The Killing Fields Of Journalism

And The Paradox Of Credulity, Issued By Mockingbird Media's Federal Reserve

“We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”

1984, George Orwell

    “This IS a war, there ARE no rules, and we WILL crush you, one at a time, completely and utterly (at least the more influential ones; foot-soldiers like you aren't worth bothering with).”

(Email from Weill-Cornell’s John P. Moore, PhD to HIV positive AIDS-dissident Michael Geiger, 27 January 2007, 10:24)”

I was already technically almost sleeping, my body had gone into “go to sleep” mode, but a little black bull of rage appeared, perhaps worth explaining. What I wrote last night about the FBI, Twitter, and the fake crisis in international journalism based on transient bans of 6 people nobody in their sound mind would count as journalists was a “rant.”

I thought my feelings about the wholesale destruction of American journalism were like a dead volcano—that they would never erupt again.

Have I spoken of it too much, or not enough?

“This parrot is dead.”

—Monty Python

I sinned in the Church of Journalism, for writing this, and was excommunicated, but not by journalists, not by my own editors.

The story grows stranger over time.

How did any of us cling to this wire-mesh cold monkey mother we call “journalism” which has not loved any of us in more than 50 years?

“Journalism” was being defined (by what year is hard to say) by industry, group-think, and attack squads from vested interests.

When they come against you, you can be sure is no international body of press freedom advocates to defend you, and the last thing you can hope for is that your facts could defend you. Even if they came from whistleblowers’ documents and first hand accounts. Even if you sent all your tapes, transcripts, and scientific papers in boxes to teams of fact checkers, who spent 3 months making sure you got everything right, and even cross checked your sources by getting them on the phone and reading their quotes back to them.

The hit squad would pollinate the lie that you brought your own fact checkers.

Every attack would signal that the attackers know nothing about journalism, (not even that reporters don’t bring their own fact checkers, to, say, Harper’s.)

The only people I ever meet who seem interested in journalism come from outside the field. I don’t want to be counted as somebody who cares about journalism, because I don’t.

We did not defend our land. We let them take it.

Enter Woke.

What determines whether you live or die in the situation I was in, in 2006, is who got upset, how upset, and how they rank in the Woke Hierarchy. Everything after the eruption of the collective brat, in the metaphor, comes to revolve around the appeasement of said brat’s feelings.

The Wounded Feelings Of A Chosen Brat Entity Is A Common Tool Of Deep State Media Deflecton Warfare.

Imagine being upset about an article and having the power to make sure the writer never works again. I’m reflecting on it more and more, how very lawless and queasy it all was.

Sh^%t storms are manufactured, and made to seem like something was terrible wrong with the article.

The matter of what had “happened” at Harper’s, the crisis, would become a cottage industry of media lamentations after 2006. The matter was even taken up at an international AIDS conference the same year, (2006) by AIDS researchers, the editor of The Lancet, Marilyn Chase from the WSJ, Laurie Garrett (Bill Gates’ favorite author) and a very angry man named John P. Moore, who devoted many years to “crushing” AIDS denialism wherever he found it.

This is where they decided to put a stop to this kind of thing in the future, which would be controlled by them. Their homegrown journalists would be minted from their “public health” schools—only they would be permitted to address things like “HIV/AIDS,” the they would do so responsibly.

An outtake, from aforementioned panel discussion at an international AIDS conference:

HIV Science and Responsible Journalism 4 XVI International AIDS Conference
08/13/2006

”A recent article in Harper’s Magazine highlighted another aspect of HIV/AIDS reporting and the peculiar persisting fascination with a group of individuals who insist on maintaining, against all evidence and without providing evidence of their own, that HIV does not cause AIDS and in fact that AIDS itself is not a new or unique medical entity.” [The bold faced words are patently false. The HIV dissenters provided nothing except clear, stark evidence, for decades.]

“The reporting of AIDS denialists has highlighted some important differences in the way in which medical scientists and reporters on medical science and their respective editors perceive and assess the import and accuracy of information. Clearly both have essential roles in free societies. But at what point can scientific controversies be considered settled? What criteria should be used in judging the validity of criticisms leveled by outsiders against the scientific establishment? What are the responsibilities of medical scientists, journalists and their editors, as both scientific journal editors and editors in the lay press, in keeping the public informed on these controversies and on the progress of the epidemic.

