It has now been six months since Celia Farber filed a lawsuit against a Not~For~Profit Charity, T.A.C. What has happened to that very public lawsuit since then is the mystery. Celia Farber called her friends at the New York Post Page Six in order to publicize the fact that she had filed this suit. I wonder why she chose a Celebrity/Social Tell All Site? Is it because no legitimate news organization will have anything to do with Farber? Or is it because, as most of the orthodox said back in May when it was filed, is because it was just a publicity stunt in the first place? It's been three months. The lawsuit has expired. What happened?
The "Investigation"
One thing that I do kow for sure is that at least two of the three defendants were never served. How could that be? After all, they have (in)famous Private Investigator Clark Baker on the case. Clark Baker and his "28 Years of Investigative Experience"! Well, if you can count 20 years as a Motorcycle Cop "investigating" speeders and jay~walkers as "Investigative Experience", that is! And from every post by Baker, he seems to count those years! So, with all that experience, why is it that Baker could not seem to find them to serve them?
Pathetic Attempt One
I can only point to two very creepy, pathetic examples of how Baker P.I. operates. First is a post I did back in June where Baker sent me a personal email trying to manipulate me into giving up these two as if I knew them or their whereabouts. Baker sent me an email of himself with two women on top of Stone Mountain in Atlanta as if he were in Atlanta at that moment. However, I could tell from the SHIRTLESS *swallowing vomit* pic of himself that the pic was taken about twenty years prior since Baker was about 65 pounds lighter in the picture!
http://dissidents4dumbees.blogspot.com/2009/06/clark-baker-smell-his-desperation.html
Desperate Attempt Two
This next attempt is really ridiculous. Clark Baker sent the email below to a long list of people offering a $5K AWARD to anyone who would serve either of the two defendants!
Greetings:
I apologize for (BLANK'S) alarm. I simply offered $5K to anyone who hands this subpoena to him. I never intended for him to wee-wee all over himself. You can read more about the court case HERE.
One of his neighbors will eventually serve him but I'd rather have one of you receive it. If you arrange for a third party to serve him that's okay too. (BLANK) doesn't need to know that you arranged it.
Feel free to contact me privately if you're interested.
Cheers!
Clark Baker CPI #19547
3940 Laurel Canyon Blvd #428
Studio City, CA 91604
www.cwbpi.com (blog)
(800-649-2164 x2500)
Not only is this FURTHER PROOF of what a DOUCHEBAG Baker is, but also of what a horrible Private Investigator he is. Offering money to serve someone, is that legal?
Requests
I have sent two emails to the NY Post requesting the original journalists who "broke" the lawsuit story to follow up and let the readers know what has happened with the suit. They have yet to respond. Feel free to send your own requests to:
rjohnson@nypost.com
scuozzo@nypost.com
I have also sent several requests to Celia Farber herself at her truthbarrier site as well. Needless to say, the only result I have gotten is to have my IP Address blocked!! JEEZ, why do you think Farber would do that? Did she actually think that would stop me?
Hey, here's an idea, how about some of you send Farber a request as well:
http://www.truthbarrier.com/
Final
The lawsuit has expired and Farber is ignoring it. It is just one more example of how these Denialsts can be in denial about anything when it pertains to history!
JTD
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Clark Baker's Blatant Plagarism (and Lies Of Course)
Clark Baker has posted a portion of an article by David France in the NY Magazine as if Baker himself wrote it. Baker does not say anywhere in the post that someone else wrote the article. He merely links to the article NOT as the article itself, but in a throwaway line that most people will skim right over without knowing it was a link to the article that Baker stole from. Why does he do this? Because by plagarizing the portion that he does plagarize, Baker can mislead the reader into thinking the article is about the insidious, toxic killing HIV Meds. In fact, the article is about how the meds extend the lives of HIV/AIDS patients by 20, 30, 40 PLUS years, and in doing so, the chronic use of the meds cause some terrible side effects. Baker comepletely glosses over the FACT that HIV Meds extend lives and change AIDS into a chronic disease instead of a terminal one!
