Archive for the 'Clark Baker' Category

Carrots, Sticks & Useful Idiots

In December 2007, Merkuri Stanback entered the Park Community Federal Credit Union in Macon, Georgia brandishing a firearm. Stanback and his cohorts restrained employees and ransacked the teller area before making off with almost $200K. When Stanback was arrested, a prosecutor declared that “bank robbers should be put on notice that they will serve the full term of years imposed because there is no parole in the federal system.” Continue reading ‘Carrots, Sticks & Useful Idiots’

HIV Defendant Prevails Over Pharmaceutical Propaganda

When outspoken AIDS activists Martin Delany, Hank Wilson, Ferd Eggan, Belynda Dunn, Joe Carroccio, George Sanderson and Howard Jacobs died, their cohorts hardly mentioned that they all succumbed to drug-caused liver cancers. But when outspoken HIV skeptic Christine Maggiore passed away in December 2008, Seth Kalichman, John Moore, Jeanne Bergman and other PharmaSluts falsely marketed her death as AIDS-related.

For nearly a year, they parroted the false claims on thousands of heterophobic blogs – most of which are directly or indirectly funded by the pharmaceutical industry. For example, a visit to The Body will cram your browser with drug advertising and gay activism.

For an industry that routinely spends billions settling criminal complaints and pushing deadly drugs to children and minorities, disinformation is a vital component of their marketing plans. Without this propaganda and the complicit media, Americans would know that infectious diseases (including HIV) are statistically irrelevant in the US, Europe, Australia and South Africa.

We would also know that millions of Americans are injured or killed each year by untested drugs, preventable medical errors, adverse drug reactions by the pharmaceutical industry’s ongoing criminal behavior and systemic incompetence.

If the Media regularly reported these facts, taxpayers would not waste billions of dollars on the CDC, NIH, research centers and universities that market unproven cures for mythical dangers like H1N1, HIV, HPV and CO2.

Despite the propaganda, Christine Maggiore – like her daughter and millions of other Americans – died from an adverse drug reaction:

Christine suffered fatal renal failure caused by antibiotics, antiviral, and calcium received during the 9 days prior to her death.

So it’s no surprise that, despite his considerable qualifications, the PharmaSluts have attacked Dr. Al-Bayati as unqualified, although few (if any) of his accusers have ever qualified in a real court to render evidence-based opinions. Not only does Dr. Al-Bayati routinely qualify as an expert in criminal matters throughout the US, but he routinely exposes flaws in medical evidence that would otherwise be used to convict innocent people.

As did Ms. Maggiore before her unexpected death, Dr. Al-Bayati represents a significant threat to the makers of HIV tests and drugs. When HIV is put on trial in criminal matters, prosecutors will require the PharmaSluts to prove that their tests are reliable and explain exactly when, where, how and who proved that HIV attacks cells and causes AIDS. Without this evidence, the expert will not qualify and the prosecution’s case will collapse.

Florida vs. Eneydi Torres

Although the PharmaSluts routinely cite the Australian case against Andre Parenzee (2006) as a criminal victory, the lesser-known case of Eneydi Torres, 42 – who faced up to fifteen years in prison this year for allegedly exposing four men to HIVhas left them silent.

Like Willie Campbell and Philippe Padeau, Torres faced up to fifteen years for allegedly exposing several men to HIV. The prosecution’s case would have been winnable except that, unlike the Parenzee, Campbell and Padeau cases, Torres was complicated by a competent defense attorney and a recent US Supreme Court ruling that requires prosecutors to prove that HIV tests are reliable and that defendants are actually infected with an infectious disease.

Not only did attorney Baron Coleman require prosecutors to connect the double- and triple-hearsay reports of HIV positivity to the defendant years before the alleged crimes, but he also planned to call the scientifically-confused cast members from House of Numbers to explain themselves under oath. For example:

Even if Ms. Torres believed that she was infected with HIV AND knowingly or deliberately exposed her unsuspecting victims, Mr. Coleman refused to allow his client to plead to much more than a dismissal.

Once they realized that they had no case, prosecutors reduced their initial offer of fifteen years in state prison to what amounted to five days of unsupervised probation. Although prepared for an acquittal, Ms. Torres agreed to pay a small fine and attended a short class that featured an hour of HIV propaganda.

Although the outcome wasn’t perfect, Torres illustrates how easily criminal HIV cases can be won when defense counsel doesn’t stipulate to propaganda. By forcing prosecutors to prove that HIV attacks cells and causes an infectious disease that someone could actually spread, Torres proved that prosecutors never had a case to begin with.

Despite this win, factually innocent men like Campbell and Padeau will likely spend the rest of their lives in prison for nothing more than accepting an unproven scientific theory.

Although others continue to be charged in various states for spreading this fake disease, Torres shows that – when questioned by competent counsel in uncorruptible courts – the PharmaSluts will prove to be the same clowns that House of Numbers proves them to be.

