing following of people who distrust science-based medicine. A new book titled Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy explores the psychological and social phenomenon of AIDS denialism. All royalties from the book are donated to buy HIV medications in Africa.
    Visit http://denyingaids.blogspot.com for more information.

  42. Truthseeker Says:

    Seth, wouldn’t it be more accurate to call that misinformation, since you have written the entire book on the premise that the paradigm HIV=AIDS is valid, when as we noted in the post this grossly improbable claim has been defeated in the journal literature for over two decades as scientifically invalid, impossible, incredible and inane?

    Surely it would be better to double check your science before writing such a tour-de-force as the volume you so assiduously promote?

    By the way, you seem to be under the impression, which also contradicts both science and common sense, that Christine Maggiore died of “AIDS”. Please refer to our recent post on this topic.

  43. Baby Pong Says:

    I finally received a follow-up email from the White House.

    Dear Mr. Pong,

    President Obama asked me to bring you up to date on the HIV/AIDS policy issues that the two of you discussed. The president simply has not had the time to investigate this issue for himself, so I’m sure you will be glad to learn that he’s turned the matter over to his science advisor, Dr. Harold Varmus. Dr. Varmus is a Nobel laureate in microbiology, so you can be certain he’ll bring his critical eye and encyclopedic knowledge to the HIV/AIDS issue and share his conclusions with the president. We’re all delighted that such a distinguished scientist is in charge of this investigation, and thankful to you for piquing the president’s interest in this important matter.

    Very truly yours,

    Debbie Banaver,

    Intern
    White House Office of Science and Technology

  44. Truthseeker Says:

    This is a bit of a setback, Pong. But perhaps we can rely on Dr Varmus to present a full view of the discussion about the failures of HIV/AIDS theory over the last twenty years, despite his past record of climbing ever higher in office and status by fitting in with the views of his colleagues in every respect, including his greatest triumph, winning a Nobel prize for a minor contribution to a somewhat questionable achievement (judging from his skimming rapidly over the topic in his three lecture account of his illustrious career at the New York Public Library, which we attended).

    We are sure that this diffidence in describing the exact contribution he had made which deserved the Nobel had absolutely nothing to do with Peter Duesberg and the opinion shared by many that it was that distinguished and wrongly maligned scientist who actually deserved the Nobel for his contribution in that field, namely identifying the first supposed cancer gene or “oncogene”, a credit which we notice has been recently transferred to Dr Varmus by Scientific American, if memory serves.

    Dr Varmus is an immensely likable person and we have total faith in his integrity and sense of justice and fairness, and we are sure that his conscience is sufficiently sensitive to the horrid injustices perpetrated on Dr Duesberg that he will make a special effort in this matter to bend over backwards as far as he can without actually losing his balance and give Dr Duesberg’s point of view its due in writing his brief to President Obama.

    However, we think it might be appropriate to cover our bets as far as the outside contingency is concerned, that is, the possibility that Dr Varmus may have a failure of recall in this regard and inadvertently omit to mention Dr Duesberg as a credible scientist, perhaps the most credible, in the manner of John Moore, who never seems to let Dr Duesberg’s name pass his lips or issue from his fingers, for some reason.

    So we personally undertake to make a connection of some kind with the delightful Debbie Banaver, and take her out to lunch or an after work drink, and interest her is a full perspective view of what is going on here, with the subtle suggestion that it might be in her interest to mention it to Michelle whenever she comes into contact with her at some convenient moment.

  45. Baby Pong Says:

    Well it looks as if the tide is finally turning our way. I got the following email from President Obama:

    Dear Dr. Pong [sic]

    My science advisor, Dr. Harold Varmus, has just delivered his report to me, and the bottom line is that he says that there is merit in a lot of what you and Dr. Duesberg and others say about the connection between HIV and AIDS. I am personally appalled that this has never been adequately discussed in the media, or in the governments of my predecessors.

    As a black man, I am deeply concerned that my fellow black citizens are being tested with a test that is prone to false positives, especially in black people who have a much higher antibody count in general than do white citizens.

    After long discussions with my advisors and even my wife Michelle, I have decided that a public airing of this controversy is long overdue. I am planning a special news conference on the evening of May 12, to bring this issue to the attention of all Americans and raise the suggestion that, until this issue is resolved, perhaps nobody should be getting tested for HIV or taking antiretroviral drugs.

    It couldn’t have happened without your valiant insistence on being a good citizen and informing me about this. I expect we will be inviting you to dine with us at the White House soon, but that’s not scheduled yet, Michelle’s social secretary will take care of that.

    Best regards,

    Barack Obama

    PS: Have you experienced genuine Chicago White Spinach Pizza or do you prefer New York pepperoni?

  46. Robert Houston Says:

    Happy news, indeed. Congratulations, Dr. Pong!

  47. Baby Pong Says:

    Well, as you might have guessed by now, May 12 came, Obama held his live TV press conference to express his doubts about Hiv, and it was COMPLETELY BLACKED OUT by the media. I was there. As soon as Obama’s drift became clear, somebody waved an arm and all the cameramen shut off their cameras simultaneously. I have only read of things like this in conspiracy literature. They say that the same thing happened to President Carter when he went on TV and tried to tell the American people the truth about who killed JFK. Very disappointing. :o(

    But at least the pizza was tasty.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Bad Behavior has blocked 144 access attempts in the last 7 days.