Here is the link to France's NY Magazine article:
http://nymag.com/health/features/61740/comments.html#comment_list_bottom
Here is the link to Baker's Blatant Plagarism:
http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com/2009/11/aging-hiv-patients-have-more-to-worry.html
Let's look at all the lies in Baker's first paragraph. Amazing how the only portion NOT plagarized is the only portion full of LIES: Baker's Bull~Shit in RED:
Now that HIV co-discoverer and Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier admits that HIV is easily cured within weeks with a good diet without HIV drugs, (blatant lie! Typical denialist tactic to mis~quote and mis~lead.)
these deadly and highly addictive AIDS drugs (Baker re~states a blatant lie that I have proven in other posts at this blog that Baker himself MADE UP and provides ZERO PROOF to back up!)
are finally sickening and killing patients in ways that HIV never did - (of course this is a lie! Baker makes this statement in a disguisting, soul~less attempt to diminish the pain and suffering of the millions of people that HIV ALONE killed!!! This is the most disguisting tactic of these fucking Denialists. To not only ignore that fact that millions of people died horrible deaths, but to also dismiss the suffering of those who died as well as the loved ones they left behind is UNFORGIVABLE!)
exposing the corrupt makers of these drugs and the so-called "research centers" at Cornell and Harvard. (This final lie is just a ridiculous, childish ad~hominem attack! ) I have proven time and again that Clark Baker is the most corrupt person I have had the misfortune to know. He was fired for being a Corrupt Cop! He has also proven he is not man enough to admit he made a mistake! God forbid Baker apologize to the victim and his family!! No. That would take a man. A man with integrity. Baker is neither a man and definitely NOT a man with integrity.
Enough said.
JTD
Here is the link to France's NY Magazine article:
http://nymag.com/health/features/61740/comments.html#comment_list_bottom
Here is the link to Baker's Blatant Plagarism:
http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com/2009/11/aging-hiv-patients-have-more-to-worry.html
Let's look at all the lies in Baker's first paragraph. Amazing how the only portion NOT plagarized is the only portion full of LIES: Baker's Bull~Shit in RED:
Now that HIV co-discoverer and Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier admits that HIV is easily cured within weeks with a good diet without HIV drugs, (blatant lie! Typical denialist tactic to mis~quote and mis~lead.)
these deadly and highly addictive AIDS drugs (Baker re~states a blatant lie that I have proven in other posts at this blog that Baker himself MADE UP and provides ZERO PROOF to back up!)
are finally sickening and killing patients in ways that HIV never did - (of course this is a lie! Baker makes this statement in a disguisting, soul~less attempt to diminish the pain and suffering of the millions of people that HIV ALONE killed!!! This is the most disguisting tactic of these fucking Denialists. To not only ignore that fact that millions of people died horrible deaths, but to also dismiss the suffering of those who died as well as the loved ones they left behind is UNFORGIVABLE!)
exposing the corrupt makers of these drugs and the so-called "research centers" at Cornell and Harvard. (This final lie is just a ridiculous, childish ad~hominem attack! ) I have proven time and again that Clark Baker is the most corrupt person I have had the misfortune to know. He was fired for being a Corrupt Cop! He has also proven he is not man enough to admit he made a mistake! God forbid Baker apologize to the victim and his family!! No. That would take a man. A man with integrity. Baker is neither a man and definitely NOT a man with integrity.
Enough said.
JTD
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Thursday, November 5, 2009
India Film Festival Awards House of Numbers "Certificate of Merit" a.k.a. Honorable Mention
Clark Baker's Spin Machine is at it again. At the link below,
http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com/2009/11/acclaimed-director-house-of-numbers.html
Baker posts a review of House of Numbers from Dr. S. Krishnaswamy at India's Global Film Festival. The major focus of Baker's post is to showcase another "award" won by House of Numbers. Baker points out that India gave HON a Certificate of Merit! What Baker hopes people do not realize is that this Certificate of Merit is less than equivalent to an Honorable Mention that a sixth grader would receive for his/her science project! It is just a policitally correct "award" and is like receiving a Blue Ribbon that says PARTICIPANT on it!