Requiem for a Loving Mother

The autopsy, pathology, and the clinical data and observation… show clearly that Christine did not suffer from any AIDS indicator illness during the two years prior to her death or at the time of her death. The gross and microscopic examination of Christine lymphoid organs and bone marrow appeared normal. The growth of P. jiroveci observed in Christine’s lungs and other tissues resulted from her treatment with corticosteroids during the 9 days prior to her death

When HIV skeptic Christine Maggiore passed away in December 2008, the PharmaSluts could not contain their elation.

Citing this LA Times report, gay activists and corrupt doctors claimed that Maggiore got what she deserved. What kind of money motivates for-rent professors like John Moore to write something like this on Seth Kalichman’s unscientific blog about a dead mother?

“Maggiore had the blood of thousands of South African kids on her hands after helping persuade Mbeki not to allow the use of Nevirapine to prevent HIV transmission from pregnant women to their children. She is also responsible for the premature death of her own daughter from AIDS. Allowing herself to die of AIDS-related pneumonia was unnecessary, but her culpability in the death of others is what she will be remembered for. Perhaps some of her friends will finally learn a lesson from what happened to her and cease their efforts to harm other people. But I doubt it, considering how crazy her fellow AIDS denialists are.

Moore is the same heterophobe who wrote to another Maggiore friend, “This IS a war, there ARE no rules, and we WILL crush you.”

Although nothing contained in Moore’s stories were true, that didn’t stop fake reporters like Jonny Steinberg or Moore’s South African blogger-buddies from claiming that Maggiore died from AIDS:

Unfortunately, no autopsy was performed on Maggiore’s body, and she was cremated. Presumably, her family made these decisions. AIDS denialists often claim that they are victims of conspiracies and cover-ups. But they have been anything but transparent in the way they have handled the horrible and unnecessary death from HIV/AIDS of Christine Maggiore.

Unfortunately for these rent-a-PhD propagandists and fake journalists like Anna Gorman, Alexandra Zavis and Adam Feuerstein, an autopsy was done. But unlike the politically rushed job by Los Angeles County Deputy Coroner James Ribe, pathologists David M. Posey, MD and Mohammad Ali Al-Bayati, PhD, DABT, DABVT have completed their eleven-month investigation into Christine Maggiore’s death and found that, like most allegedly HIV+ patients and millions of other Americans, died from complications related to preventable adverse drug reactions (ADR).

I kept Maggiore’s autopsy confidential so that the pathologists would not be influenced or pressured by someone from within the LA County Department of Health like Walt Senterfitt. While I have nothing against gay atheist anti-capitalist social revolutionaries per se, I’d rather not have them dictating healthcare to LA County’s 11 million residents or risk having them pressure doctors into faking evidence that John Moore and Daniel Kuritzkes MD can use for propaganda the way Moore and Kuritzkes did in 2006:

Christine Maggiore is a person who’s proselytized against the use of antiretrovirals to prevent HIV/AIDS. She’s a classic AIDS denialist, and she gave birth to a child who died at age three late last year of an AIDS-related infection. The coroner’s report clearly reports that the child died of AIDS.

Had Dr. Ribe reported the obvious signs of anaphylactic shock in 2006, Moore and Kuritzkes could not have exploited the death as AIDS-related the way they exploited Christine’s death this past year. After Christine’s death, Dr. Ribe settled her family’s claims against him.

This is why doctors Posey and Al-Bayati quietly and methodologically took eleven months to collect the evidence and complete their report.

Other excerpts:

Christine was a well developed and well-nourished Caucasian woman who appeared younger than her age of 52 years. She measured 66 inches in length and weighed 145 pounds…

Christine did not have interstitial pneumonia and the edema observed in her lungs resulted from her heart and renal failure induced by medications.

The autopsy, pathology, and the clinical data and observation described in this report show clearly that Christine did not suffer from any AIDS indicator illness during the 2 years prior to her death or at the time of her death. It has been reported that Christine’s serum was tested positive for HIV with subsequent testing indeterminate in the 1990s. The clinical findings in Christine’s case clearly challenge the clinical and scientific validity of the HIV test, if it is intended as a certain marker of gradual immune demise, which she did not manifest. (full report here)

Celia Farber comments as well.

HIV Scam Revealed by Discoverer Montagnier

BREAKING NEWS – The drug industry pushes ineffective drugs and vaccines because they cannot profit from good nutrition or clean water – so says Nobel Laureate (2008) and HIV Discoverer Luc Montagnier, MD in this just-released video.

As I explained last Saturday, if the world learned today that HIV is no longer a threat, the financial and political beneficiaries of HIV and AIDS would no longer be needed and the CDC and NIAID have no rational reason to exist.

Since 1955, infectious disease has been statistically irrelevant (chart), so why does the Centers for Disease Control waste half of its $9.2 billion budget on HIV and immunizations?

House of Numbers shows audiences around the world that, without the hysterical fear of infectious disease, PharmaSluts on the government dole would have to find real jobs – which is why the documentary now poses an existential threat to these overpaid slugs.

