62 2 mins 10 yrs

Well, it appears that Obama’s birth certificate IS a fake.

“Members of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s posse said in March that there was probable cause that Obama’s long-form birth certificate released by the White House in April 2011 was a computer-generated forgery. Now, Arpaio says investigators are positive it’s fraudulent.

Mike Zullo, the posse’s chief investigator, said numeric codes on certain parts of the birth certificate indicate that those parts weren’t filled out, yet those sections asking for the race of Obama’s father and his field of work or study were completed. Zullo said investigators previously didn’t know the meaning of codes but they were explained by a 95-year-old former state worker who signed the president’s birth certificate. Zullo said a writer who published a book about Obama’s birth certificate and was aiding investigators let them listen in on an interview he conducted of the former state worker.”

Here’s my view. I’m not in the least bothered if his certificate is real or not. The issue is that Obama is a fake.

It’s his policies that are unreal. It’s his relentless undermining of everything that is good about America that bothers me. It is the fact he is racking up debt on a scale without precedent that is the concern.  It’s his utter contempt for the US Constitution that disturbs. Of course the small detail of where Obama was born interests some, and were this a GOP incumbent I suggest media interest would be much greater, but it is a detail beside the point.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]


  1. The birth certificate is a non issue,

    But you’ve got to Love Sherif Joe, as my Daddy would’ve said “he clanks when he walks”…. 🙂

  2. If you are not in the least bothered, why give further time to the idiocy of the birther crowd?

  3. So the Manchurian is Kenyan afterall.

    Come on, there are more holes and gaps than substance in this bloke’s life, and the only document his gang release, to prove his citizenship, is a clear fake.

    If they can’t get that right, they must be having a right struggle faking years of college records.

  4. Heck it’s obvious that not only is Obama not entitled to be POTUS by reason of his birth country (Kenya, Cuba, whatever) but he’s also a muslim who hates the USA.

    Oh, and Iraq was responsible for 9/11.

    These are all pretty mainstream beliefs in today’s GOP, along with an insatiable war-lust.

  5. the only document his gang release, to prove his citizenship, is a clear fake.
    If they can’t get that right, they must be having a right struggle faking years of college records.

    Poor Pete.

  6. Gentlemen –

    The only investigation into the birth certificate has declared it to be a fake.

    Therefore, and I see we are joined by a couple of strong “facts and evidence” people, the evidence suggests that the birth certificate is forged.

    If The Kenyan was a natural born citizen it would be no bother to prove it. It could be done in a day, but not even the White House can manage it. The reasonable conclusion, therefore, is that the man is not a natural born citizen.

    Believe otherwise if you like, but that would clearly be an act of faith, and we know how some regulars hate that kind of thing.

  7. Zullo said a writer who published a book about Obama’s birth certificate and was aiding investigators let them listen in on an interview he conducted of the former state worker

    Someone actually wrote a book about this.

    Some people will actually read it.


  8. IF, Obama is not American by birth, and Congress have done bugger all about it, are they all breaking the ‘Constitution’ I know that Congress rarely adhere to it, what about the President?

  9. Ugh not this again. Listen you voted for this balloon head so deal with it. Hows that Hope and Change thing working out? lol

  10. The White House should never have released the birth certificate. It fed the nutters and of course it was inevitable that they’d say it was a fake!

  11. Yes, if there’s anyone I’m gonna believe, its the sheriff of Maricopa County. An honest broker on this issue if ever there was one.

  12. “The White House should never have released the birth certificate.”

    But they didn’t.

  13. I don’t care where the son of a bitch was born. He could have been born on Mars for all I care.

    This is Clown Show Constitutionalism by unserious people who could care less about the real world and the problems that are in it.

  14. If this is true , and this is the second person in the States employ who say it’s a fake , then I trust that Sheriff Joe’s Posse will arrest Obama for impersonating a President .

  15. the doctor –

    No-one will be arresting anyone, and Arpaio’s writ only runs in Maricopa County anyway.

    DC is the place where you can get away with literally anything if you’re powerful enough or have sufficiently powerful patrons. You can get away with brazenly stealing trillions, openly giving billions to you pals and running thousands of automatic weapons into Mexico. What’s a faked birth certificate against that lot?

    This administration is probably the most venal and corrupt ever, and given the extremely high standards of DC that’s quite an achievement. But what does the GOP care? They want to do the same thing when it’s their turn.

  16. Frank ODwyer, on July 18th, 2012 at 12:22 pm Said:
    It’s true what they say, the left has gone left and the right has gone nuts

    And the difference is … what exactly?