Next, Baker makes it apparent that S. Krishnaswamy is a DOCTOR, but fails to mention that he is not a medical doctor nor does he hold a PhD in Science. Perhaps that is why the "review" which I have posted in it's entirety below, reads like a non~scientist who has been swayed by the high quality of the film, but who does not understand that this film is simply a veil between the viewer and the FACTS that HIV does indeed cause AIDS. That is why this film is so dangerous. It is highly effective and accomplished at disguising the truth and therefore misleading those who do not understand science and are afraid and vulnerable.
Below is Baker's post and the review.
Acclaimed director and Chairman of the Jury S. Krishnaswamy has awarded Brent Leung's documentary House of Numbers one of two Certificates of Merit at India's Global Film Festival.
Apparently unimpressed by the unhinged pseudo-scientists of HIV, Dr. Krishnaswamy reviewed the documentary in India's national magazine Frontline:
Notice Baker putting words in the mouth and head of Krishnaswamy: "...unhinged pseudo~scientists of HIV..."
The "review" by Krishnaswamy:
House of Numbers, directed by Brent Leung, challenges the common understanding of HIV-AIDS, with a combination of perceptive research, investigative journalism and a sharp eye for detail, compelling you to change your perspective. One learns that the AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) threat is highly exaggerated. Through interviews with patients, doctors and scientists, the film establishes that the mortality rate among those who receive treatment after testing positive for HIV, or the human immunodefiency virus, is far higher than in people who ignored the diagnosis more than 15 years ago and refused to take the prescribed medicines. Interviews with Nobel laureates and senior scientists reveal that HIV has never been recognised in any laboratory and that all treatment is based on vague hypotheses. The film indirectly suggests that pharmaceutical lobbies have created the threat in the minds of possibly well-meaning but ignorant politicians.
JTD
http://exlibhollywood.blogspot.com/2009/11/acclaimed-director-house-of-numbers.html
Baker posts a review of House of Numbers from Dr. S. Krishnaswamy at India's Global Film Festival. The major focus of Baker's post is to showcase another "award" won by House of Numbers. Baker points out that India gave HON a Certificate of Merit! What Baker hopes people do not realize is that this Certificate of Merit is less than equivalent to an Honorable Mention that a sixth grader would receive for his/her science project! It is just a policitally correct "award" and is like receiving a Blue Ribbon that says PARTICIPANT on it!
Next, Baker makes it apparent that S. Krishnaswamy is a DOCTOR, but fails to mention that he is not a medical doctor nor does he hold a PhD in Science. Perhaps that is why the "review" which I have posted in it's entirety below, reads like a non~scientist who has been swayed by the high quality of the film, but who does not understand that this film is simply a veil between the viewer and the FACTS that HIV does indeed cause AIDS. That is why this film is so dangerous. It is highly effective and accomplished at disguising the truth and therefore misleading those who do not understand science and are afraid and vulnerable.
Below is Baker's post and the review.
Acclaimed director and Chairman of the Jury S. Krishnaswamy has awarded Brent Leung's documentary House of Numbers one of two Certificates of Merit at India's Global Film Festival.
Apparently unimpressed by the unhinged pseudo-scientists of HIV, Dr. Krishnaswamy reviewed the documentary in India's national magazine Frontline:
Notice Baker putting words in the mouth and head of Krishnaswamy: "...unhinged pseudo~scientists of HIV..."
The "review" by Krishnaswamy:
House of Numbers, directed by Brent Leung, challenges the common understanding of HIV-AIDS, with a combination of perceptive research, investigative journalism and a sharp eye for detail, compelling you to change your perspective. One learns that the AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) threat is highly exaggerated. Through interviews with patients, doctors and scientists, the film establishes that the mortality rate among those who receive treatment after testing positive for HIV, or the human immunodefiency virus, is far higher than in people who ignored the diagnosis more than 15 years ago and refused to take the prescribed medicines. Interviews with Nobel laureates and senior scientists reveal that HIV has never been recognised in any laboratory and that all treatment is based on vague hypotheses. The film indirectly suggests that pharmaceutical lobbies have created the threat in the minds of possibly well-meaning but ignorant politicians.
