Regarding Jeanne Bergman's "alleged" doctorate, UC-Berkeley verified that she was granted a Ph.D. in anthropology in Spring 1997.
But I would still call her out for asserting that New York's foster care system and Incarnation Children's Center were "compassionate" in giving minority children -- some as young as newborns -- "access" to drug treatments they clearly did not want to take. (Follow the link to her letter at http://www.rethinkingaids.com/Co.../Default.aspx.)
These drugs were already, as she notes, tested on adults. And as a result of this testing, they already carried FDA "black box" warnings.
So I need to know if Dr. Bergman still qualifies as a feminist "human rights activist" after taking this position. And if she can produce even one family or child who is grateful for "access" to these drugs by having their kids taken away, I will publish their account. I'm not hard to find, by phone or e-mail.
Readers can see my concerns about these drug trials and the incomplete investigation of them at www.AskdeBlasioWhy.com. Would Dr. Bergman object to the release of the medical records that would make this investigation complete? Or, as a human rights activist in New York City, will she work for their release as well, to prove that 200 kids died of "AIDS" and not the drugs?
I welcome her answer.
It amazes me that that anyone could find any credibility with aidstruth.org.
The 'dead dissidents' section is enough to turn off any human being with an ounce of compassion or empathy. It's just so very crass and disrespectful. It's meant to evoke an emotional reaction. Unfortunately for the 'truthy' crowd, the emotion is evokes is revulsion toward their "cause".
Clark,
Murtagh sounds pretty desperate in the pdf link( http://www.cwbpi.com/legal/Murta.../
MurtaghTAC.pdf )you provided in his emails to Gil. Man he really hates you from what I see in the emails and he seems so very desperate to get Gil to join this TAC group. Whats is that all about?
contd...It amazes me that that anyone could find any credibility with aidstruth.org. If you have ever dealt with anyone that has anything to hide, its easy to see why these people are always on the defensive. I have had one of these goons send me and my wife emails under a fake name. Like I have no idea who it is????
Joe
Clark,
I took your advice and emailed NIAID this question: "Can you please send me the document that shows who, when, where, and how HIV was proven to cause AIDS?"
They replied back with this (if you notice down near the end, They included www.aidstruth.org as one of their references):
NIAID Office of Communications and Government Relations
to me
show details Jun 16 (4 days ago)
Reply
Follow up message
This is in reply to your inquiry dated June 15, 2009, to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), concerning HIV as the cause of AIDS.
We believe the overwhelming evidence provides testimony to the role of HIV in AIDS. You may wish to review the NIAID documents related to HIV as the cause of AIDS. An overview is presented at http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/topics.../
connection.htm, with a link to additional information at the bottom of that Web page.
Additional information can be found at the independent Web site http://www.aidstruth.org/.*
We hope that this information is helpful.
Sincerely,
Correspondence Specialist
Legislative Affairs and Correspondence Management Branch
Office of Communications and Government Relations
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
* We have provided you with this link to the above non-government Web site for your convenience. The NIAID is not responsible for the availability or content of this external site, nor does the NIAID endorse, warrant, or guarantee the products, services, or information described or offered at this Internet site.
Clark: hit piece? you've arrived.
Or really stuck your hand in a hornets' nest this time! ;o/
I've been reading your blog since back before when, and watching the development of your output. Like a few other more public figures I could name, "attack pieces" are demonstrably false just on the face of the characterization of the person under attack. Those who have read you for longer than "Gallo's Egg" would see through any such attack(s) instantly.
Cheers.
As far as the 'aidstruth' crowd and ICC go...
The "truthies" engage in much Orwellian language, and the AIDS skeptics don't always catch them on it. When it comes to the drugging of orphans at ICC, the "truthies" will say that the kids are receiving treatment. This is a lie.
The children are being experimented on. This is the very nature of drug trials. The kids are NOT being 'treated' for their "HIV infection". They are being observed for reactions/effects that result from their drugging.
Treatment and experimentation are two different things.
[con't]
She finishes by claiming that the individuals using orphans in drug trials without permission are 'heroes,' and those who are opposed to the practice, are essentially Holocaust Denialists. She never did talk with any of the children, as I did, or mothers, or nurses and child-care workers, as I did, as Celia Farber did, as even the skunky reporter from the Village Voice managed to do...but she knows, prima facia and without possible doubt or error, that she is correct, and there can be no other opinion but hers in the discussion.