At the start of the movie, Donald Francis MD claims that HIV “kills everything” and, at the documentary’s conclusionthe discoverer of HIV and Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier MD concludes:

Montagnier: We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected… our immune system will get rid of the virus within a few weeks if you have a good immune system.

Brent Leung: If you have a good immune system then your body can naturally get rid of HIV?

Montagnier: Yes.

Brent Leung: If you take a poor African who’s been infected and you build up her immune system is it also possible for them to also naturally get rid of it?

Montagnier: I would think so…

While the lamestream media slept through Montagnier’s simple CURE FOR AIDS, the usual suspects accused the filmmaker of tricking (sucker-punching) the world-acclaimed scientists who appeared in the film. In response, Leung posted this additional clip, which added:

Montagnier: I would think so… It’s important knowledge, which is completely neglected. People always think of drugs and vaccine.

Brent Leung: There’s no money in nutrition, right?

Montagnier: There’s no profit, yes.

Still, this wasn’t enough for the pharmaceutical lawyers who ghostwrote Jeanne Bergman’s revised arguments. Although they acknowledge that the “discoverer of HIV” is “clearly not a denialist,” the lawyers that defend drugs like Benoxaprofen and Vioxx used Bergman’s rent-a-PhD to claim Leung “sucker-punched” Montagnier with “leading questions.”

To satisfy the PharmaSluts, Brent Leung has now released this never before seen exclusive video of his interview with Dr. Montagnier.

As you watch it, ask yourself these questions:

  • Did the filmmaker fool him? Did Montagnier look “sucker-punched?

  • Did Montagnier have a good command of the English language?
  • Why does Montagnier smile at the end of the interview?

House of Numbers Upsets Corrupt Scientists

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Over time, investigators learn how to identify common characteristics of criminal behavior. Whether the suspect is a lawyer, longshoreman or pharmaceutical company, the cues are often the same. Though some are as subtle as a heartbeat, one does not need a phlebotomist to hear them.

Despite the preventable deaths and injuries to thousands of trusting patients each year, billion-dollar drug companies routinely pay off prosecutors with profits bled from their victims. In 2009 alone, Eli Lilly and Pfizer paid billions to settle criminal charges and, despite the death and injuries, not a single executive went to jail.

Like common crack and heroin dealers, drug companies are friendlier to customers than to those who ask tough questions. If drugs like Sustiva and Nevirapine offered something more than a addiction and death, drug makers wouldn’t have to pay the activists at TAG, TAC and AIDSTruth to attack those who question their schemes with tactics taught by Marxist radicals.

Conceived in 1981 by shady scientists (who faced unemployment) and gay men (who refused to accept blame for their self-destructive behavior), AIDS was marketed as an existential threat to humanity. This 1983 report alleged that the number of AIDS victims was doubling every six months which, if accurate, would have claimed the lives of 100 billion people a decade ago.

Though my original investigation presents a synopsis of what has always been a political disease, no one has captured the high priests of HIV in flagrante as well as the documentary House of Numbers. In some ways, filmmaker Brent Leung has exposed them much the same way that Hamlet identified his father’s murderer.

Hamlet’s Play

As Shakespeare explained, Hamlet was suspicious. Weeks after the king’s sudden death, his mother (Queen Gertrude) married Claudius, Hamlet’s uncle. Hamlet suspects that Claudius murdered the king to marry his mother and ascend to the throne.

While suspecting is one thing, proving it is quite another. To expose the crime, Hamlet commissions a play to reenact the king’s death in hopes of pressuring Claudius to admit his crime. If Claudius and Gertrude are innocent, the play will have no effect. But if they are guilty, their responses will corroborate it.

As expected, Claudius is furious and plots numerous schemes that, in the end, expose the crime and leads to the demise of Claudius and his morally-confused queen.

Like Hamlet’s invention, House of Numbers exposes HIV causation and policy as something akin to Queen Gertrude’s illicit marriage.

Like Claudius, lab rats like Robert Gallo and John Moore are “shrewd and conniving in contrast to the other characters”:

Whereas most of the other important men… are preoccupied with ideas of justice, revenge, and moral balance, Claudius is bent upon maintaining his own power… Claudius is a corrupt politician whose main weapon is his ability to manipulate others through his skillful use of language. Claudius’s speech is compared to poison being poured in the ear—the method he used to murder
Hamlet’s father

Like Queen Gertrude, gay activists like Richard Jefferys, Walt Senterfitt, RN, MPH, PhD, and Jeanne Bergman PhD are:

… defined by (their) desire for station and affection, as well as by (their) tendency to use men to fulfill (their) instinct for self-preservation — which, of course, makes (them) extremely dependent upon the men in (their) life…

After initial refusals, the soft-spoken film student convinced one of the lab rats to agree to an interview, which resulted in a procession of lab rats who couldn’t resist the opportunity of having their egos stroked on the big screen with other scientific frauds. Unfortunately for them, no one memorized their alibis and the interviews of the planet’s most incandescent AIDS scientists and researchers quickly devolved into a food fight of he-said-she-said conflicts that culminated in Jay Levy’s impassioned five minute argument with himself. If not for the part they continue to play in the preventable deaths of thousands of people like Joyce Hafford, the ensuing hijinks would have been comical.

