by Liam Scheff
John P. Moore, of the New York Times, and of Aidstruth.org, on his approach to discourse and debate in science [Here ]:
- “AIDS Truth’s approach is to destroy (by public exposure) the “leadership” of the AIDS denialist movement and thereby prevent them from causing the deaths of people who for various reasons are prone to believing the lies the denialists peddle for political reasons, including the profit motive.”
First, there is no “Aids denialist movement.” This is a term Moore has invented to describe those have pointed to the massive, blood-soaked failures of the standard Aids belief system, and pleaded for a new plan of attack on the many problems that “Aids” represents and stands in for.
Second, the profit motive belongs, solely, to the mainstream. Nobody is getting rich by asking GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, or Bristol-Myers-Squibb to stop poisoning poor, Black children with their very profitable, internationally distributed and hawked drugs.
He continues:
- “We know this approach is working, as we win every individual campaign we decide to fight (we don’t always publicize our successes, only when it suits us to do so).”
Moore, the “scientist” we’re supposed to trust, runs hard-core “campaigns” against those who would like to challenge a failing medical paradigm in public debate.
- “The hard core denialists don’t like our strategy, because it’s so effective, and because they are not used to their own tactics being used against them (although, unlike the denialists, we don’t use immoral or illegal activities like cybercrime, threats, libels, etc, etc – the truth speaks for itself, and is sufficient).”
The AidsTruth “strategy” – Writing an endless stream of letters and press-releases to newspapers, to Deans and department heads of universities, to broadcast news agenices, slandering and libeling any and all professors, doctors, scientists, journalists, researchers, patients and private citizens who cite the ten thousand contradictions in the Aids paradigm, and who are asking – begging – for an opening up of the paradigm for reconsideration.
I think “letting science speak,” is a great notion. On the other hand, Moore (and his cabal at Aidstruth.org), systematically refuse to debate those they attack. They state that they are on the side of “Truth,” and that everyone and anyone who opposes them (or their wishes), for whatever reason or reasons, is on the side of “the denialists.”
Moore says that “Aidstruth” doesn’t libel. But that’s all they do, because they won’t debate. They excuse themselves from their responsibility to face those they indict. They run like the cowards they are. (Ask them to debate anyone of the people they libel; we’ll arrange it the moment they find the cajones).
They don’t libel, but the word “Denialist” constitutes libel. Equating someone who points to the ten thousand published flawsin a dangerous medical paradigm, with someone who denies the Nazi state’s murder of millions in death camps, is a profound, and intentional, libel. Its intention is to terrify anyone and everyone from looking at the statements or research of those they denigrate, for fear of being labeled a “denialist”, too, in newspapers, press releases, and on the web.
They don’t threaten, says Moore, but “Destroying the leadership” constitutes a threat, when it is enacted by letter-writing smear campaigns against academics and researchers at Universities, who lose their jobs or their academic and intellectual freedom to challenge dangerous paradigms and to alert the public to flaws in policy.
Moore states, regarding patients who have been failed by standard “Aids drug” treatments:
- “I have no comment to make on the person/people you refer to, as I don’t know enough about their personal histories, and I don’t offer SPECIFIC medical advice to SPECIFIC individuals in any case as I’m not a physician. In general terms, the best medical centers and physicians would surely be able to help this person/people find a suitable therapeutic regimen.
This is the same John P. Moore who claims that orphaned children should, nay, MUST be used in government/pharmaceutical drug trials, with three, four, five, six, seven drugs – FDA Black-Box labeled drugs (those that have permanently damaged or killed patients taking them) – at once.
That sounds like specific medical “advice” given to a great many specific individuals. But, “in any case,” he says, “I’m not a physician.” (But that’s alright, most physicians aren’t physicians these days, either).
Moore continues, highlighting his frankly, “denialist” position:
- “I am puzzled by your comment regarding HIV+ status and immune deficiency. The science here is unequivocal and long-established: Not every individual who acquires HIV-1 infection develops AIDS, although the overwhelming majority do so over time.”“Individuals who do develop AIDS progress to that state over a highly variable time course, such that they may well suffer little or no overt immunodeficiency for a prolonged period until they become symptomatic. So, no, HIV+ status is NOT an AUTOMATIC indicator of immune deficiency,
And here is where the record skips. Aids is a name for a thousand kinds of deficiency or excess – wasting or cancer – that occurs in a thousand different environments on earth, for a thousand different reasons. “HIV testing” is a non-specific art, which moves certain groups of people into the Aids drug line.