“This morning we’re fortunate to have assembled a distinguished panel, international panel, of scientists, journalists, and editors and policy experts to discuss these critical questions. So without further ado, let me introduce the first speaker, Dr. John Moore, who is a professor at the Weill Medical College of Cornell University, recognized as an expert on HIV and who’s recent work has focused on the search for microbicides as a preventive measure for HIV infection. John?”

JOHN MOORE, PH.D.: Thank you, Dan. So I’m going to cover a number of different areas of HIV reporting in the press and specific reference to AIDS denialists, and Nathan Geffen will follow on from me. But let’s have no doubt about this — this is dangerous stuff. AIDS denialism kills. I’m going to review who they are, who they are not, how they operate, what are some of the untold stories, and what journalists need to be on the lookout for.”

Pause.

Whoa. Did you catch that? Journalists, henceforth, would be trained to be “on the lookout” for “irresponsible journalism.”

And this is precisely what happened.

“Now when I say that denialism kills, thousands of South African adults and children have died of AIDS because of the flawed government policies on HIV and AIDS. Nathan will talk to you more about that, but the South African government has been heavily influenced over the past six or seven years by AIDS denialists. Any one, man or woman, who’s persuaded that safe sex or using clean needles is not necessary and then becomes HIV infected and dies of AIDS, the person advising them inappropriately bears responsibility. Anyone persuaded not to take antiretrovirals and use instead alternative medicines — lemon and garlic, potatoes and whatever — is also dying unnecessarily. Anyone persuaded not to be screened for HIV status and deprived of the chance of treatment or counseling dies unnecessarily.”

Whatever.

Let’s have a look at what is not “dangerous,” in the minds of these people—AZT and Nevirapine, for starters: Here’s Iraqi Pathologist Mohammed Ali Al Bayati, in BMJ:

”Besides, the following is a list of some of the serious adverse
reactions to AZT that have been reported in infants, children, and adults
as stated in the drug information book for physicians and other databases
to illustrate the danger of AZT [1, 8, 23]. These reactions may include,
neutropenia, granulocytopenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, myopathy and
myositis, hepatomegaly with steatosis, hepatitis, pancreatitis, lactic
acidosis, sensitization reactions, hyperbilirubinemia, vasculitis,
abdominal pain, back pain, body odor, chest pain, chills, edema of the
lip, fever, flu syndrome, hyperalgesia, syncope, vasodilation, bleeding
gums, constipation, diarrhea, dysphagia, edema of the tongue, eructation,
flatulence, mouth ulcer, rectal hemorrhage, lymphadenopathy, arthralgia,
muscle spasm, tremor, twitch, anxiety, confusion, depression, dizziness,
emotional lability, loss of mental acuity, nervousness, paresthesia,
somnolence, vertigo, cough, dyspnea, epistaxis, hoarseness, pharyngitis,
rhinitis, sinusitis, acne, changes in skin and nail pigmentation,
pruritus, rash, sweat, urticaria, amblyopia, hearing loss, photophobia,
taste perversion, dysuria, polyuria, urinary frequency, and urinary
hesitancy.

“The adverse reactions of the second drugs (Nevirapine) that have also
been given to HIV-pregnant women may include severe and life-threatening
skin reactions (stevens-johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis),
severe and life-threatening hepatotoxicity, skin rash, maculopapular
erythematous cutaneous eruptions, fever, nausea, headache, and
granulocytopenia [23]. In addition, the safety profile of this drug in the
neonates has not been established.

The information presented above describing the toxicities of AZT and
nevirapine tells the horrifying stories about the suffering of pregnant
women, infants, and children who are given these toxins based on a false
assumption that HIV is a killer virus. Some of these people are forced to
ingest these toxins. This is heartbreaking!”

If you have strong nerves and really are prepared to see what it looks like, look up “Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Nevirapine.” Only do this if you have thought it through.

Here’s a partial list, described, in classic dissociative AIDS research language, of what can befall a person choosing to have their life saved by ARVs (antiretrovirals:)

”Some ARVs affect the central nervous system (CNS), which is made up of the brain and spinal cord. CNS effects can include a wide range of functions, including:

• The ability to see, hear, taste, smell, and feel different sensations

• The ability to think, reason, speak, and form memories

• Voluntary and involuntary functions, such as movement, balance, coordination, as well as regulating the actions of most other body systems, such as blood flow and blood pressure.”