  17. Petr Tarasov, on July 18th, 2012 at 1:07 pm Said:
    The White House should never have released the birth certificate. It fed the nutters and of course it was inevitable that they’d say it was a fake!

    And those from the left, the Gullible and the nieve, will shout, scream and holler .. Oh no it’s not 😉

  18. Charles Bliss, on July 18th, 2012 at 12:47 pm Said:
    Ugh not this again. Listen you voted for this balloon head so deal with it. Hows that Hope and Change thing working out? lol

    I think they are still working on it 😉

  19. “nieve, will shout, scream and holler ”

    That reminds me. Whatever happened to Neve Campbell? I thought she was pretty hot in the Scream movies.

  20. Obama lies. and lies. and lies. And still….the race remains a tie.

    This is why Democrat Congressman, Schumer yesterday urged a muzzle be put on political speech …and probably why Mahons wrote his propaganda piece above on the dangers of the internet.

  21. I am surprised at the number of posters who do not seem to care whether the president of the US is who he says he is. ‘Move along now, only birthers allowed here’ they cant obediently.

    It seems to me to be quite an important issue.

    Out of curiosity I downloaded the birth certificate from the whitehouse.gov website a year or so ago, when it was first released.

    Just looking at the picture, it looked fine, and perfectly credible. However, when I loaded it into Photoshop it immediately became clear that all was not what it seemed. Though it is possible to argue a case for the way it turned out; I can’t really see that this is a credible explanation. It seems most likely the image had been manipulated to me. I cannot really think of an honest reason why this should be.

    So who cares? Nobody it seems.

    So what if the president isn’t who he says he is? So what if he were actually an embezzler of millions of dollars of public funds? Who cares? So what if he were wanted for the rape of children under a previous identity? Who cares?

    These, of course, are baseless suggestions. But if we do not care about even the fundamental identity of the most powerful single person in the world and are happy to just say “deal with it” then it seems we deserve all we get.

  22. steveatw, on July 18th, 2012 at 4:39 pm Said:
    I am surprised at the number of posters who do not seem to care whether the president of the US is who he says he is. ‘Move along now, only birthers allowed here’ they cant obediently.

    Oh the pain .. imagine being a ‘Birther’ and a ‘Denier’ all in ome 😉

  23. steveatw: it’s not that people don’t care. obviously, many, many people care. the problem is that the MSM is the propaganda arm for the Administration and they stand in the way of clarity and explanation. They prefer to misreport the Travon Martin case because it suits the narrative of a racist America and they have no intention of actually investigating the man in the White House because he is their guy.

    we have a problem. a real problem.

    Obama’s birth place is not his worst lie. Obama is a Socialist and his vow to uphold the Constitution was a hollow gesture – he is an Internationalist and he would like to take America down a peg. I don’t think Obama likes America at all.

    at this point, the solution is not to keep beating a dead horse – Obama’s birthplace – but to vote him out of office.

  24. Patty, on July 18th, 2012 at 4:52 pm Said:
    steveatw: it’s not that people don’t care. obviously, many, many people care. the problem is that the MSM is the propaganda arm for the Administration

    ” If you wish to be mis-informed, read a ‘newspaper’ if you wish to be informed, then read a book ”

    Can’t remember where that quote came from, but it’s true.

  25. Patty –

    It’s a dead horse because the GOP, as far as I can see, has chosen to turn a blind eye to some of the administration’s corruption and been intimidated into silence elsewhere.

    Look, this is going to be a thoroughly nasty, dirty election. If the GOP isn’t going to get its hands dirty the it’ll lose. The Obama election machine will use very lie, smear and trick it can. It’s dividing the country racially. It’s working to get people with no right to vote into the election halls. On election day it’ll again have its heavies out intimidating honkey. There’s nothing it’ll stop at to win.

    What’s Romney done? He’s said Obama’s wrong in his attacks on Romney’s time at Bain. Big deal!

    Suppose Romney had been outed as the dubious American who releases forged documents. The Obama campaign would have a field day. Democrats would be all over it, all over it.

    Remember four years ago – the GOP/McCain took the decision to go easy on Obama, to go easy on the vetting, to lay off the personal attacks and all that. Well that worked out well! What’s the point in repeating a failed strategy? You’ll fail again.

  26. I could not agree with you more, Pete. It sets my teeth on edge.

    Carl Rove – Bush’s “architect” – continues to espouse the need to play “nice guy.”