JTD
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Focus on Farber: Hypocrisy and Libelous Comments
There is one thing that continues to astound me about the AIDS Denialists and that is their continuous, constant and extreme hypocrisy! They continually claim that the orthodox make ad~hominem attacks. However, the AIDS Denailists actually do this time and again. A perfect example is Celia Farber's recent incoherent, emotional diatribe in which Farber wrote some incredibly demeaning, inflamatory, ad~hominem attacks and character assasinations at The Spectator UK.
Here's the link:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5461313/questioning-the-aids-consensus.thtml
This first post, Farber states The Spectator Debate was cancelled because the two orthodox reps. cancelled.
Then she calls them a bunch of childish names in a very emotionally stunted diatribe.
Then Farber tells The Spectator "What Journalism Is"!
Later she contradicts ALL of these comments and tries to attribute her remarks to me and others.
Celia Farber
October 27th, 2009 2:14am
Report this comment
The event was cancelled because the two representatives of the orthodox position cancelled over the weekend. One of them cited a sick relative, the other suddenly realized he had to be in another part of the world on that day.
This last minute vanishing act is a well established hide and seek tradition that the orthodoxy has deployed since 1988, with monstrous consistency.
These people are deplorable, pitiful, and detestable. They lie, distort, conspire, cheat, debase, attack, and finally--flee like frightened mama's boys in a schoolyard fight they claim the right (always) to win hands down from a high branch in a tree 3 miles away. All that has happened in 23 years is that every possible method of evasion, McCarththyism, censure, intimidation, vandalism, and obfuscation has been perfected and advanced. And still they remain with their backsides firmly planted on the highest of invisible king's horses.
Even the horses want nothing to do with them at this point.
Stand firm Spectator. You have in no way sinned against journalism. This IS journalism.
In this next comment, Farber berates me because I had commented that Dr. Sonnabend claimed that he did not drop out of the Spectator Debate as she had insinuated. Farber did in fact write that "both orthodox reps cancelled". However, Farber vehemently claims here, and again below, that she did not name Sonnabend specifically. (Well, if you want to get technical.)
What is even funnier (i.e. crazy) is that Farber starts admonishing me for trying to say "What Journalism Is"! WTF? Take a prozac, Farber. You were the one who did that, not me! I was the one who claimed that Celia Farber trying to explain "What Journalism Is" was the funniest thing I had ever heard!
Farber finishes by telling me and others to stop "bullying, cesoring, demaning etc..." Yeah, Farber, are you looking in the mirror while tying that sentence?? Have another prozac.
Celia Farber
October 30th, 2009 6:30am
Report this comment
JTD has once again proven that he can't read. Where did I state that Joe Sonnabend was one of the Disapprovers Of The Film who canceled?
Can't you people stop being so boastful about your censoriousness?
You seek to shut down debate wherever its spirit manifests, because you are horrified at what will become of your self-declared moral superiority when your decades long strangle-hold on the mass mind breaks down. It is that simple and it is quite apparent. Nobody has requested to be controlled or instructed by any of you. Journalism is journalism. It seeks, ideally, to open up, investigate, and resolve distortions that affect people's lives.
Stop telling everybody what journalism is. Stop berating, attacking, demeaning, libeling, bullying, slandering, and censoring.
You've messed up. HIV positive people are the ones driving this revolution. Soon you will have to deal directly with them, when the media ceases to act as your personal body-guard, protecting you from all the very real problems with your paradigm. People are quite clear: There is no shame in this debate. It is necessary and it is happening, whether you like it or not.
In this final post, Farber really goes off the deep end. She throws me aside to berate another poster named Carolyn. Farber once again claims that she never said Sonnabend dropped out of the debate. (But she did!)