See full article in Very Well Health, as the helpful outlet has named itself, here. The list of adverse effects of ARVs goes on and on. You can scarcely believe your eyes. Sadomasochism in medicine?

In any case, they were the good guys—the anointed. We were the Enfant terribles—the condemned. Condemnation did not follow factual integrity, it followed woke fault lines.

They (the anointed, perpetually offended) would police AIDS journalism, which would morph into public service screeds for the pharmaceutical industry, and Fauci’s fever dreams.

Journalism was not prepared to defend its borders from this Trojan horse attack. All was thereby lost.

I am but one of countless examples: The people who took me out were not journalists, they were activists.

Today, so-called journalists are generally paid activists. Stories no longer exist in the sense of singular voices, breaking forbidden ground. Journalism sounds voiceless, today, and one wonders how they can stand the boredom, even for all that money.

Anointed meant they had “woke” protections; They were “treatment activists,” from South Africa to New York—they were professional AIDS stormtroopers, who policed acceptable discourse on AIDS in all media everywhere. I have been recounting the details of this prolonged attack between 2006 and 2008, for the upcoming new edition of my 2006 book “Serious Adverse Events: An Uncensored History of AIDS.” (I will announce details very soon, and when it can be expected to be purchasable.) The details of what made me what I call a “ghost of journalism” were always kept, by me, in a distant fog, but in recent weeks I had to retrieve them, and re-live them.

I’ve been living in this alternate universe for a long time, where the guardians of “journalism,” “responsible journalism” (propaganda) and the Greater Good are to the last man, liars, tools, deep state agents, and bullies.

Have they once lamented to imprisonment and torture of Julian Assange, barely alive in Belmarsh prison, for never publishing a false document?

No.

But when 6 bullies Tweeted the details of Elon Musk’s private jets, they all became the new saints of a free press, because they were taken off Twitter, for less than 24 hours. (Give or take.)

The only people strictly forbidden from addressing “attacks” on a free press are real journalists.

Have a look at this: “Farber describes the death of one patient and implies this is relevant to the science of HIV.”

In that one sentence, the cold soul of this cult is on full display. You have to read it repeatedly to grasp its implications: Humans are to be sacrificed to scientific progressivism. Not only was Joyce’s death not tragic, I failed to understand that it was not even “relevant” to (not her children—wait for it) “…the science of HIV.”

The altar.

People wonder who built the cult of Fauci-sim, and I have the answer. It was these people. If you read the document linked above, it will all become clear.

So what is happening when I rant, as I did last night? It means the dead nerves of the journalist are coming back to life. It means I’m taking the bait, fighting the imposters of journalism, to no avail.

The United Nations addressing press freedom and a “chilling effect” was the straw that broke the camel’s back. I saw that Bari Weiss also chimed in, sort of lamenting what Musk did, and that made me distrust her, or relegate her to perhaps being what I call a “pod.”

I’m sick of all this caterwauling about press freedom, “chilling effects,” and the pretense that mobbing, insulting, and doxxing a bad-daddy figure constitutes bold journalism.

Not Julian Assange. Not Gary Webb, may he Rest In Peace. Or Liam Scheff, may he Rest In Peace. There are so many genuine martyrs, who died to get their stories across the border, only to be ruthlessly mocked and “discredited” by the same woke anointed who went and rang emergency sirens at the United Nations over some parrots put in a Twitter time- out.

I’m sick of everybody and their uncle holding forth about the soul of journalism, while nobody will stop and define what it is or is not.

I may want to teach a journalism course. To whom?

People who are interested in lost worlds, I guess.

When I was 18, had just returned to the states, I asked my father, a journalist, broadcaster, interviewer, and writer, what he could tell me about journalism. What made me do that? I suppose I was trying to bond with him. He said: “I can sum it up in three words: Penetrate the ostensible.”

I believed, then, that this was the imperative of journalism—the unexpected.

Elon Musk’s opening up of the Twitter Files, by way of three journalists who show all documents as they report on them (raw material) echoes the tradition of Wikileaks.

It comes closer to “draining the swamp” than anything Donald Trump ever did, with due respect.

Go back to post 2016 attacks on Julian Assange and you will see that the guardians of “journalism” all said he was not a journalist.

Since then, he was a prisoner.

He believed he could outsmart the central weapon known as kill the messenger.