Ron Unz on RFK Jr and AIDS
Why the near total media silence?
I was directed to the article by Ron Unz that appeared Monday August 14, “Why the Media Fears RFK Jr.” I won’t offer a lot of commentary, but please check this piece out. It’s very detailed and full of important information. My focus today is on Unz’s vitally important question:
Why is the mainstream media completely ignoring Kennedy’s statements about AIDS?
Unz offers an intriguing possibility: Perhaps the real reason the AIDS section of Kennedy’s book about Fauci, The Real Anthony Fauci, is being ignored is because to even allow for this subject to be discussed will open up a can of worms whose repercussions are unimaginable. Consider the following excerpt from near the end of Unz’s piece (emphasis at the end mine):
A single sentence uttered by Kennedy’s bitter enemies in the media could have seemingly destroyed him: “Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a conspiracy theorist whose book claims that AIDS is a hoax.”
However, our entire media establishment—so eager to attack Kennedy on every other matter—has completely avoided engaging him on that issue. One of the early attacks on his book came from a Times journalist with deep expertise in Gay Rights history, but he completely excluded any mention of Kennedy’s extreme AIDS Denialism. “The Dog That Didn’t Bark.”
The only logical explanation I see for this total reluctance to engage Kennedy on what would seem his greatest vulnerability is that the media fears that he might very well be right. So after consulting trusted medical experts who had carefully reviewed Kennedy’s 200 pages of analysis, all these different editors concluded that discretion was the better part of valor.
If Kennedy is correct, our entire American media has spent the last 35 years promoting and protecting a medical fraud that cost us many hundreds of billions of dollars and many hundreds of thousands of lives. As far back as the 1990s, a former Harvard professor had declared that the AIDS hoax was a worse scientific scandal than the notorious Lysenko fraud. So the media rightly fears that if they engage Kennedy on the issue, they themselves would suffer the total destruction of their reputation.
He has a point. If the HIV AIDS whistleblowers are wrong and crazy, it would be the easiest thing in the world to repeatedly point out that Kennedy has expressed sympathy to our cause. If we are wrong, and so obviously, catastrophically wrong as we are painted to be, why on earth not take away all of Kennedy’s potential power by dismissing him as an “AIDS quack”?
I believe Unz is correct and his statement, “So the media rightly fears that if they engage Kennedy on the issue, they themselves would suffer the total destruction of their reputation,” is absolutely on the money.
Has anyone given serious thought to what the end of HIV AIDS will look like? When the paradigm falls—and it will, because it is built on sand and the foundation is crumbling before our eyes—the reckoning will be enormous. Every one of the world’s public health organizations has thrown everything they have behind the falsified HIV AIDS story for forty years; nothing but lockstep agreement is tolerated, and as the AZT scandal, the Truvada disaster, and the massive ignored epidemic of non-HIV AIDS indicate, the results have been nothing short of catastrophic—from iatrogenocide to dozens of failed predictions and dozens of failed vaccine trials, not to mention a campaign of terror and discrimination that has been waged against HIV-positives (and now, thanks to PrEP, has been expanded to include HIV-negatives) since day one. When all of this crumbles, what will happen? Besides the enormous amount of money that has been spent to prop up this long since falsified theory, the reputations of entire institutions depend on its validity. This eventuality is something we need to be thinking about, and preparing for, very seriously.
Again, thank you to Ron Unz for this important piece. Please go check it out.
In The Real AIDS Epidemic, I present an analysis of data that falsify the HIV/AIDS hypothesis and warn about the toxic drugs being given to people in the name of that falsified HIV/AIDS hypothesis. In the afterword, I offer constructive suggestions for a paradigm shift in AIDS research and treatment that emphasize the recognition of the massive Non-HIV AIDS epidemic in the general population.
To support my work on Substack, please purchase my book for yourself or for a friend, and leave a review on Amazon. You can learn about efforts to ban my book here.
"HIV/AIDS" was built on a handful of papers published in 1984/5 that were not peer-reviewed and published for the scientific community to vet BEFORE the government declared they were the correct scientific basis for declaring the known cause, at a press conference. It's probably the most egregious case of 'science by press release' we have.
Worse, Gallo and his lab were found to have committed scientific 'misconduct' (softened version of fraud) because the lab books and the data within them were different from what was published in the papers.
https://archive.nytimes.com/query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage-9F0CEFDA103DF932A05751C1A964958260.html
"As to the many errors in the 1984 paper, which was co-authored with Dr. Popovic, the report concluded, "In light of his role as senior author, Dr. Gallo must bear substantial responsibility for the numerous discrepancies, including four instances of scientific misconduct attributed to Dr. Popovic."
"On the standards of Dr. Gallo's laboratory record-keeping, the report said, "Especially in light of the groundbreaking nature of this research and its profound public health implications, O.R.I. believes that the careless and unacceptable keeping of research records reflects irresponsible laboratory management that has permanently impaired the ability to trace the important steps taken."
RFK knows this history.
Rebecca, it seems to me that Unz is somewhat overstating the case that Kennedy makes in the book. Kennedy isn't saying AIDS is a hoax, he's saying that HIV as the cause of AIDS is a hoax and that it's more of a lifestyle affliction than a disease spread via the sharing of bodily fluids.