Like Claudius, the lab rats were so enraged that they drafted and signed this letter weeks before the film was released. Their queens joined them and issued thousands of libelous emails and letters to pressure film festival managers to censor the film.

Despite the pressure, House of Numbers has won ten awards at festivals around the world despite a few predictably ghostwritten attacks in the lame-stream media. After rave reviews at London’s Raindance Film Festival, The Spectator (UK) published Neville Hodgkinson’s expose, while political editor Fraser Nelson asked about the legitimacy of questions related to the link between HIV and AIDS. The ensuing comments (171 now) not only captured the rational comments of skeptics, but also the rage of apoplectic lab rats and the queens who defend them.

In this comment, Cornell’s John Moore argues:

I’m one of the scientists (the legitimate ones) that Leung deceived into appearing in this shoddy film. He used Sasha Baron Cohen-style tactics to sit in our offices and disguise his true agenda…

Whether questions were asked by Cohen or Leung, what possible impact would their questions have on the truthfulness of Moore’s responses? Although Leung did not pose as Kazak or a hooker, he elicited Moore’s honest answers the same way that Hannah Giles exposed ACORN. While Moore might’ve been friendlier to a man in heels, he fails to explain how Leung’s straightforward questions deceived him. Moore continues:

- an “honest investigation”? Yeah, right….. Leung is an AIDS denialist, pure and unadulterated.

Using Rule 13 of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, Moore 1) Picks his target and attempts to 2) Freeze It, 3) Personalize It and 4) Polarize It.” Like Galileo, Leung is a heretic – a non-believer of Moore’s deadly theology. Moore continues:

And his multi-million dollar and its promotional budget was paid for by a few wealthy AIDS denialist backers that Leung consistently refuses to identify…

This from the militant bagman whose servile complicity with the makers of HIV drugs and tests has resulted in illness, death and millions of dollars in pharmaceutical grants to his employer. Moore wants them identified so that fellow lab rats like Daniel Kuritzkes MD, who coaches journalists in the fine art of character assassination, can apply Rule 13 to them as well. In one speech, Kuritzkes complained that denialists like Peter Duesberg “still work in universities” and urged that they be “denied access to students and reported to authorities whenever possible.” Said Kuritzkes, “If this happens in your neighborhood ask the university authorities why they allow this and then write about it.”

Moore continues:

The film itself is deliberately edited to make AIDS scientists look bad, and to create controversy where none lies.

Although Moore’s lab rats issued the same allegations weeks before the film debuted, none have offered a single example – terrified of the filmmaker’s repeated offer to post uncut interviews so that viewers can decide for themselves. Like their political complaints of Prof. Duesberg’s scientific report, the lab rats can only blog their contempt. After 20 years, Duesberg’s paper remains unanswered.

Moore’s whining continues:

And of course Leung’s friends are made to look wise and thoughtful, honest questioners of the truth, when the reality is very, very different.

Wiser and more thoughtful than Moore?

Like I say, it’s Sasha Baron Cohen in action…… But of course this film is no comedy intended to entertain; its effect will be to cause yet more people to become infected with HIV and die of AIDS.

Moore’s arguments fail. Despite the unsupported numbers produced by profiteers, HIV is hardly noticed in the US or Africa (chart). Compared to a century ago, infectious disease is statistically nonexistent. But if we consider that AIDS consumes three-quarters of all US medical research funding despite its statistical non-existence, we can understand why the lab rats and queens believe that the political disease that funds America’s gay movement is more important than fighting real diseases like diabetes and heart disease. (chart). Moore concludes:

There’s much material on the AIDS denialists, who they are and what they do, posted on the AIDS Truth website. Read it and weep that such crazy and evil people can still influence others to make poor choices with their lives. And pay particular attention to the pages on “The denialists who died of AIDS”.

If we consider why HIV is so important to corrupt African regimes we will understand why HIV is so important to the Marxist South African propagandists at AIDSTruth.

As a career criminal investigator with nearly 30 years of experience, House of Numbers may be the most important documentary of the 21st century. Although I’m not a virologist, criminal behavior is less mysterious.

While Claudius, assorted lab rats and queens like Moore assume that ordinary people are too stupid to figure it out, the documentary and a review of the The Spectator comments will allow readers to decide for themselves.

Another Nobel Laureate Exposes AIDS Clerics

As if Nobel Laureates Walter Gilbert, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling and 2600 other nominees, investigators and scientists weren’t enough, 2008 Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier MD has broken ranks to expose HIV and AIDS as little more than a pharmaceutical marketing scam. As one of two alleged co-discovers of HIV, how clerics like John Moore and others defend themselves from Montagnier’s charges will be interesting to see.