    Operatives in Washington DC like to be liked. They like to go to dinner parties.

    And Leftists have been very successful at characterizing the Tea Party as “crazy racists” and the Republicans as basically fascist pigs.

    The MSM walks in lock-step with the Admin. and the Progressive agenda (see Trayvon Martin or Sandra Fluke if you doubt)

    So, we have a problem. A real problem.

    The irony is that Romney is actually a genuinely nice man – an honest and very competent man. And with different handlers, this would be well-known.

  27. And Leftists have been very successful at characterizing the Tea Party as “crazy racists” and the Republicans as basically fascist pigs.

    Nah, they do that to anyone who does not agree with them 😉

  28. So Arpaio’s “posse” studied an electronic copy of a document and then declares it an electronic copy of a document?!?

    Hmmm Let me study the end of my nose……… yep its definately the end of my nose

  29. This administration is probably the most venal and corrupt ever

    LOL! Warren Harding, Ulysses Grant, at least a dozen others.

    As for lying, Trickie Dickie has that title, like forever. No-one could ever hope to beat his lies and law-breaking.

  30. Yes, Peter, throughout our history government of all stripes has been corrupt – republican and democrat, alike – which is why we need small, limited government as set forth in the US Constitution.

  31. Peter –

    Warren Harding? There were a handful of scandals which were tiddlers by today’s standards and hardly any of the touched Harding himself.

    He gets a bad rap from historians because when America’s greatest depression hit (in 1920) he refused to intervene in the economy, and because he didn’t make himself “great” by killing thousands of foreigners.

    The economic situation in 1920 was grim. By that year unemployment had jumped from 4 percent to nearly 12 percent, and GNP declined 17 percent. No wonder, then, that Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover — falsely characterized as a supporter of laissez-faire economics — urged President Harding to consider an array of interventions to turn the economy around. Hoover was ignored.

    Instead of “fiscal stimulus,” Harding cut the government’s budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Harding’s approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third. The Federal Reserve’s activity, moreover, was hardly noticeable. As one economic historian puts it, “Despite the severity of the contraction, the Fed did not move to use its powers to turn the money supply around and fight the contraction.”2 By the late summer of 1921, signs of recovery were already visible. The following year, unemployment was back down to 6.7 percent and was only 2.4 percent by 1923.

    For doing nothing in 1920/21 except slash taxes and spending he ranks as one of the very greatest presidents.

  32. Pete Moore

    A google search on “Warren Harding corruption” gets 221,000 hits, including this:

    “Among corrupt administrations, such as those of President Ulysses S. Grant and President Richard Nixon, scholars consider President Warren G. Harding’s one of the most corrupt. The president’s self-serving friends made up his cabinet, and they quickly found opportunity for corruption, including the sale of alien properties after World War I and exploitation of oil-rich lands that had been held in reserve during World War I….”

  33. Peter –

    First, who wrote that? What’s the source?

    Second, the next sentence reads: “The latter opportunity evolved into the Teapot Dome Scandal, which fully erupted after Harding’s sudden death in 1923.”

    The Teapot dome scandal was the most serious and notorious of Harding’s presidency, yet it never touched him. He knew nothing of it. It was others in government who were getting up to no good. Historians have done a great job in elevating relatively very minor scandals compared to modern standards yet they cannot link Harding to any of it.

    Although Harding was responsible for making these appointments, it is unclear how much, if anything, Harding himself knew about his friends’ illicit activities. No evidence to date suggests that Harding personally profited from such crimes, but he was apparently unable to prevent them.

    Look at some others:

    Lincoln was a butcher, a megalomaniac and a despot, yet he sits like Zeus on his dais in Washington, apparently the greatest of them all.

    FDR was a catastrophe, yet he’s a hero to historians.

    Truman allowed thousands of Nazi butchers to become Americans.

    LBJ’s fought a catastophic war and his grandchildren are making some American cities more dangerous than Afghanistan.

    Nixon was as bent as bent can be, oh but he was clever.

    Reagan sent the deficit and debts on the current trajectory.

    Clinton was so corrupt only a wordsmith like C. Hitchens could do it justice.

    GWB and Obama have continued the disastrous wars, finished off the constitution and handed over trillions from Americans to Wall Street.

    Warren Harding was an angel compared to this line up.

  34. Warren Harding has been trashed unfairly by historians and the corruption scandals were- as Pete says- pretty minor- Fast & Furious, Clinton’s perjury and Iran-Contra were all far bigger scandals than anything that emerged from Warren’s administration.

