A Note to Professor Seth Kalichman

Last Sunday, I wrote this note to Columbia Professor Steven A. Siegelbaum, PhD who allegedly wrote in this email:

… you know that there is overwhelming scientific evidence that a retrovirus known as HIV exists, is transmitted by bodily fluids and destroys the immune system of infected people, leaving them vulnerable to opportunistic infections. Without antiretroviral treatment, advanced HIV disease (AIDS) almost invariably results in death.

I’m not sure why, but Dr. Siegelbaum has not yet responded to my message.

On the other hand, Seth Kalichman teaches psychology at the University of Connecticut. Because he receives generous funding from Tony Fauci at the NIH, he blogs about HIV, AIDS and those he derisively calls denialists.

Because Seth purports to have the same unbiased investigative expertise that I acquired during the past 29 years, I wrote the following email to him. He has refused to post my questions or comments, which suggests that he may be intimidated by real investigators. In any case, I will be happy to post a dialogue between Kalichman and me if and when he decides to.

As a university professor with close links to the NIH, like Gallo, Fauci and Siegelbaum, Seth is highly qualified to provide responses to my questions. His blog proves that he has lots of time on his hands as well.

This is my email to Professor Kalichman:

From: Clark Baker
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 3:31 PM
To: Seth Kalichman
Cc: 'contact@littleatoms.com'
Subject: Your interview and denialism...

Professor Kalichman:

I heard your recent interview on the topic of what you call “AIDS denialism” and was intrigued by your comments.

Because you promote yourself as an unbiased investigator, I thought you might be interested to hear from someone who has actually qualified as such in state tests and too many courts to list.

Unlike you, I am a licensed investigator and retired member of the Los Angeles Police Department. I have conducted thousands of criminal and civil investigations since 1980. During the course of those investigations and training, I have learned how to recognize charlatans, fraudsters and con men,as well as their behavioral traits. I have physically examined, interviewed and tested several thousand IV drug users and have trained dozens of police officers during the course of my 29-year career. I have never been paid by any party to promote one side or the other in any dispute.

Real investigators collect and present evidence in court, under oath, under penalty of perjury.

As a court-appointed private investigator for the defense, I dropped defendants who I learned were factually guilty, lied to me or asked me to misrepresent facts and evidence – even when my career was at risk. Simply put, this is the ethical standard by which competent investigators behave.

You, on the other hand, are compensated by Tony Fauci to promote what now appears to be the unproven concept that HIV attacks cells and causes AIDS.

I base my assessment on these undisputed facts:

1. NIH suddenly withdrew all research funding to Peter Duesberg and other researchers who question the unproven causation of AIDS,
   
   
2. NIH funds and compensates those who promote the unproven assumption that HIV causes AIDS,
   
   
3. NIH directly, or indirectly, compensates unqualified and unlicensed investigators like you to promote their unproven ideas on their behalf.
   
   

As a career investigator, it is impossible to ignore the parallels between you and your book and the security guard who not only sells filters from his garage but also investigated this definitive history of HIV for Robert Gallo. The fact that you, Robert Gallo and Security Officer Nick Kontaratos were compensated with NIH funding cannot be ignored.

Why the NIH would fund and promote obscure professors and filter salesmen as legitimate investigators suggests what real investigators often recognize as consciousness of guilt. If what they believe is competently defensible, they wouldn’t pay someone as unqualified as you and Kontaratos to defend them.

And since individuals like Barbara Culliton, Sarngadharan, Zagury and Blattner also celebrated and promoted Kontaratos’book, it’s easy to see how their works and yours also found publication.

In any case, one does not need to be a psychology professor or Sherlock Holmes to recognize how those corrupted by greed, ambition, narcissism, or complexes of inferiority might crave unmerited respect from others. After decades of no discernable or recognizable achievement, you and Kontaratos appear to be ideal NIH candidates to attack the unfunded critics of Robert Gallo and Anthony Fauci as denialists.

Your role is certainly not without precedence. When the heretical-denialist-non-scientist-mathematician Galilei Galileo questioned centuries of the scientific consensus regarding geocentric astronomy, he was attacked by paid individuals like you as a heretic. Under penalty of death, he was ordered to retract his heresy and, when he recanted, was ordered to house arrest for the remainder of his life. What do you think that did to peers who secretly agreed with him? What do you think that did for the advancement of science and astronomy?

