First, we have Cliff Kincaid, with a nice right hook to the flabby mid-section known as AIDS Inc. with an aptly entitled piece -- The AIDS Vaccine Project has Failed.
We couldn't agree more, Mr. Kincaid:
In total, the U.S. has spent about $200 billion on HIV/AIDS-and an AIDS vaccine-since 1981.
$200 Billion? Thatsa lotta sheckels! And what do we have to show for it, I ask? Well, crack stenographer NY Times Reporter, Scary Larry Altman elaborates:
Altman also said that "Although more than 30 experimental H.I.V. vaccines have been tested in people, only one has completed full-scale testing. That vaccine, Aidsvax, made by VaxGen, failed in a large trial that ended in 2003."
You mean more false promises, billions thrown down a rathole, and abject failure in AIDS science? Say it ain't so, Shlomo!
Kincaid closes with a nice little nugget at the end:
An HIV/AIDS vaccine could be made mandatory, for children as well as adults, despite the fact that some experts still insist that HIV doesn't cause AIDS, and AIDS tests can be extremely unreliable.
Hmm. Must a conspiracy or sumptin';)
Next, we have a stiff upper-cut to the glass jaw of AIDS, Inc. from Michael Fumento, writing in that Right-Wing rag, The American Spectator. His piece -- exploring the moribund International Yawn Fest in Toronto -- declaims, most sensibly, I must add, that, No, We Don't All Have AIDS. We like the clarity of this point made by Fumento:
Seriously, this bit of propaganda is but one illustration of how efforts against AIDS have always been handicapped by politics. Nobody really believes we all have AIDS. But many have bought into the "Everyone is at risk" nonsense, which clearly works against targeting those truly at risk.
Yes, it most certainly is nonsense of the highest order. Recall the figure of 272 AIDS cases in all of Canada last year! Fumento continues:
These figures are from an agency that itself has grossly exaggerated the world AIDS threat. For example, in 1998 it estimated that 12% of Rwandans age 15-49 were infected; now it says it's only 3%. Whoops. On the other hand, other agencies had estimated a horrific 30% of Rwandans were infected. According to James Chin, a former U.N. official who made some of the earliest global HIV estimates, such concocted figures are "pure advocacy."
Give that feller, Chin, a gold medal for honesty! Of course, none of these lies, bogus predictions, and unbridled advocacy of false data, slows down the money train:
Meanwhile, worldwide AIDS spending averaged $1.7 billion between 2002-2004 but reached $8.3 billion for 2005 and is slated to hit $10 billion in 2007. The size of that pie, and the desire to have a slice of it, is all you need to know to understand how the Toronto conference could attract a stunning 24,000 attendees who have been rightly labeled "the AIDS industry." Nevertheless, insists UNAIDS, that $10 billion isn't nearly enough.
The AIDS industry -- I like that.
New rule: Any person -- scientist, activist, journalist -- who is making $$ from the AIDS Industry oughta be ignored. They are part of the problem, not the solution.
Hank, I cannot even fathom the amount of money that has been wasted on Aids. Think of the good and the hungry mouths that could have been fed with these funds. Rather, it has mainly benefited those who are motivated by greed and not the good of humanity.
When I think of an Aids vaccine, a vaccine for some, almost non-existant bird flu and now young women given shots for another uncertain virus, where will it end? We will all be in the virus of the month club with of course, the remedy being a shot. When will this insanity end. I have to agree with another commenter, we have allowed it to happen.
Posted by: noreen martin | August 24, 2006 at 12:25 AM
The above article by Mr. Kincaid and Mr. Fumento spells out the truth pretty good. Please everyone drop them a note and forward their comments on to others. It's great to see the Rethinkers side of the story getting out there!
Posted by: noreen martin | August 24, 2006 at 08:32 AM
Noreen,
Be careful with Fumento: He has expressed profound hatred for persons who don't think HIV causes AIDS. He has also disseminated (in print) outright lies about Peter Duesberg--claiming that he fabricated data on cancer studies. Say anything wild you wish about Peter Duesberg, but to say that he cooks his data is so vile there are no words.
