Celia Farber hopelessly replies

10 December 2009

Dear Val and Eleni,

Montagnier's mea culpas on HIV as putative single cause actually began in or around 1990 (mycoplasmas, co-factors, leaving the Montreal AIDS conference, etc.) I reported on that carefully as long as I had a forum. When I did have a forum, (SPIN, Words From The Front,) I wrote a feature ("column") about your first paper on the HIV test, (Is a Positive WB proof of HIV Infection? in Bio-Technology, which was also re-written for Genetica, which was edited by Peter Duesberg. (!)

Your inquisitions are rooted in the premise that I "ignored" your work.  Now we add the accusation that I was part of a conspiracy of quasi-repression to ignore Djamel Tahi's work.  This is all so bizarre. Why on earth do you care so much what I write or don't write, especially since I am, according to one of your staunch defenders, or perhaps "friends," I am an "embarrassment to the movement."

I am dismayed to discover that you weave your positions from invisible threads. To wit:

1.  You wrote: "...but the next moment you say the dissidents should keep silent about this because it is very hard for anyone to understand such arguments."

Where did I "say" that? Where did I even hint that? Where, when? Please provide citations. To my knowledge, I have never said any such thing. Somebody named Sabine now reports in that she is "angry" and that your letter to me is now on Anthony's website. So now we have rage built on vapor. All of this on a day when the pathology report is published showing that Christine Maggiore had an intact immune system and died of renal failure. (www.deanesmay.com) Guess who "ignored" it?

ALL OF YOU! (aka "the dissidents.") (Go team!)

Glad we have our priorities in order.  I believe that all people are free to react to, write about, and emphasize whatever they have the impulse, strength and inclination to place emphasis on. I don't see myself as a police officer patrolling other people's works and utterances. I don't think this is a movement and I don't think there is such a thing as a "dissident."

So-- Christine's pathology report constituted a yawn, while the tribunal against journalistic blind spots against your work constitutes a higher crime against humanity than even... Che Guevara's documented killings, which your "most admired friend" Anthony Brink sees as pink-hued heroism. See what I mean? How easy it is to mix everything up? My lawn is my lawn. Yours is yours. Etc. I am only answering you because I am desperately curious to read your replies to my questions about where and when you think you are citing me accurately. And so that Sabine might be relieved of her anger, of course.

2. To whom is the quote "The argument being a difficult one to verify currently may not be the best argument," attributed? Why do you throw quotes around so loosely? Why do you conflate emotions, presumptions,  and documented facts? Why do you seem to think I owe you an accounting of everything I WAS EVER ASSIGNED to cover about "HIV/AIDS?" (caps mine. I have made the point before. A journalist must have an assignment. Tahi had the distinct advantage that his editor was Huw Christie.)

3. When you say I invoke a "sexually transmissible retrovirus," did I seem to be speaking from my own estimation or from the vantage point of the paradigm-holders, when I wrote that?  Please offer a citation and the full sentence wherein I used that phrase.

4. When you sarcastically refer to David Crowe as my "most admired friend," you must be referring to the fact that I stood in the way of your most admired assassin Anthony Brink's wild accusations against him. I don't have many 'friends' among what you call dissidents. Mostly, if anything, we share information. There are some exceptions. Christine, for example, was my friend. Friends support one another, unconditionally.

5. Djamel did his work. It was published. It was widely cited and discussed, as all major breakthroughs have been. I cited it and wrote about it, and so did countless others, but most importantly, it was its own proof of its own value. What is it that "we" supposedly "did" to Djamel? Nobody has the power to "do" anything to others, when their work is strong.

6. Why are you lecturing me about supporting Brent? I did. I do. That caused your irritation as well, as everything I say or do or don't say or don't do does. I am on good terms with Brent and I helped him a whole lot on his film and I am proud of his success. Stop creating problems.

7. Do you seriously think I have a hand in some witchy conspiracy of RA's to make sure everybody who speaks of non isolation is wrong and inferior and your work is slighted. Why can't you absorb facts? I documented my efforts to get the conflict between PG and RA resolved in time for one of you to attend the conference. It all failed.

8. You ask: "Does taking on the HIV frighten you, Celia?"

Nothing frightens me anymore. Some things do, however, bore me to tears.

Please trust that I am having a marvelous time in the free world, which I discovered was as close as one psychic foot-step away.