The Failure Of HIV & AIDS Dissent.

I have decided to edit some parts of the original piece in view of the fact that some points I made (rather naively) regarding certain Doctors, could be interpreted as siding with one faction against another one, as respective doctor's supporters argue about their theories and classify everyone as friend or foe.

I reject the idea of factions and above all any association with any of them. I respect everyone’s input and feel they should all respect the fact that for many of us defeating AID$ Inc. is what's important, not who has the gratest theory on AIDS, which is a political construct and nothing more. I personally maintain that if any theory is going to stop AID$ Inc. it will be a political one, and then again, it will have a lot more to do with will rather than theory.

The Failure Of HIV & AIDS Dissent

This is not a “gay” perspective.
It is a “human” one.

There is a brilliant couplet at the start of the excellent film by Stephen Allen HIV Fact Or Fraud that goes something like:

“The war on AIDS has failed not because it never found a cure.
The war on AIDS has failed because it never found the cause.”

Well by that same criteria one can say the same thing about the AIDS Dissent Movement. After more than twenty years it has failed to get the establishment to listen. Even worse it has also failed in getting the people to listen or even to be interested. Why? After dedicating an entire year to look into a very wide range of material backed up by some direct contact with different aspects of the dissent movement, I will try to venture forth some answers to that question, and hopefully raise some more along the way as well.

The dissident movement has failed to get the establishment to listen because it failed to accept that the establishment is behind the whole lie. It has also failed to get the people interested because it tries to present this as a great tragedy for science when in fact it is an incalculable tragedy for people. No one cares about science. Time always takes care of scientific disputes, and anyone who knows anything about history knows that. Some within the movement call Gallo and Co. “criminals” responsible a “fraud” that now operates as part of a more global “agenda” to perpetrate “genocide”. For others in the movement this language is “counterproductive”. However, when you take into account all that has been perpetrated in the name of HIV & AIDS, the mere idea of adopting a “sanitized AIDS dissent lingo” seems to many a little obscene. I think sanitising language is the same as “political-correctness”. I find that very unsettling when I think of how that has been used in the HIV=AIDS debate, which has been to stall debate and create smoke-screens. Sanitised-AIDS-dissent-language also smacks of the “old boy network”, a seeming anachronism in a dissent movement, until on closer contact with some elements within it, you see that it is a language that obeys and supports an established structure. This seems to keep it all under apparent consented control. When you come into contact with some of these elements, there is a feeling that you are being tested or groomed to follow a line, a language, where you could serve a very specific purpose that is chosen for you. If you refuse to comply, or you disagree, you will be suddenly and abruptly ignored and shut out of the club in punishment. These elements keep the debate within the movement firmly with the doctors centre stage, whilst the “humanists”; who are the ones who really helped us not crack-up under the horrible shock of finding the truth behind the HIV=AIDS paradigm, but they have been relegated throughout this whole dispute to play the equivalent of the colourful (but secondary) role of the “Chorus” in a Greek tragedy.

These elements still fail to see that this is not a scientific issue anymore. This is a social and political one. So why is the main emphasis in dissent in general still on science? We are all extremely grateful for the vast amount of scientific theory this dispute has generated over the years, however as ordinary people we inevitably tend to lean more towards the works of Christine Maggiore or Stephen Davis, who through their accessible works have shown us all how to take on face-to-face the ONE and ONLY question we need answered from science: What do the so-called HIV tests prove? We all know Science/AIDS Inc. cannot answer that one without getting into a complete mess. We all know that the HIV=AIDS hypothesis is a load of bull excrement. Better: plain “voodoo”. That’s all the science we need to know. The doctors should have moved off centre-stage a long time ago. The real problem has always been in the political, social and human realm, where the devastation wreaked on peoples minds and lives is palpable. There again we need Maggiore, Farber and Shenton, Lauritsen and Young, Ellner and Crowe, Russell and Pasquarelli, Hodgkinson & Davis, Scovill & Allen, so people can understand the human, social and political motives behind this fraud that has been perpetrated against them, and lots and lots of Mark Weinberg, so people can also see and hear in whose hands they have relegated their health. The last thing we need are more doctors with scientific theories that do not take into account that we don’t even need them. Some even declare now that AIDS can be cured. Great! But who the hell has AIDS? The “classic AIDS”, who has that? This is obviously not applicable to AIDS in Africa, the situation AIDS Inc. has created there is even more sordid and shattering. AIDS Inc. will redefine our understanding of the word “genocide” by the time they have finished in Africa, if they are not stopped.