Also, Farber really goes after Dr. Sonnabend making some very demeaning, libelous claims! She really comes across as childish and well, crazy! Have prozac number three!
What a hypocrite!
Celia Farber
October 30th, 2009 2:42am
Report this comment
Whoever Carolyn Thornley is, she can't get facts straight.
Do you, Ms. Thornley, mean to state here and now that The Spectator did not cancel this event because of the sudden withdrawal of two orthodox panelists? Did I SAY one of them was Joe Sonnabend? Can we make a bet? I'm ready to post my evidence, if you are. Have we a deal?
In addition: I have countless hours of tapes from the ever shifting but consistently indignant Joe Sonnabend dating as far back at 1988, when I wrote my first lengthy article about HIS multi-factorial theory of AIDS.
I shall put them all up online and then we'll see whether you still find him to be on the side of the angels. I mean, by the way, interviews that date from 1988 through 2001, if not longer.
After that, he became impossibly sycophantic to the orthodoxy.
He has no integrity. I can produce, from my personal files, a letter written by Joe Sonnabend, at the insistence of the decent and lovely Michael Callen, that Joe correct at least ONE act of cloying treachery, which nearly cost me my job in 1991. A TAG operator had forced Joe to sign a letter claiming he never said the things to me that I quoted in an article, about the origins of the heterosexual AIDS hoax (his word.) He was strong-armed by Spencer Cox at TAG into signing a letter claiming I had falsified his quotes. Joe complied. TAG ferried the letter over to Liz Smith, who reluctantly quoted it, later telling my father she knew she was being had...Major heat came down on me from the investors of SPIN magazine. Callen went crazy, Joe started apologizing to me, before I even knew what he was talking about. (This was at the Amsterdam Alternative AIDS conference in 1992.) Sonnabend had to finally write a second letter, which I have in my possession, admitting he was COERCED into writing that letter, and that the quotes I had attributed to him were 100% accurate. Before this correction was issued, TAG had already sent gorgeous flowers to Liz Smith. As for me, like everybody else under Joe's Bus, I forgave him because he seemed so abashed. I even invited him to my wedding.
But he is a weak, dishonest man without any integrity, who loves the sensation of throwing everybody under the bus.
If anybody wishes to see a copy of the letter I describe here, email me at editor@thetruthbarrier.com
Lastly, if someone could request a copy of that letter from Farber I would appreciat it as I am sure she would just ignore my requests.
Thanks,
JTD
Here's the link:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5461313/questioning-the-aids-consensus.thtml
This first post, Farber states The Spectator Debate was cancelled because the two orthodox reps. cancelled.
Then she calls them a bunch of childish names in a very emotionally stunted diatribe.
Then Farber tells The Spectator "What Journalism Is"!
Later she contradicts ALL of these comments and tries to attribute her remarks to me and others.
Celia Farber
October 27th, 2009 2:14am
Report this comment
The event was cancelled because the two representatives of the orthodox position cancelled over the weekend. One of them cited a sick relative, the other suddenly realized he had to be in another part of the world on that day.
This last minute vanishing act is a well established hide and seek tradition that the orthodoxy has deployed since 1988, with monstrous consistency.
These people are deplorable, pitiful, and detestable. They lie, distort, conspire, cheat, debase, attack, and finally--flee like frightened mama's boys in a schoolyard fight they claim the right (always) to win hands down from a high branch in a tree 3 miles away. All that has happened in 23 years is that every possible method of evasion, McCarththyism, censure, intimidation, vandalism, and obfuscation has been perfected and advanced. And still they remain with their backsides firmly planted on the highest of invisible king's horses.
Even the horses want nothing to do with them at this point.
Stand firm Spectator. You have in no way sinned against journalism. This IS journalism.
In this next comment, Farber berates me because I had commented that Dr. Sonnabend claimed that he did not drop out of the Spectator Debate as she had insinuated. Farber did in fact write that "both orthodox reps cancelled". However, Farber vehemently claims here, and again below, that she did not name Sonnabend specifically. (Well, if you want to get technical.)