    He suffers for two reasons- firstly the left wing bias of academic historians and secondly because when he died his own party had no interest in defending him and every interest in using him as the scapegoat for everything that did emerge.

  35. Oh and back on topic- Sheriff Joe Arpaio is a corrupt buffoon who has no expertise in the matter of forged documents and no integrity that would make it possible to trust him even if he had.

  36. Pete Moore

    Which word in “corrupt administrations” do you fail to understand? Did I post that Harding was personally corrupt?

    You alleged “This [Obama] administration is probably the most venal and corrupt ever” and I pointed out that at least a few others have better claims. Then you choose to interpret that as an allegation that Harding was personally corrupt. He may or may not have been, but that is not what I posted.

  37. Peter –

    Tak it easy, we’re just having a discussion.

    Ok, so you literally meant “administration”. Even then, the Harding administration was nowhere near as venal and corrupt as many others.

    When I stated: “This [Obama] administration is probably the most venal and corrupt ever”, I wholly associated Obama with that venality and corruption.

  38. So to be clear, you are alleging that Obama is personally corrupt, in the sense of cashing in on his office?

  39. “The economic situation in 1920 was grim.”

    And of course it would be inconvenient to mention why that might have been.

    Austerity proponents depend on the argument that substantial cuts to federal spending moved the economy to a recovery in 1921, but this understanding fails on multiple counts. The bulk of both fiscal and monetary austerity occurred immediately prior to the onset of the depression. Any austerity in policy decisions by the Wilson administration, the Harding administration or the Federal Reserve Board after the depression began were moderate compared with the considerable austerity measures taken by the Wilson administration and the Federal Reserve before the downturn. The evidence seems to suggest, even more clearly than in the case of the Great Depression, that postwar austerity may have even helped cause the 1920–21 depression. Subsequent monetary easing by the Federal Reserve occurred concurrently with the economic recovery, which itself was underway by the time Warren Harding took the oath of office.

  40. Frank O’Dwyer –

    That silly boy is arguing aginst himself.

    Total bank deposits more than doubled between January 1914, when the Fed opened its doors, and January 1920. Such artificial credit creation sets the boom–bust cycle in motion. The Fed also kept its discount rate (the rate at which it lends directly to banks) low throughout the First World War (1914–1918) and for a brief period thereafter. The Fed began to tighten its stance in late 1919.

    Economist Gene Smiley, author of The American Economy in the Twentieth Century, observes that “the most common view is that the Fed’s monetary policy was the main determinant of the end of the expansion and inflation and the beginning of the subsequent contraction and severe deflation.”[12] Once credit began to tighten, market actors suddenly began to realize that the structure of production had to be rearranged and that lines of production dependent on easy credit had been erroneously begun and needed to be liquidated.

    What happened is the classic boom-bust cycle. The dip in 1919 spending was a result of credit tightening after the war. Government expenditures fell naturally because of it and the malinvestments which it caused were beginning to unwind. Harding did exactly the right thing. He slashd spending and taxes and let the economy right itself. If he has intervened to “stimulate” the economy as Keynesians suggest the result would have been a decade-long depression.

  41. If he has intervened to “stimulate” the economy as Keynesians suggest the result would have been a decade-long depression.


    But a deeply corrupt administration just the same.

  42. Ross is a clear voice of reason in a babbling sea.

    I don’t understand how any rational conservative could support Arapaho, much less listen to his ignorant accusations. He’s a runty little tyrant who regularly spits on the Bill of Rights and chases after the media spotlight like any two bit political whore.

  43. Steveatw, I liked your comment at 4:39pm. Those are pretty much my thoughts, too. Whether Hussein’s birth certificate is fraudulent or not, it’s a hugely important issue in and of itself, and at first glance, it is genuinely surprising how the issue gets waved aside as if it hardly mattered – even by the most patriotic, conservative USA commenters such as Patty.
    (Yes, of course it’s Obama’s policies which matter, and which affect real life on the ground, I get that bit – but surely, so to speak, “from the man floweth the policies”? In that sense, the POTUS’s very identity lies at the heart of the issue, I would have thought?)

    I gave this some thought, and I believe that, to understand why so few Americans are willing to look into this issue, you have to understand what the US Constitution (US.C.) really means to Americans. You’ve obviously heard/read for yourself how they venerate it – it’s seemingly on a par with Holy Scripture! The US.C. is held as a sacred text – now, why is that so?
    I think that it’s because the US.C. was not written “in a vacuum”, it was drafted in order to free the US from a very particular tyranny (ie, us Brits, as always). The US.C. does not simply mean “freedom” in some airy, ethereal way, it initially meant freedom from a very tangible, experienced tyranny. That’s what gives it its enduring clout, in my opinion. (Bear with me, I’m coming to my point!)