HIV & AIDS Dissent in Spanish is also something rather alarming but for different reasons. Why is the entire debate in the Spanish-speaking dissent world almost entirely on “curing” AIDS? Here people only have scientific theories to calm their fears and anxieties. No “humanist” material at all to help them understand that there is nothing wrong with them. Nothing! Theories on “oxidative semen” and “viral counts” and lymphocytes, and special diets; it’s crazy. The Spanish-speaking forums where people meet to talk and find out information are desperate places: “AIDS-zones” but without a virus which makes it all the more insane as everyone still thinks they are sick, and no one or nothing to tell them that there is nothing wrong with them. Again people are suffering the consequences of doctors holding the debate on science, and no one else wanting to take the responsibility that comes with knowing, that in over twenty five years of the HIV=AIDS lie, it was with the help of the “humanists” that we survived and never the doctors, and that no real advances in helping people can be pretended without the “humanists” and their contribution to this tragedy. Why is the Spanish-speaking world being made to go through this unnecessary ordeal, when it could and should be avoided? Everyone knows that you cannot just give people scientific theories. It’s a disgrace that when you look for material to point people to you only find addresses to some private practice. So in the Spanish-speaking world there is nothing available for people with a highly probable false unreliable HIV+ diagnosis, except the most detailed documents on how AIDS can be cured. What do these people have that needs curing? Spanish speaking AIDS seems to declare itself able to cure what many have spent years telling us we did not develop through testing positive. Australian AIDS dissent does this too. No wonder people get confused. This is a lot more difficult to explain to people than the simple “fraudulence” behind the HIV test. That’s when it all starts to look and sound like a Feydeau farce. The only problem is that no one is laughing. Except maybe AIDS Inc.

As far as a cure for AIDS goes, the only real cure people need would be to help them see that that HIV=AIDS hypothesis is a plain deliberate lie, another one in a growing list of lies lthat assault us from all directions; a virus from within, terror form without, and God or Mother Nature who are now going to make us all “globally fry”. It is part of something much bigger where maybe doctors have little to do. Call it what you like but it’s there and plain to see for those that want to or can. I’m not even sure this is just about AIDS anymore. Keeping the debate on “cures” is futile and misleading and makes no logical sense at all. It keeps people firmly in the idea that they are sick. Why else would you need a cure? It should be seen a wholly wrong by those who hold the basic belief that: “no one” is “anything” on the strength of “that test”. The only thing we need to cure is our mind from this “voodoo”, this deadly belief. We don’t need cures for AIDS. AIDS is a construct, a belief. Nothing more. I thought that everyone agreed on that!!

This is not a tirade against doctors. I admire and applaud their personal and scientific contributions to this issue and the courage in speaking out in the face of great opposition and even ridicule.

The final question on the nature of the dissent movement that had been bugging me for along time now was; why was the net littered with pages of individuals speaking out over the years, trying to warn people of the danger of the HIV fraud? So many people have known over the years. Have they lost interest? Most would seem to prefer to think that they did. But I am yet to meet a single person who understood the truth behind the tragedy of AIDS enough to speak out about it that has been able to sleep well since then. People don’t get bored with something like the HIV lie, it has a far too lethal effect on our lives to “toy” with it. I don’t know people who have “toyed” with this. People either look it in the face, or they just look the other way. I did notice however that in some cases the efforts of certain individuals and certain groups is referred to in derogatory terms through posts and memos over the net, that when pieced together could leave one thinking that there is a kind of process of selection one has to pass to be in or out. Maybe all those people just didn’t pass, so now they remain silent.