Montagnier: We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected… our immune system will get rid of the virus within a few weeks if you have a good immune system.

Brent Leung: If you have a good immune system then your body can naturally get rid of HIV?

Montagnier: Yes.

Brent Leung: If you take a poor African who’s been infected and you build up her immune system is it also possible for them to also naturally get rid of it?

Montagnier: I would think so… It’s important knowledge, which is completely neglected. People always think of drugs and vaccine.

Brent Leung: There’s no money in nutrition, right?

Montagnier: There’s no profit, yes.

While the documentary House of Numbers (HON) continues to shock audiences around the world, pharmaceutical marketers continue to incite the gay inquisition against the film and those who promote it. As described in previous reports, most of these crystal meth radicals are supported by the makers of HIV tests and drugs and predators like George Soros who exploit them.

In many ways, HIV has become the de facto religion of the radical gay movement that parades under the pretext of human rights – as if cross-dressing, gay sex and crystal meth somehow equate to the abolition of slavery.

The AIDS Church requires believers to evangelize Robert Gallo’s unproven assumptions about HIV (1, 2, 3, 4) and subject themselves to a baptism of HIV tests. Once confirmed, believers receive a sacramental cocktail of highly addictive psychotropic drugs and DNA inhibitors so that members can suffer and die for their church just like Jesus.

Thankfully, the vast majority of men and woman (gay and straight) know better than to subject themselves to the church’s social marketing schemes – which may be why the Academy of Education Development and pharmaceutical companies are now paying ex-celebrities like Blair Underwood and Magic Johnson to target their own vulnerable communities.

Montagnier and Gallo are only two of the highly paid clerics who make fools of themselves throughout the documentary. It would be comedic, except that these clerics are complicit in the deliberate and unnecessary sickness and death of millions around the world – drug-caused mortality that continues to be used to perpetuate a fake epidemic that the American Medical Association cannot substantiate.

Years from now, researchers and students will watch recordings of those clerics with the same fascination we now share for humanity’s other historical monsters. Our amazed progeny will ask themselves, “How could millions of people around the world fall for such a transparent lie?”

Coming to a film festival near you.

House of Numbers: Stunning!

“A stunning piece of filmmaking!”

That’s what Canadian filmmaker and Raindance Film Festival founder Elliot Grove said this week about Brent Leung’s documentary House of Numbers. Having worked on 68 feature films and over 700 commercials, Grove knows what he’s talking about.

Objecting to the wasted resources and union bureaucracy that prevents aspiring filmmakers from getting their features off the ground, Grove moved to London in the late 1980s and launched the Raindance Film Festival in 1993 – a festival devoted to independent filmmaking and its emerging talent. He has written books about, and lectures on, screenwriting and filmmaking throughout the UK, Europe, North America and Japan. In 1992, he set up the training division of Raindance, which offers nearly two dozen evening and weekend master classes on writing, directing, producing and marketing films.

After the film’s screening, Grove said:

I’ve just come out of screening of House of Numbers Brent Leung’s film… I hadn’t seen it until now. I was a bit skeptical because of all the furor around the film that has swirled around Raindance, but I’ve gotta say that it was just a stunning piece of filmmaking…

In another coordinated attack on free expression, the pharmaceutical industry’s marketing goons tried to pressure Grove into spiking the film:

We were flooded with hate mail, emails, legal letters couriered from the States from all sorts of people threatening us and accusing us of being prissy and smug about showing this film obviously from people who obviously hadn’t seen it accusing this film of being an “AIDS denialist” film and I’ve just seen the film and it’s obviously not an “AIDS denialist” film at all. It’s just a brilliant piece of filmmaking – journalistic filmmaking which, anyone who takes the time and effort to see it should completely re-examine their view of the whole AIDS/HIV question… I think history is gonna be re-written or should be re-written and perhaps this… film is one of the first steps.

This explains why the makers of deadly AIDS drugs and dangerously unreliable testing kits are so fearful of Leung’s film. Grove wasn’t deterred:

Regardless of the topic… as the way the film was put together, the journalistic approach and the skill of the filmmaking, the post-production, the music and everything reminded me of a British documentary… called Man on Wire… I’ve got to say that Brent’s film, House of Numbers was right up there – and Oscar season isn’t far away… It’s extreme, it’s honest… a really good piece of filmmaking.

Hollywood Gumshoe has posted more on the film here.

Pharmaceutical Giant Charge Critics with Genocide

When the survival of South Africa’s (SA) mining industry now appears to hinge on their ability to blame their laborers’ costly mine-related lung diseases on irresponsible sex, the financial connections between South Africa’s mining industry, government regulators and university researchers is becoming clear.

Because strategic mining operations depend upon our ability to cheaply mine defense materials like gold, platinum and uranium, the US government shares a powerful incentive to promote the “irresponsible sex/HIV” mythology rather than support the historical claims against the SA mining industry.