That said, he certainly nailed it on the subject of heterosexual AIDS so called, in his (banned) book.
I agree with you that the colossal amounts of money wasted are cause for despair. It's hard to fathom.
Posted by: Celia Farber | August 24, 2006 at 09:19 AM
Celia, thanks for the heads-up about Fumento, I'll scratch him off my Christmas list! Anyone who slurs Peter Duesberg's reputation certainly can't be in our camp.
Posted by: noreen martin | August 24, 2006 at 09:41 AM
Folks,
I just spoke to Richard Berkowitz, who I brought up earlier, in the thread about the early history. Richard is a 50 year old gay man who worked as a sex worker throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s in NYC, and co-invented "Safe Sex" with the late Michael Callen, who also was a close friend of mine, and source. I asked Richard if he would come online here and share his EXPERIENCES AND OBSERVATIONS about HIV/AIDS/ the early years, and the burning question of whether AIDS is uni-viral or multifactorial. He has written a book I strongly urge you all to read. It is called: "Stayin Alive: The Invention of Safe Sex."
(Westview)
The title cloaks in some way the harrowing contents of the book. As AIDS history, it is alone in its league, and Berkowitz is a brilliant, searingly honest writer.
I quote from the introduction:
"The almost unbearably tragic truth is that despite all the blaming and finger-pointing we've done in all directions, we held the keys to survival the whole time."
How can we arrange for him to communicate his knowledge here in a way that will be organized?
I suggest that he be interviewed, and I feel that the best format would be, actually, if Mark Biernbaum interviewed him. I will ask Mark, if that's ok with Barnes.
Is Mark still with us here?
Posted by: Celia Farber | August 24, 2006 at 10:38 AM
If there is an interview, I'd be interested in seeing where it goes.
As a gay man who enjoyed as much natural sex as other gay men in the very early 80's, I've found "safe sex" to be just as much a part of this death culture as "AIDS".
The whole psychology of "safe sex" and "AIDS" sickens me to the core. Gay men get hysterical at the mere mention of other gay men having natural sex. If we haven't killed ourselves physically, we've killed ourselves psychically, emotionally and spiritually through our unnecessary fear of "HIV/AIDS" and our self-imposed restriction on intimacy.
Posted by: Dan | August 24, 2006 at 11:02 AM
Dan,
Understood, utterly.
But stay with this: Callen and Berkowitz created something that bears little or no relation to the bowdlerized version of Safe Safe that rose up like a hammer and sicle. (sp?)
They would agree with everything you say--they said the same. Callen and I spoke in depth about the question of intimacy. Berkowitz has wrestled with it too. Their version of Safe Sex is something that was designed for sexually active gay men, and was rooted in a kind of common sense and a certain complexity.
You'll see. I want to let Richard explain it.
But your points are very well taken.
Posted by: Celia Farber | August 24, 2006 at 12:30 PM
Celia,
thanks. I know there's more to the story. I'm expressing my dismay over how this whole thing has killed gay men in every respect. And how we've taken it on as our "duty" to die a physical death, or at the very least a spiritual-cultural death.
I've been unconvinced about "AIDS" since '84. And I'll admit that I harbor some resentment toward all the drama queens who unquestioningly accepted this death sentence. I want it to be over with. But just like it took a consensus to get this nightmare off the ground, it will take a consensus to take it down.
Posted by: Dan | August 24, 2006 at 12:50 PM
Well, Dan, it's going to be a long way towards consensus if you fling prejoratives, like "drama queen" at your own community. Do you think that will bring us closer to consensus? Can you get through writing a comment about gay men without condemning your own community to your own eternal hatred? I fear you'd have very little to learn from someone like Mr. Berkowitz with that kind of attitude. Maybe there would be a better forum for this, Celia. I don't want to see Richard waste his time.