Who Am I?
I am a forty-three year-old gay man. I have a fifteen year-old positive (whatever the hell that means) diagnosis. I stopped treatment a year ago after seven years of retroviral chemotherapy, and have never looked back. I do no viral load or CD4-counts as it’s all just an insidious, twisted “Church of AIDS” ritual designed to keep your head full of imaginary viral debris. There is nothing wrong with me now nor was there ever. I don’t believe it anymore. I have got rid of the “voodoo” just by looking it in the face, and the only virus I saw was in my head, I didn’t need to take any antioxidants for that either, except green tea on ice a couple of times a day as one more drink I take when I am thirsty. I work hard at times long hours and live pretty normally, I smoke and drink beer or red wine occasionally, I eat everything that Mediterranean cuisine has to offer, I take no recreational drugs or steroids or “gay ghetto/lifestyle” trappings of any kind as of a number of years now. And I have no problem at all admitting that any health problems I may have in the past were directly related to the abuse I was subjection my body to at the time. I am a classified member of a “high risk” group, and I am fine with taking NOTHING, because I believe nothing about the HIV & AIDS construct anymore. I have seen how the science behind it is laughable and how it worked just like “voodoo” on my (then) “stupid” mind. Now I see it as something deliberate, criminal, fraudulent, corrupt and full of lies and deceit. It is pure concocted evil.

I am convinced that if this “paradigm from hell” had been left for the “humanists” to fight out, it would have been all over and done with years ago. As Michael Ellner would say:

“Is there a better explanation?”

I am more than eager to hear it.
Manu.

This letter has been sent to the following list of persons asking them for their comments in response to the questions raised in the piece: Rev. Michael Ellner-HEAL NY, Christine Maggiore, Peter Duesberg, The Perth Group, HEAL Toronto, Celia Farber, Alex Russell, John Lauritsen, Ian Young, Robin Scovill, David Crowe, Stephen Davis, Stephen Allen, Etienne De Harven, Joan Shenton, Harvey Bailey, Michael Geiger, Mike Hersee-HEAL London, ACT UP San Francisco, ACT UP Toronto, Roberto Giraldo, Monarcas Mejico and Paul King -Dissent Action among others.


Comments
David Crowe said...
I think that the difficulty combatting the HIV=AID$=Death dogma is that it is supported by a multi-faceted establishment, including scientists, doctors, media and politicians. I agree with you that change will not come from them. Science won't magically self-correct. Change will come from the lobbying of people who have educated themselves on the scientific flaws in HIV/AIDS. It's important to have scientists speak out, but that will never be enough. We need HIV-positive people to stop taking the drugs, gay men and Africans to refuse HIV testing and drugs. We need people to bravely speak out.

The dissident movement clearly has not succeeded, but the day it succeeds it is no longer needed. We have made progress though. Every person who refuses HIV testing, stops or doesn't start the drugs, who talks to other people about this issue, is a success. And gradually, like drops of water on a step, we are eroding the establishment paradigm. Hence the anger and frustration of people like Moore and Wainberg, and the need for Gallo to testify in Australia.
6/18/2007 12:03 AM

Mike Hersee HEAL London said...
Very well articulated, Manu. Essentially, I can boil the reason we have been unsuccessful into a very simple notion: Those who have discovered a different AIDS paradigm tend to be truthseekers, where new information is given equal priority to old information when being analysed. Most people tend to filter new information through their existing beliefs.

Where we've gone wrong is that most of us have tended to assume that people we are trying to reach think in the same way as us, they simply don't have the facts. That is why we have failed. What we have to do is understand not just what other people think, but how they think, and target our approaches that way.