    Now, it’s in that context, that the very thought that a President could ever con his way into the Presidency, is so unpalatable to the American mindset. If it were really true that Obama had fraudulently done so, it would rip their trust in the US.C. to shreds. It would horrify and appall so deeply, that an imposter had managed to defraud them so, that, the only possible response in many American minds would be to simply shut their eyes/ears and say “No, I’m not listening! This can’t be true, I won’t hear of it”.

    That’s basically why I think so many Americans (even the most patriotic, indeed, especially the most patriotic) are simply shutting their minds off to the possibility that Obama’s birth cert. is a fake. It’s simply too humiliating to accept, because, if it is true, the constitutional implications are so horrific, so demeaning, so embarrassing, so “how did we get fooled so badly” that I think most Americans would rather simply deny the possibility than face it squarely.

    I hope my USA friends don’t take this comment the wrong way. By voicing this opinion I’m not trying to “rub their faces in it”, nor am I gloating in any way. I love the USA. I’m simply applying a bit of amateur psychology in order to attempt to answer Steveatw’s comment.

  44. Pete,

    “The dip in 1919 spending was a result of credit tightening after the war. Government expenditures fell naturally because of it and the malinvestments which it caused were beginning to unwind. Harding did exactly the right thing. He slashd spending and taxes and let the economy right itself.”

    Tax receipts and spending fell further and faster both BEFORE he got there, and before the recession began. Yet you claim that was the cure.

    Monetary easing happened at the same time as the recovery, and you claim that caused the problem.

    As I said before, you are simply spouting dogma. Besides, according to you economics isn’t a science, so it’s incoherent for you to also claim to have empirical proof. Of course you also make the incoherent claim to be able to make predictions using something you claim isn’t science, so by your own argument you may as well be using tarot cards. Good luck with that.

  45. Frank

    The USA and UK have had substantial “monetary easing” since the 2008 melt-down. But both are still mired in recession.

    In the UK the monetary stimulus is (so far) £350 billion. Maybe it needs to be a trillion or more? Or when will its adherents accept that it’s a failed policy?

  46. I don’t pretend to understand the intricacies of American economics in the Depression years, or even to fully understand how different Democrats and Republicans are from each other, but it truly staggers me to try and comprehend how anyone could possibly imagine that one person – ONE person, out of the entire American population – has managed to elevate himself to the position of President, effectively the most powerful man on the planet, on his own.

    Do any of you actually, truly believe, that an alleged non-American, pot-smoking, cocaine-taking BLACK MAN, could rise to this position without outside help!? Did GWB get the presidency purely on his own merit? ‘Cos if he did, you got a country just chock full o’ fuckwits, if you’ll pardon my Kenyan 🙂

    To see who rules the ‘United’ States, maybe you should take a closer look at who rules the ‘United’ companies of America, and then compare that with who funded his campaign, and then compare THAT with who sits on the various ‘advisory’ boards. I don’t imagine you’ll see much difference in the make-up of those boards over the past lot of decades.

    Blaming Obama for your national debt is like blaming the cheerleaders at one of your girly sports over there – interesting to look at, but ultimately nothing to do with the result, other than to be something to look at some more 🙂

  47. The sheriff is an elected official and he carried out an investigation at the behest of some of his constituents. Some people thought the certificate looked fake and they asked the sheriff to investigate. He did.

    Apparently, there is no back-up documentation for the birth certificate – it was created electronically – also, some of the numbering is off.

    So, no reflection on Obama – that’s not really the issue.

    it’s more of a reflection on the birth certificate forgery that requires more investigation since it is a federal offense, I believe and a possible national security risk.

    That’s all. Pretty simple. No need for hysteria.

  48. In reply to TomTyler at 11:14 .. Yes I think this is almost certainly the reason too. It would rather be like the BBC finding out that the Queen is really a very clever transvestite. I’m sure they would suppress it for the same reasons.

    The evidence for Obama not being who he says he is seems quite compelling. Not quite definitive (from what I have seen) but certainly it does not seem even slightly ‘cookey’ to question it.

    I wonder what the repercusions might be if he is revealed as a fake in five years time? I suppose much less than finding out now.