The latest evidence comes from Farber lawsuit defendant James J. Murtagh MD who recently posted this email about possible criminal prosecution of the so-called AIDS denialists:

Starling new evidence that AIDS denialist Peter Duesberg and his supporters may be liable for vast human tragedy. I hope that other denialists including Gil and Ullberg will read this carefully. I hope Gil and his gang will repent. Time may already have run out.

Attached to Murtagh’s email was this commentary by AIDS Truther Nathan Geffen, which reads in part:

From 1999 to 2007, (Thabo) Mbeki and his Minister of Health Manto Tshabalala-Msimang obstructed and then undermined the implementation of highly active ARV treatment (HAART) and prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV in the public health system. Two studies, conducted independently of each other, conservatively calculated that over 300,000 people died because of Mbeki’s AIDS denialist policies.

Edward Mabunda was one of them. These studies could not account for additional deaths due to the promotion of quackery, often with the health minister’s support. They also did not consider the number of infections that occurred because of the confusion generated by the insipid state-funded prevention campaign and the messages by some outspoken Mbeki supporters dismissing the link between sex and HIV infection. The Mbeki era also fostered a profound mistrust of scientific medicine, the consequences of which also cannot be quantified.

What, if any, repercussions should be there for those responsible for this tragedy?

Geffen ponders various possible criminal charges and venues citing studies, all written by South African researchers who just happen to also be directly or indirectly funded by the SA mining industry, US pharmaceutical companies, investors and/or consultants to those industries. Some of those reports are published by the National Institutes of Health.

As I described last month, RMIT professor Jock McCulloch used portions of the Leon Commission Report (1995) to explain the incestuous relationships between the SA mining industry and research community which:

… shared the same research focus and a common source of funding through mine revenue. They also shared the same personnel, as key researchers moved between one sector and the other. The same men served on state commissions and departmental committees, and represented the Chamber at public inquiries. That made it difficult for an individual to confront the mining houses over the dust hazard…

While the slippery relationships between the genocidal post-Apartheid groups AIDS Truth, Treatment Action Campaign and the pharmaceutical industry and investors were exposed last month, Murtagh’s latest email and Geffen’s report produce one more financial/pharmaceutical connection.

The report footer indicates that it was published by the newly created Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiancy Syndrome (JAIDS.org), which is managed by co-Editors in Chief William Blattner (who just happens to be the co-founder of Robert Gallo’s Institute of Human Virology) and acclaimed AIDS researcher David Ho.

The website’s domain name registrant is the international investment powerhouse Wolters Kluwers, which generated ~$5 billion in 2008.

According to WK’s 2008 Annual Report:

Wolters Kluwer had 2008 annual revenues of €3.4 billion, employs approximately 20,000 people worldwide, and maintains operations in over 35 countries across Europe, North America, Asia Pacific, and Latin America…

The division is organized into four market-centered business units – Pharma Solutions, Medical Research, Professional & Education, and Clinical Solutions – to serve the information needs of its customers.

Their product Pharma Solutions:

… provides a wide range of data and analytic capabilities, marketing and publication services, business intelligence products, and diversified consulting services to support life science professionals and the pharmaceutical industry, from drug discovery through distribution, as well as government agencies and other healthcare sectors

… The unit was awarded multi-year pharmaceutical data contracts, including a long-term agreement with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)… and a multi-year partnership with Bristol-Myers Squibb to provide Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) – compliant prescription sales data to measure business efficiency, control costs, and determine sales force effectiveness.

Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) is the manufacturer of  Sustiva (Efavirenz), which is so highly addictive that African children are now smoking it like crack.  Sustiva’s addiction-withdrawal syndrome also appears to produce symptoms that AIDS clinicians identify as the onset of AIDS.

Because BMS faces significant liability regarding the Sustiva snafu, they have good reason to partner with a damage-control publishing company like WK and children of Apartheid like Nathan Geffen who, with the assistance of very creative legal counsel (probably from WK), threatens real scientists like Peter Duesberg with false charges of genocide.

As an investigator, Geffen’s commentary appears to be one more propaganda piece that fits well with the genocidal post-Apartheid organizations that exploit Africa’s cheap black labor force for mining operations, leaving them with mining diseases, false HIV diagnoses and highly addictive and deadly AIDS drugs.

It is also possible that Geffen’s propaganda is the beginning of fabricated documentary evidence that Murtagh and his co-defendants may try to use to defend themselves from Ms. Farber’s lawsuit – even as they try to distance themselves from him.

Either way, Bristol-Myers Squibb has much to explain.

Morality, Courage & SSI Membership

SSI recently received this email from someone who identified himself as a physician and wants to refer SPR victims to Semmelweis:

Please post this to everyone involved in this running feud. I used SSI when I was having my career ruined. Now I don’t know where to send fellow health care providers to when they are getting their lives ruined in a sham peer review. All the clinics and hospitals will use your fued (SIC) against you in court and discerdit (SIC) SSI. Shame on all of you for what you are doing. Both sides of this SSI fued (SIC).