And seeing as most people spend far more on entertainment than they ever do on education - heck, most people spend more money on alcohol than they do on education - we have to make some educational entertainment.
6/19/2007 6:08 PM

Terry Dobbbin ACT UP TORONTO said...
Well said manu! We all need to laugh at this silly construct. Your right most people don't care about the science or understand it. HIV is political.
6/20/2007 1.50 AM

How do we know if the dissident movement has failed? We simply don't. We never set any real goals to begin with so can we really say we failed. There has never been a collective agreement among dissidents about the direction we should take and this may be good. Most of us are free thinkers. Its all a process and I believe the universe always supports the truth and bravery. Everything is working out as it should. We have to trust in the process and just never give up and get frustrated or bitter. There are many other movements facing the same force ( ie 911, global warming..) we are and together we can change the world. WE ARE DO IT!!!! Look at the change that has happpen. Embrace the positive.
6/24/2007 6:18 PM

John Lauritsen says...
Manu, I agree with your conclusion, which is eloquently expressed. HIV=AIDS=DEATH is indeed a "paradigm from hell". It really is "something deliberate, criminal, fraudulent, corrupt and full of lies and deceit ... pure concocted evil."
I have written repeatedly that the prevailing AIDS paradigm is not just an unfortunate mistake, but rather a war -- a war against gay men. It is iatrogenic genocide.
Certainly we AIDS dissidents have not won the war, and perhaps will not in our lifetimes. But, in a struggle of David against Goliath, Goliath usually wins, at least in the short run. An important point is that censorship of AIDS dissent is ruthless and all-pervasive. There are some cracks in the Wall of Censorship, but not all that many.
Many of my articles are now on the Internet. Two books -- The AIDS War (1993) and The AIDS Cult (1997) -- are still in print. After a decade of procrastination, I have finally put together a personal web site, which has a few AIDS pages, including the full text of the 1986 book, _Death Rush: Poppers & AIDS_.
http://paganpressbooks.com/jpl
John Lauritsen
6/24/2007 2:55 PM

Michael Ellner Tom DiFerdinando HEAL NY say...
Bravo Manu!
I am confident that your essay will help many see the light. And every time another person gets it - We are all one step closer to exposing and putting an end to this murderous fraud.

I agree -- The "Dissident Movement" must completely free itself from the "AIDS Zone" before it can help others see the light.

Of course, it's easier said than done because in order to wake up from the “AIDS trance” we must fully understand at least five things: noninfectious diseases and the conditions associated with developing them; the US Public Health Service’s history of viral etiologies and sexual terrorism; the greedy, arrogant and market-driven nature of modern medical science and its toxic medications; the mass media and manufactured consent; and the psychospiritual dimensions of health, mass-hysteria and high-tech “bone-pointing,” particularly in the gay community and among gay “AIDS activists,” past and present.
Michael Ellner
6/24/07 7:34 AM

Christine Maggiore says...
From my experience, I've noticed that most scientists have a practical and methodical way of thinking and addressing their concerns about AIDS, and that some are less connected to the human aspect of AIDS and more connected to the biology.

I also see that doctors among us are addressing the fact that some HIV positives are ill and need help, not because of HIV, but for reasons that would make just about anyone in like circumstances ill. I believe their focus on healing comes from their desire to be healers and I don't see any doctor on this side of the issue making money from patients, talks or books. Like me, they are investing huge amounts of time and energy into their efforts to help, to make a difference.

I understand your frustrations about how experts in science, medicine and humanities tend to stay in separate orbits but I don't see this as intentional or motivated by ill will.

I hope you will continue to be a voice of love, sanity and self empowerment.

With big hugs,

Christine.
6/27/07 2:09 AM

Darin Brown from AIDS Wiki says...
Hi, Manu

I just read your post of the "failure of HIV and AIDS dissent".

"There is a brilliant couplet at the start of the excellent film by
Stephen Allen HIV Fact Or Fraud that goes something like:

“The war on AIDS has failed not because it never found a cure.
The war on AIDS has failed because it never found the cause.”

Well by that same criteria one can say the same thing about the AIDS
Dissent Movement. After more than twenty years it has failed to get the
establishment to listen."

The establishment will _never_ listen. They only understand the logic of
force/violence -- and by "force/violence", I don't mean physical
force/violence, I mean political force/violence. They will only listen
when the political forces threaten them -- when public sentiment is
strong enough to threaten their funding and their profits -- when
millions of people refuse to be tested, when millions of people refuse
their drugs. _THAT_ is what they will listen to. _THAT_ is why they are
frightened today for the first time in 20 years; this is the first time
they have been seriously challenged.