Posted by: Mark Biernaum | August 24, 2006 at 01:27 PM
Well,
I thought my honesty might bring about a comment from Mark. I was right.
Mark, newsflash: gay men call each other "drama queens" all the time. I don't think this is something new that I've done.
Also, I can chew gum and walk at the same time...meaning I can care about gay men and how this has affected us, *and* be angry that we willingly took part in this extermination program.
Posted by: Dan | August 24, 2006 at 01:34 PM
Well, Dan, I'd be more inclined to think that your views on the gay community were multi-faceted if your typical comment was more balanced, like this previous one. The two comments prior to that express nothing but disdain -- so "news flash" back at you -- try expressing some respect for the dead, and I might express some respect for you. And please -- attack me again, I know it's one of your favorite games to play -- as I represent all those "drama queens" you seem to have so much hatred for. I know I'm not dead, but you can still hate me just as much, can't you, Dan?
Posted by: Mark Biernbaum | August 24, 2006 at 01:38 PM
And...I'm done with this discussion. This is not the right audience, Celia. Let's not waste Richard's time here. Now Dan -- please attack, as is your custom.
Posted by: Mark Biernbaum | August 24, 2006 at 01:40 PM
Dr. Biernbaum,
How many times have you withdrawn from "this or that" discussion only to return?
I for one think it is a brilliant idea for you to interview Mr. Berkowitz for publication at Hank's, and urge you to hook it up asap. I believe *all* will find the Q&A between you to be fascinating, informative and very well worth the reading and pondering. There is absolutely no sarcasm in any of this.
Posted by: George | August 24, 2006 at 01:51 PM
Mark,
I've kept my word TWICE now in our little online "battles".
I'll do it again. Here's the deal...
Celia should get Richard Berkowitz here to speak. I won't comment even once. You've got my word, and I've got a good track record at keeping my word.
I do have to say that I tire of you attacking me. Believe it or not, I have respect for the dead, as I've had friends die as well. I want the unnecessary death to end...both the physical and the spiritual. I bet we both can agree on that.
So, can we shake hands on my not commenting on a Richard Berkowitz thread?
Posted by: Dan | August 24, 2006 at 01:51 PM
There's our boy Mark again, posting from his internal rage. Dan, I am sure you realize that Marks remarks have nothing at all to do with you, or what you had posted. It is merely the projection of his own feelings of victimhood and fear, and the anger that he covers these unresolved emotions with and then projects at others. There is no doubt in my mind, that he has been called a "drama queen" many times, and is quite sensitive to hearing or reading the words. It would be really nice if our dear psychologist could perhaps find someone that could assist him in getting to the bottom of his own disdain and rage and fears. We have now all witnessed months of Marks raging antics. Time and again, he lashes out, on this site and every other site under his name or various pseudonyms. A cry for help perhaps. But there are none that can help him until he realizes there is something not quite right here. And until he decides to help himself to get beyond it. Perhaps Mark should work on his own self and fix his own self before he considers himself of much value to assisting others?
Hey Mark! Enough already!
Posted by: Doctor Doctor | August 24, 2006 at 01:58 PM
Hey guys,
Let's try to avoid unnecessary personal skirmishes here and refocus on the two papers by Kincaid and Fumento.
As for the Berkowitz interview, I think it's a good idea.
Hank
Posted by: Hank B. | August 24, 2006 at 02:15 PM
I am going to visit somebody in the hospital so won't be around until late this evening. I didn't want anybody to think I had abandoned. But I do wish somehow we could stop fighting, all of us.
I have asked Richard to jump in here.
Posted by: Celia Farber | August 24, 2006 at 02:30 PM
Celia,
I think we're *usually* pretty well-behaved here. I think we can get back on track though without any problems.
Let's get Richard here. I'm interested to see what he has to say.
Posted by: Dan | August 24, 2006 at 02:35 PM