Dear Doctor:

SSI believes that your question is important. As requested, we have posted your email and this response on our website.

If you are mugged and you defend yourself, the casual observer might conclude that you and your mugger are equally and shamefully immoral. Reasonable people know, however, that your morality is not based upon the pedestrian’s casual observations. By raising the specter of shame, you are either profoundly misinformed or are practicing the intellectually lazy doctrine of Relativism. If either is the case, I encourage you to join Dr. Murtagh’s cohorts.

If you read my preliminary investigation and my ongoing investigation you’ll see that “the dispute” began in May 2008 when ex-SSI members James Murtagh and Kevin Kuritzky issued outrageous allegations against UC Professor Peter Duesberg and investigative journalist Celia Farber, with the intent to compel the SSI Board to summarily rescind their 2008 awards without review.

Their complaint called for a competent independent investigation because, if false, their libelous allegations could have professionally harmed both (per se libel) and would have unnecessarily subjected Semmelweis and its Board to unnecessary liability.

As a retired member of the LAPD and licensed investigator who had not heard of the issues, disputants or SSI before 2008, no one was better suited to examine the charges. As soon as I began my investigation however, Murtagh’s camp tried to pressure me into stopping it – going as far as criminal attacks and witness intimidation.

My continuing investigation eventually developed sufficient evidence for this New York Supreme Court lawsuit against and Murtagh and Kuritzky, who are still hiding from process servers. Their co-defendant receives, directly and indirectly, millions of dollars in funding from pharmaceutical and mining companies (and their investors) that avoid billions of dollars in liability by blaming their impoverished black African miners’ silicosis, asbestosis and tuberculosis on “irresponsible sex” (e.g. AIDS). Murtagh, his co-defendants, hedge fund operators, pharmaceutical companies, international mining companies and the UN promote the scam as a “human rights” issue in order to sack Africa’s rich mineral wealth while attacking individuals like Farber and Duesberg who question the arrangement.  Without AIDS, thousands of international mining operations in Africa would close – as they almost did in 1995.

So outrageous were Murtagh’s charges that even his collaborators recently distanced themselves – calling him morally repugnant.

If Murtagh’s allegations against Farber and Duesberg were true, he would enthusiastically respond to the civil charges against him - just as SSI did after Ralph Bard filed his frivolous lawsuit against SSI last December. Because of our fact-based response, Bard’s own neighborhood court will soon dismiss his complaints.

So as you can see, the two sides consist of 1) the current board and membership, and 2) “Murtagh’s camp” which libelously tried to rescind the 2008 awards to Duesberg and Farber without evidence – in what anathematically resembles “sham peer review.”

If you read my bio and investigation you’ll see that I have better things to do than keep the peace between SSI and a tiny group of socially dysfunctional ex-doctors.  But as a victim of retaliation myself, I never targeted others for personal gain. Murtagh’s camp demonstrates that not all peer review are shams: Their behavior only serves to corroborate whatever allegations were once made against them.

My year-long examination concludes that SSI, its membership, mission and goals are too important to turn over to alleged men who attacked SSI on behalf of individuals like Murtagh and Kuritzky.

What also appears to animate Murtagh’s camp is SSI’s refusal to advertise legal services by ex-doctors. The SSI Board stopped this practice last year when they sensed that SSI’s former ex-doctor-lawyer board members were exploited SSI’s website, name and members for personal gain.

Since those lawyers were removed from Board influence last year, SSI has assisted more than a dozen physicians and nurses with free legal consultation and affirmative defense that has saved their careers at a minimum cost.

Because of the complications of HCQIA and peer review, SSI no longer promotes the use of career doctors who become lawyers for the same reason that we would not encourage surgery by a career lawyer who becomes a surgeon. When it comes to peer review cases, experience matters.

If you’re still confused about what you’ve called our shameful dispute, SSI probably isn’t for you. Our mission and goals are too important to waste time with Murtagh cohorts or those who are easily confused by them: Nor do we waste much time thinking about them. Like other benign pathologies, they will eventually slough off or find softer targets.

As a former US Marine and LA cop, I am proud that the SSI Board stood strong in the face of Murtagh and his enablers. Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis knew that courage often exacts a terrible price.  Of courage, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote:

A decline in courage may be the most striking feature which an outside observer notices in the West in our days. The Western world has lost its civic courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country, in each government, in each political party, and, of course, in the United Nations. Such a decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling groups and the intellectual elite, causing an impression that the loss of courage extends to the entire society.

SSI membership is not for the morally confused or ambivalent. While it takes courage and endurance to fight corrupt multi-billion dollar healthcare and pharmaceutical industries, it would take comparatively little effort to accept the material benefits that would come by surrendering to them in the name of patient safety and Semmelweis.