"Even worse it has also failed in getting the people to listen or even
to be interested."

The people are the _only_ people who have a hope of listening, as I said
above.

"The dissident movement has failed to get the establishment to listen
because it failed to accept that the establishment is behind the whole
lie."

I think it's a bit more complicated than that, unless you take a really
broad definition of "establishment". There are powerful psychosocial
forces at work, that go beyond economics.

"It has also failed to get the people interested because it tries to
present this as a great tragedy for science when in fact it is an
incalculable tragedy for people. No one cares about science. Time always
takes care of scientific disputes, and anyone who knows anything about
history knows that."

Focusing too much on the scientific tragedy is a problem. I think this
is probably because a lot of the people involved in AIDS dissent are
themselves scientists, and so science is a very personal issue for them
and they do feel the "scientific tragedy" on a deep personal level --
simply imagine how you would feel if you saw the subject of your life's
work corrupted and plundered for profit. But most people are not
scientists, so they don't share this personal feeling.

As far as scientific disputes always resolving, I don't think
comparisons with the past are apt. Never in the history of the world has
the scientific enterprise been as enormous and powerful as today -- not
just economically, but spiritually, in a sense. Its hegemony is almost
complete.

"These elements keep the debate within the movement firmly with the
doctors centre stage, whilst the “humanists”; who are the ones who
really helped us not crack-up under the horrible shock of finding the
truth behind the HIV=AIDS paradigm, but they have been relegated
throughout this whole dispute to play the equivalent of the colourful
(but secondary) role of the “Chorus” in a Greek tragedy."

I'm sorry you've had this experience.

"These elements still fail to see that this is not a scientific issue
anymore. This is a social and political one. So why is the main emphasis
in dissent in general still on science?"

Well, there is one reason I can think to still spend some time on
science (although not the "main emphasis"): and that is that 99.9% of
the world does look to the AIDS establishment for "scientific" reasons
to cling to their HIV beliefs, because they still see it as a scientific
issue. They [the establishment] are then forced to respond to specific
arguments (by Duesberg, Perth, etc.) and their responses can be very
clever, clever enough to satisfy someone wanting to cling to their
beliefs. Not responding is interpreted as not having an answer.

Also, there are constantly new papers and "research" coming out claiming
to answer the dissidents once and for all, or claiming to resolve some
paradox about HIV. Almost all of these do just the opposite. I feel we
_must_ respond to these papers; this is why I spent so much time on the
Rodriguez paper last fall.

"the ONE and ONLY question we need answered from science:What do the
so-called HIV tests prove? We all know Science/AIDS Inc. cannot answer
that one without getting into a complete mess."

Yes, that's the crux of it all.

"and lots and lots of Mark Weinberg, so people can also see and hear in
whose hands they have relegated their health."

Yes, I know a few people who were motivated to question HIV just because they were shocked to hear Weinberg speak.

"AIDS is a construct, a belief. Nothing more. I thought that everyone
agreed on that!!"

I thought so too recently...but I've encountered a few dissidents since
then who seem to disagree.

"The final question on the nature of the dissent movement that had been
bugging me for along time now was; why was the net littered with pages
of individuals speaking out over the years, trying to warn people of the
danger of the HIV fraud? So many people have known over the years. Have
they lost interest? Most would seem to prefer to think that they did.
But I am yet to meet a single person who understood the truth behind the
tragedy of AIDS enough to speak out about it that has been able to sleep
well since then."

There are different reasons. I think loss of interest is rarely one.

Burnout is probably the most common reason. The second most common
reason is probably just that someone feels they have contributed all
they have to offer. Another big reason is life circumstances -- people
often have things happen in their life that simply preclude the time and
effort involved. This can be anything from going to graduate school,
caring for ailing relatives, raising a family, starting a new career,
moving, etc.

Darin
6/29/07 3:43 AM