Like Pope Urban, Tony Fauci withdraws all funding and attacks uncorrupted academics like Peter Duesberg and Rebecca Culshaw who raise legitimate questions. Like the ex-Pope and stereotypical Italian mobsters, Fauci and Gallo exploit individuals like you, Culliton, DeShong, Zagury, Blattner and Moore to attack heretics rather than present the evidence your critics have requested for more than two decades.

Indeed, it is your participation in these attacks that implicates you, Gallo, Fauci and their enablers in something far different from the coherent defense of legitimate science.

If you examine the application criteria for investigators, you will see that strict laws require qualified applicants to be licensed so that the community and courts can be confident that a licensee can competently conduct unbiased investigations. More importantly, if we violate the terms and conditions of our license, we will lose our license and career.

Uncorrupted investigative agencies, police officers and the courts dismiss those who exhibit bias or skew evidence to favor one side over another. Officers and private investigators who are caught doing so are viewed by their employers, peers and the courts as unreliable perjurers and can no longer called upon to present evidence. Falsified evidence taints the entire case and all investigators involved (poison tree doctrine). Such individuals face criminal charges and license revocation, which may be why Gallo and Tony Fauci pay unlicensed, incompetent or malleable individuals like you and Kontaratos to investigate things you are not legitimately, intellectually, or
ethically qualified to examine.

I was appointed last year by Semmelweis Society International to investigate the conflict between scientists and physicians who believe that HIV causes AIDS and those who do not – essentially examining both arguments of HIV/AIDS as you have told others you do.

I conducted my investigation pro bono, believing initially that it would be easy to prove or disprove allegations that Professor Duesberg was guilty of genocide in Africa and that investigative journalist Celia Farber was a mentally ill prostitute. Their allegations have become the basis of Ms. Farber's recently filed lawsuit.

Shortly after my investigation began, the doctor and expelled medical student who alleged these things pressured me to discontinue my investigation – eventually committing an ID theft against me and attacking me personally, just as you, your book and your ilk have attacked Gallo’s detractors since the 1980s.

Real scientists and investigators allow their evidence to speak for itself while people like Gallo and Fauci routinely use people like you to obfuscate and attack. Many of you use your diplomas the same way that Pope Urban’s astronomers wore crosses.

Unlike you, I am not paid to promote one side or the other. If tomorrow you produced verifiable proof that HIV attacks cells and causes AIDS as well as documents that show exactly how this theory was proven, I would not compromise a significant stream of income in the way you do. If and when proved wrong, my investigative career would resume elsewhere. But because you rely on generous NIH funding, a finding the contradicts the NIH's AIDS theology would dry up as quickly as Peter Duesberg’s did. A real and unbiased investigator would immediately recognize (and be extremely embarrassed by) such an obvious conflict of interest.

Finally, let’s assume that my instincts about you are completely wrong and that, NIH funding notwithstanding, you can competently examine evidence without bias. As an investigator and psychology professor, please answer these questions:

1. Why do you think Robert Gallo hired a licensed security guard, who was also a relative of former IHV associate Tony Kontaratos PhD, instead of one of America’s ~100,000 licensed and highly qualified investigators - to investigate and report the history of Gallo, HIV and the disputes related to allegations that Kontaratos’ book was supposed to end?
   
   
2. Why do you think Culliton, Sarngadharan, Zagury and Blattner praised the investigation and book written by Gallo’s security guard and filter salesman?
   
   
3. Why do you think the Bristol-Myers Squibb Company fails to mention the extremely addictive properties of Sustiva or the way withdrawal from the drug suppresses immune function, T-Cell count and elevates viral loads in the same way that clinicians diagnose the onset of AIDS?
   
   
4. Why do you think the JAMA didn’t identify HIV or AIDS as one of the leading causes of mortality in the US between 1970 and 2002?
   
   
5. Since it is not a leading cause of death in the US or Africa, why do you think Tony Fauci spends $207,000 per alleged AIDS death compared to the $2,639 per death spent on known legitimate causes like stroke and heart disease?
   

Instead of wasting your valuable education, time and NIH dollars on attacking those who ask these important and relevant questions, maybe you will find the time to answer one or two of them.

By the way, I wrote a similar note to your colleague last Sunday and I’m still waiting for his response.

Since you’re so well connected to NIH, maybe you can help answer these vexing questions. But hey, if you can’t, I will wait for your attacks and insults. Having spent twenty years dealing with LA’s assorted felons, ruffians and vagabonds, I’m used to those sorts of attack.

Sincerely,

Clark Baker
Los Angeles
800-649-2164 x2000

Let's see if Professor Kalichman writes back...