Where do you go with rhetoric like this? The question is not even to be asked, in her worldview: "Should small to grown children, and teens, who are wards of the state, children of drug addicts, be experimented on in the orphanage that's sworn to protect them?"
"Well, of course!" Is her answer. But read it yourself. She invents most of what she states, as is the habit with Aids'truth.' She never contacted me for a quote or to ask after any of the children, or mothers, or even check up on my reporting. She also accuses Maggiore of faking her diagnosis, more or less.
They surely changed their tune, didn't they?
Bergman was also the whip in the attack on the BBC, which was trumpeted loudly by John 'monkey vagina' Moore:
Pit-bull Bergman:
http://liamscheff.com/daily/2007...s-on-a-scandal/
Monkey-lover?
http://liamscheff.com/daily/2007...ke-thalidomide/
See the linked articles for descriptions of John P. Moore's fascination with monkey vaginas, and shoving drugs into them.. and then applying this 'science' to actual, living African women, who, as a result, turn up "HIV positive."
Does he then qualify, in AIDStruth jargon, as a "murderer?"
bests,
Liam Scheff
Clark, that's a keeper. My word, you're really on a roll.
So, that was Bergman, screaming at Celia Farber in Tennessee - but not revealing her identity? That's 'science' in action, I suppose.
You can read Jeane Bergman's hate screed about children and how they should have no choice or voice in how they are to be drugged here (in her own insane words):
http://nypress.com/18/25/news&co...mns/
bergman.cfm
"Should children of two or even 12 years get to decide if they will or will not take their medicine? Of course not,"
She then gives the rationale:
"...particularly when irregular dosing may result in drug-resistant HIV."
Yeah, well, "regular dosing" may result in death. May, can, has, does, and God help them, will. And that's as well-known as it gets.
By the way, isn't "drug resistant HIV" just AIDS-crazy speak for "The patient is getting really sick despite the fact that we're drugging them to hell with these liver-killing, skin-peeling Black Box drugs?"
Oh well, I'm not the 'expert' Bergman is. If I were receiving gobs of pharma money, like Moore or Wainberg, or the rest of them, maybe I'd understand 'HIV' better. (No, I'd probably still be the asshole who thinks that "informed consent" is something that still belongs in medicine).
She continues:
"All responsible parents and caregivers understand that children can't make crucial life-and-death decisions for themselves, and the law recognizes this fact too: that's why legally children can neither give nor withhold medical consent."
Yes, three cheers for children's rights. Drug 'em without permission - and that's what happened. But she's not bothered a wit by the experiments on babies, on HIV negative and indeterminate children, on children from "4 to 22 years old" with "7 drugs" at one time, "some at higher than usual doses." Seven drugs, each with the FDA's Black Box label:
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct...001108?
order=30
What 'responsible parent' would give her own child seven Over-the-Counter drugs At One Time? At "higher than normal doses?"
Anyone? Anybody?
Nope. You'd be strung up on one of the CNN squawk shows for weeks for doing that to your own child.
But this is what happens in the face of the miserably flawed and overstated "HIV test diagnosis." A sheer and senseless panic takes over, and all compassion, all humanity is flushed from the body... and it's just 'Attack! Attack! Drug! Drug!' And woe be to anyone who dare utter a word of caution or complaint.
Or, to put it like this:
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passion, without mercy."
Bergman goes on to compare Black-Box labeled AIDS drugs ("can and have caused death"), and the practice of force-feeding them to children, to 'cherry flavored NyQuil.' (That's her little joke in the piece).
[con't]
I agree with you, mostly, with the exception of the gay movement being funded by AIDS, Inc. ...
If anything, AIDS, Inc. has corrupted the gay liberation movement, stalled it, contaminated it. Imagine how heartbreakng it is for gay people who recognize what it is that has occured. The dead from the AIDS chemo drugs may be just numbers to you - to us, though, they were our friends, lovers, heros, and mentors...
I think Wacky Zachie Heart-Attacky, started taking all these wonderful ARV's until he had a heart attack himself -- at age 43.
http://www.thebody.com/content/a...nt/
art8640.html
Of course, rest assured, it wasn't from the drugs:0
I wonder if he still takes them....
Great writing, Clark.
Like Gallo's Egg, this one's a keeper!
Commenting by HaloScan