“Hiv infection,” doesn’t necessarily lead to immune deficiency, says John P. Moore. And so it is.
But that’s not how it goes in the case of the crack-orphans in the Incarnation Children’s Center in Washington Heights. It is not variable, it is not questionable, it is only good for one thing.
Moore and his co-BBC-killer Jeanne Bergman, have decided that all of these children must be “allowed” (forced) to take these “life-saving medications” (that’s FDA Black Box-labeled drugs, to you and me), regardless of their actual health, actual illness, actual response to being on 7 drugs at once, or to any one of the many Aids drug that cause anemia, bone-marrow death, deformity, permanent cellular damage, and then death.
He continues, “So, no, HIV+ status is NOT an AUTOMATIC indicator of immune deficiency,”
- “it’s an indicator that the average HIV+ person will, over time, probably develop immunodeficiency and AIDS,”
Probably. Or maybe not. So, “hiv causes aids?”, I guess, is the slogan.
He concludes, (and here’s where the bread is buttered):
” … unless he or she takes HAART at the appropriate time.”
HAART is an acronym for the many drugs plied into Aids patients – these of the Black-Box label, the organ failure, skin death, developmental damage, wasting, fat redistribution, and fatal anemia.
So, the “appropriate time” for these drugs is when?
The answer? When John P. Moore and Jeanne Bergman say so. Which is now, immediately, and forever (till death do you part), if you’re an infant in an crack orphanage. And then, we should study what happens when we give the drugs to you, seven at a time, force-fed, pushed through a hole punctured in your stomach, by the helpful doctors who don’t want you to miss a dose.
Moore adds:
- “This is not a remotely controversial issue, at least not in serious scientific and medical circles.”
Well, of course it is. It isn’t just a “remotely controversial issue.” It is an acutely controversial issue, especially in serious medical circles, and it has been for 25 years.
The concept of when, how much, and if to drug “Aids” patients, has been and continues to be battled in the medical literature. Look for “Hit early, hit hard,” as a concept in the early ‘90s, that melted away, like the flesh of so many people who took the drugs in large doses, “early and hard.”
Moore isn’t bright enough, or is too corrupt to allow debate on the subject, even within his own party. (If Moore actually read Aids research, from field physicians and researchers, he’d have to call half of them “denialists” for contradicting his central dogma).
Moore is a true-believer. He refuses to allow a contradictory thought to enter – not his, but Your head. Otherwise, he’d allow debate, and he’d have no fear of public response to the ten thousand failures of his central dogma.
He’s just got to scrub the idea of the scientific process from his mind, (and yours too), and he does so by likening anyone who has a brighter idea, to… are you ready?
A “holocaust denialist.” So, if you know how to treat an “Aids” patient successfully, without murdering them with the treatment, to Moore you are, a “holocaust denialist.”
Not clever, but criminal. Moore, Bergman, and their group, are ruining medicine, ruining scientific discourse and medical discovery, and they must be opposed, and they must be challenged; and competition in the field must be allowed to flourish, so that the best ideas are born out, by process. Not by cabal, or attack, or slander, or censorship. But by competition in the field, which currently takes a “denialist” position to anyone who doesn’t uphold the party line.
Long live competition, and choice; and today especially, may they be born again in science and medicine.
See also:
ADDENDUM – John P. Moore Causes HIV Infections:
John P. Moore, of the Aidstruth drug cabal, leads the way in destroying African lives:
“Trials of two vaginal microbicide gels to prevent HIV led to more infections among those using the products instead of placebos.”
But don’t worry, they’ve got “new” microbicides ready to go. (But not really “new,” just old HIV drugs shoved into people’s privates, instead of their stomachs).
Leading the way in the research? The basis for this line of thinking seems to be this 2003 monkey trial, (published in Nature“led by John P. Moore, Ph.D., of the Weill Medical College of Cornell University in New York City.”
Funny coincidence, huh? Destroying lives in Africa, destroying lives in Washington Heights. To borrow a quote from Kanye West, “I guess that John P. Moore really doesn’t like Black people.”
No comments:
Post a Comment