As long as there are some healthcare professionals who take their Hippocratic Oath seriously, I am proud to remain in that fight.

Clark Baker
Secretary/Treasurer
Semmelweis Society International

Soros Goon Attacks Dead Mother with Dead Baby

After decades of decline, the war on infectious disease was all but over by 1981. Faced with severe budget cuts, scientists had to make up a pandemic or sell shoes at Macy’s. So when a tiny group of gay men succumbed to their toxic misbehavior the scientists had their pretext.

After nearly three decades of self-serving research and a trillion wasted tax dollars, AIDS has never been identified as a leading medical cause of death and two large prizes for proof of HIV and AIDS causation remain unclaimed.

In the latest sign that the wheels are falling from NIAID’s little red propaganda wagon, Apartheid’s mercenary offspring are starting to get reckless.

In the past 45 days I have reported that:

Because of these revelations, investors who support groups like TAC and AIDSTruth are pressuring other financially-compromised university researchers like Seth Kalichman, Steven Siegelbaum and Cornell’s John Moore to promote the propaganda.

In the latest attack, TAC-funder George Soros directed Jonny Steinberg (one of Soros’ well-paid but scientifically incompetent South African shills) to propagandize AIDS in the pseudoscientific magazine New Scientist. Soros appears to have chosen Steinberg and NS for the same reasons that Gallo picked a security guard to investigate his career in HIV research.

NS’ reporting is so sloppy that when science fiction writer Greg Egan noted its combination of a sensationalist bent and a lack of basic knowledge by its writers, the editor admitted that NS is “an ideas magazine (that writes) about hypotheses as well as theories.” Unfortunately, NS rarely makes that distinction for readers who must speculate about the accuracy of its reports and the qualifications of its guest writers.

Like Nick Kontaratos, Kalichman, Bergman and the rest, Steinberg parrots the milk-fed propaganda – this time blaming the death of Christine Maggiore and her daughter on her scientific skepticism. It was no surprise that the truthers reflexively praised Steinberg – just as Gallo’s esteemed scientists praised Gallo’s security guard.

This incompetence was NOT an “accidental oversight” by NS.

Although the story and shills like Kalichman and truther Nick “Snout” Bennett accused Maggiore of killing her baby (160+ comments now), investigative journalist Liam Scheff posted a comment that NS viewed as unfit for its pages.

Ask yourself what was inappropriate about Scheff’s remarks?

I am wondering why the writer, Jonny Steinberg, focuses on one mother, who may have simply been a bad mother, or someone who didn’t know much about health, instead of focusing on the dozens to hundreds of deaths buried in the AIDS drug Uganda trials?
Or in the death by AIDS drug of tens of thousands of people over the years, as the drugs have been cycled down and down and down in dose, (often to no improvement in health, that is they still kill the patient)?
Mr. Steinberg, will you try, for your next article, to contact Jonathan Fishbein, who lost his job and career for blowing the whistle on the NIH fraud in Uganda? Will you talk to the family of Joyce Ann Hafford, who was killed by Nevirapine, or by anyone whose friend or relative died on any AIDS drug?You paint a one-sided picture, and it reeks of pay-for-play. You have no previous articles in New Scientist, and one is left to wonder what your motives are?
The political attack arm of the AIDS industry infiltrates media and creates smear campaigns in order to deflect from the hundreds and thousands of tragedies, errors and crimes perpetrated by the AIDS pharma industry, in selling its wares to the public.
Journalism is supposed to serve the public good by putting a light on the dishonesty of institutions. You have uncovered, badly, what was already in public view – a woman with some health issues and many enemies has died. There are sufficient political reasons to think that she was killed, but that question is never raised.
She was hounded by the AIDS pharmaceutical industry, and many prayed loudly and openly for her demise and downfall, and death, for over a decade.What effect will that have on a human body?

I do not have the details necessary to answer the questions of Christine Maggiore’s fitness or lack of fitness as a parent. I would say she was perhaps too zealous or highly naive in taking such a political stand against such a juggernaut.

On the other hand, please see the cases of the tens of thousands who died on high dose AIDS drugs in the 80s and 90s. Please review the Uganda trial. Please review the case of Joyce Ann Hafford, among others, and put some perspective in your histrionic and political article.

Dangerous words indeed.

In this case, NS found it easier to kill Scheff’s comment than admit their magazine posts unproven and unscientific hypotheses and theories.

If HIV/AIDS was a scientific disease, the proof would speak for itself. But as a political disease, US Government agencies like NIAID refer inquiries to AIDSTruth in the land of Apartheid, where the mountains of Africa’s dead miners continue to grow. So much is at stake that hedge fund managers like Soros now pay the offspring of Apartheid to beat the dead woman with her dead child.

The role of the Ford and Tides foundations and Soros Hedge Fund also explains why pro-Soros websites like Huffington, Daily Kos, TruthOut and MoveOn entirely ignore this 30-year controversy and their complicity in the mine-related genocide of Africa’s poorest and most vulnerable people.