What is even funnier (i.e. crazy) is that Farber starts admonishing me for trying to say "What Journalism Is"! WTF? Take a prozac, Farber. You were the one who did that, not me! I was the one who claimed that Celia Farber trying to explain "What Journalism Is" was the funniest thing I had ever heard!
Farber finishes by telling me and others to stop "bullying, cesoring, demaning etc..." Yeah, Farber, are you looking in the mirror while tying that sentence?? Have another prozac.
Celia Farber
October 30th, 2009 6:30am
Report this comment
JTD has once again proven that he can't read. Where did I state that Joe Sonnabend was one of the Disapprovers Of The Film who canceled?
Can't you people stop being so boastful about your censoriousness?
You seek to shut down debate wherever its spirit manifests, because you are horrified at what will become of your self-declared moral superiority when your decades long strangle-hold on the mass mind breaks down. It is that simple and it is quite apparent. Nobody has requested to be controlled or instructed by any of you. Journalism is journalism. It seeks, ideally, to open up, investigate, and resolve distortions that affect people's lives.
Stop telling everybody what journalism is. Stop berating, attacking, demeaning, libeling, bullying, slandering, and censoring.
You've messed up. HIV positive people are the ones driving this revolution. Soon you will have to deal directly with them, when the media ceases to act as your personal body-guard, protecting you from all the very real problems with your paradigm. People are quite clear: There is no shame in this debate. It is necessary and it is happening, whether you like it or not.
In this final post, Farber really goes off the deep end. She throws me aside to berate another poster named Carolyn. Farber once again claims that she never said Sonnabend dropped out of the debate. (But she did!)
Also, Farber really goes after Dr. Sonnabend making some very demeaning, libelous claims! She really comes across as childish and well, crazy! Have prozac number three!
What a hypocrite!
Celia Farber
October 30th, 2009 2:42am
Report this comment
Whoever Carolyn Thornley is, she can't get facts straight.
Do you, Ms. Thornley, mean to state here and now that The Spectator did not cancel this event because of the sudden withdrawal of two orthodox panelists? Did I SAY one of them was Joe Sonnabend? Can we make a bet? I'm ready to post my evidence, if you are. Have we a deal?
In addition: I have countless hours of tapes from the ever shifting but consistently indignant Joe Sonnabend dating as far back at 1988, when I wrote my first lengthy article about HIS multi-factorial theory of AIDS.
I shall put them all up online and then we'll see whether you still find him to be on the side of the angels. I mean, by the way, interviews that date from 1988 through 2001, if not longer.
After that, he became impossibly sycophantic to the orthodoxy.
He has no integrity. I can produce, from my personal files, a letter written by Joe Sonnabend, at the insistence of the decent and lovely Michael Callen, that Joe correct at least ONE act of cloying treachery, which nearly cost me my job in 1991. A TAG operator had forced Joe to sign a letter claiming he never said the things to me that I quoted in an article, about the origins of the heterosexual AIDS hoax (his word.) He was strong-armed by Spencer Cox at TAG into signing a letter claiming I had falsified his quotes. Joe complied. TAG ferried the letter over to Liz Smith, who reluctantly quoted it, later telling my father she knew she was being had...Major heat came down on me from the investors of SPIN magazine. Callen went crazy, Joe started apologizing to me, before I even knew what he was talking about. (This was at the Amsterdam Alternative AIDS conference in 1992.) Sonnabend had to finally write a second letter, which I have in my possession, admitting he was COERCED into writing that letter, and that the quotes I had attributed to him were 100% accurate. Before this correction was issued, TAG had already sent gorgeous flowers to Liz Smith. As for me, like everybody else under Joe's Bus, I forgave him because he seemed so abashed. I even invited him to my wedding.
But he is a weak, dishonest man without any integrity, who loves the sensation of throwing everybody under the bus.
If anybody wishes to see a copy of the letter I describe here, email me at editor@thetruthbarrier.com
Lastly, if someone could request a copy of that letter from Farber I would appreciat it as I am sure she would just ignore my requests.
Thanks,
JTD
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