    It does seem strange that the Republicans do not seem willing to exploit this doubt. Surely they would only have to ask the questions and get them into the forefront of minds to render Obama un-electable (whether fake or not)?

  49. The sheriff is a complete moron and so are the people excusing his self-aggrandizing, destructive idiocy.

    He’s an ugly, low brow version of Palin. Gypsy carnival, pick your gullible pocket, look-at-me sideshow Arpaio.

  50. Patty was a Birther from the early days. Good to see she’s sticking to her nutty guns.

  51. “In the UK the monetary stimulus is (so far) £350 billion. Maybe it needs to be a trillion or more?”

    Maybe it does. The UK govt has also been admiring of Ireland’s austerity measures and held it out as shining example. Which one is the failed policy?

    I don’t know, because I don’t profess to have any great economic insight, certainly not in macroeconomics, and I don’t think I’m the only one here who doesn’t. I have just done some limited reading trying to get my head around it, and then more so on microeconomics.

    I instinctively do not get the austerity thing though, nor the aversion to borrowing. While I know it is simplistic, if not flat out incorrect, to make the analogy of a national economy or the global economy to a household or business, if you’ve just lost your job or a client you would no doubt cut back on non-essentials but one thing you would surely not do is think ‘gee, I’m in a lot of debt, this would be a great time to pay some extra off my mortgage’. Nor would you cut back to the extent you cannot eat. You would do whatever it took, leapfrog credit cards, whatever, and take that hit when you were back on your feet.

    I also know from personal experience that debts that seem insurmountable at one time can seem like nothing when your income rises over time. At one time interest rates were so high that my mortgage payments were more than I earned – but then at the time everyone was in the same boat so banks just gave payment holidays and rolled over the interest. Today that mortgage and the payments on it would be easy. Similar is true if we are borrowing from future generations who will almost certainly be many times richer than we are (as we are always told when it is any other issue, such as climate change).

  52. steveatw: the Republicans aren’t touching this new development because their poll number drop when they mention the “birther” issue.

    the MSM and Obama’s supporters have been very effective at making this seem like a kook issue. (see Petr’s comment above for an example of the technique used)

    Alot of people don’t have time to follow news so they just skim the surface and when there is a crowd shouting in unison “birther” followed by derisive laughter, they just would rather not bother with the issue.

    The Left tried with less success with the AGW “denier” slur.

  53. “The Left tried with less success with the AGW “denier” slur.”

    The left, my ass.

    Two excellent online fact sheets have been prepared to counter many of the most commonly used arguments to deny HIV causation of AIDS [8,9]; as such, we will not discuss these in this article. Instead, we will review the current intellectual strategies used by the HIV denial movement. Although other forms of science denial will not be specifically discussed, the characteristics described below apply to many other forms of popular denial, including denial of evolution, mental illness, and the Holocaust.
    That HIV is the primary cause of AIDS is the strongly held consensus opinion of the scientific community, based upon over two decades of robust research. Deniers must therefore reject this consensus, either by denigrating the notion of scientific authority in general, or by arguing that the mainstream HIV community is intellectually compromised.
    Since the ideas proposed by deniers do not meet rigorous scientific standards, they cannot hope to compete against the mainstream theories. They cannot raise the level of their beliefs up to the standards of mainstream science; therefore they attempt to lower the status of the denied science down to the level of religious faith, characterizing scientific consensus as scientific dogma [21]. As one HIV denier quoted in Maggiore’s book [10] remarked,

    “There is classical science, the way it’s supposed to work, and then there’s religion. I regained my sanity when I realized that AIDS science was a religious discourse. The one thing I will go to my grave not understanding is why everyone was so quick to accept everything the government said as truth. Especially the central myth: the cause of AIDS is known.”

    Others suggest that the entire spectrum of modern medicine is a religion [22].

    Deniers also paint themselves as skeptics working to break down a misguided and deeply rooted belief. They argue that when mainstream scientists speak out against the scientific “orthodoxy,” they are persecuted and dismissed. For example, HIV deniers make much of the demise of Peter Duesberg’s career, claiming that when he began speaking out against HIV as the cause of AIDS, he was “ignored and discredited” because of his dissidence [23]. South African President Mbeki went even further, stating: “In an earlier period in human history, these [dissidents] would be heretics that would be burnt at the stake!”


    Sure sounds familiar.

  54. Frank: I was talking about Anthropomorphic Global Warming, you know.

    Are you arguing that AIDs is not spread through unprotected sex? I have no idea what you’re referring about here – and zero interest – it sounds nuts.

Comments are closed.