NYT Editorial on Lawyers... and Demonizing Prosecutors, too!!
Mort Zuckerman
Durlan...@yale.edu, Aa...@columbia.edu, gary_w...@nymc.edu,
scientifi...@ostp.gov, pkru...@princeton.edu,
Stanle...@fiu.edu, emcsw...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@po.state.ct.us, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, brans...@comcast.net,
vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us, freet...@charter.net,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, govern...@po.state.ct.us,
attorney...@po.state.ct.us, randall...@usdoj.gov,
Robert....@yale.edu, edi...@greenwich-post.com,
harol...@yale.edu, sedm...@nswbc.org, rrmcg...@aol.com,
fr...@nytimes.com, dpr...@stmartin.edu
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, criminal...@usdoj.gov,
karla.d...@usdoj.gov, christophe...@usdoj.gov,
richar...@yale.edu, harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu,
inq...@aldf.com, ly...@idsociety.org, meganm...@theatlantic.com
Subject: NYT Editorial on Lawyers... and Demonizing Prosecutors, too!!
Date: Mar 8, 2010 8:27 AM
EDITORIAL BELOW
===================
Yes, well, as I recall, Richard Blumenthal
was demonized heartily by the "8000 members of
the Infectious Diseases Society of America"
(formerly known as the Flat Earth Society) for
calling Yale et al on their "Lyme Disease" bullshit.
http://www.actionlyme.org/COMMENTS_PORETZ.htm
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/301/6/665
"The IDSA was forced to settle the claim to avoid exorbitant
litigation costs, even though the society's guidelines were based on
sound science."
LMAO.
JAMA refuses to recognize that by then, IDSA twice
refused to cooperate with Mr. Blumenthal, the first
instance being their refusal to turn over all their
own data which refutes every single statement they
make in their "guidelines."
Remember the hysterical maniac Durland Fish'
answer to the inquiry?
http://groups.google.com/group/scilyme2/msg/a7826a32d982af9d?hl=en&dmode=source
"He proceeds down the list, name by name: "Totally bogus." "He killed
one of his patients." "They tried to shut him down." Words like
"crackpot," "wacko," "buffoon" and "fraud" pepper his discourse.
"A little later, he stops to ponder a question.
"I don't know," he says after a moment's thought. "I don't know why
they hate me so much."
Clearly ^^^ a psychopath, forgetting
that he had intended to play the
victim, before he was caught with
a hit-list.
The article proceeds:
"***Now Fish is fighting a subpoena*** from state Attorney General
Richard Blumenthal, who says Fish and 13 other experts may have
improperly excluded [THEIR OWN] scientific evidence of chronic Lyme
when they issued guidelines last year for treating the disease."
FIGHTING THE SUBPOENA FOR ALL THEIR
OWN DATA:
http://www.actionlyme.org/BRAIN_PERMANENT.htm
I despise lawyers. But for once the
AG and his staff - Tom Ryan, notably -
looked at the science and took our
referrals (Sam Donta and Ken Liegner,
ones not offered by the Obstructionistas,
http://www.lymediseaseassociation.org )
http://www.actionlyme.org/Donta.htm
The NYTimes did nothing about our 100s
of thousands of complaints - TO THEM - other
than write a review of my book Pam Weintraub
published for me, but of course, because
Weintraub is not a scientist, she had
no way to follow up on the SCIENCE
behind Pam3Cys or the LYMErix vaccine
being the actual CAUSE KNOWN of the
New Great Imitators:
http://www.actionlyme.org/CHP_9_IDSA_REVIEWS.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/Actionlyme_History.htm
CAUSE KNOWN:
http://www.actionlyme.org/Pam3Cys_Version15.htm
Did they stop the AIDS vaccine trial because
it was made of the same stuff as the
immune-suppressing LYMErix?
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/359/9/888
They did.
Was that reported in the Papers of Record?
NOT.
Indeed. It's pretty unpopular to be
a "TERRORIST" to be saying such TRUE THINGS
as "Yale Committed a CRIME with LYMErix:
http://www.actionlyme.org/DICKSON_FDA_SUBMISSION_FULL.htm
that effed up research in ALL DISEASES
for at least 10 years.
The same penis-breaths who claimed I
was dangerously insane to be saying
Lyme was RICO
http://www.actionlyme.org/andersonpenisbiter.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/USDOJ_COMPLAINT_RICO.htm
now have to answer for the Shaken Baby
Defense with real science.
Will THAT ^^ ever make it into the Papers of
Record, who now suddenly admire lawyers
who take on the Bigs?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&cmd=link&linkname=pubmed_pubmed&uid=6150430&ordinalpos=1&log$=relatedarticles_seeall&logdbfrom=pubmed
How about my interview with NYT's David Grann
in Albany??
http://www.actionlyme.org/STEERE_FAIRY_UNSTALKED.htm
We're were AT A PROTEST IN ALBANY, all
of us "dangerously intelligent chemists"
who were allegedly "stalking Steere."
Grann never mentioned meeting me and my
discussion with him about the FDA meeting
a few months before, where I explained the
entire crime to the FDA Vaccine Committee:
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/slides/3680s2_11.pdf
Does the NYTimes really have a right
to criticize anyone who takes on
"unpopular" topics?
This commentary is kinda too ridiculous
for words. But I had a few anyway...
Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org
http://www.relapsingfever.org
======================================
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/08/opinion/08mon1.html?pagewanted=print
March 8, 2010
Editorial
Are You or Have You Ever Been a Lawyer?
In the McCarthy era, demagogues on the right smeared loyal Americans
as disloyal and charged that the government was being undermined from
within.
In this era, demagogues on the right are smearing loyal Americans as
disloyal and charging that the government is being undermined from
within.
These voices — often heard on Fox News — are going after Justice
Department lawyers who represented Guantánamo detainees when they were
in private practice. It is not nearly enough to say that these lawyers
did nothing wrong. In fact, they upheld the highest standards of their
profession and advanced the cause of democratic justice. The Justice
Department is right to stand up to this ugly bullying.
Senator Charles Grassley, Republican of Iowa, has been pressing
Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. since November to reveal the names of
lawyers on his staff who have done legal work for Guantánamo
detainees. The Justice Department said last month that there were nine
political appointees who had represented the detainees in challenges
to their confinement. The department said that they were following all
of the relevant conflict-of-interest rules. It later confirmed their
names when Fox News figured out who they were.
It did not take long for the lawyers to become a conservative target,
branded the “Gitmo 9” by a group called Keep America Safe, run by Liz
Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, and William
Kristol, a conservative activist (who wrote a Times Op-Ed column in
2008). The group released a video that asks, in sinister tones, “Whose
values do they share?”
On Fox News, Ms. Cheney lashed out at lawyers who “voluntarily
represented terrorists.” She said it was important to look at who
these terrorists are, including Salim Ahmed Hamdan, who had served as
Osama bin Laden’s driver. Let’s do that.
Mr. Hamdan was the subject of a legal battle that went all the way to
the Supreme Court. Ms. Cheney conveniently omitted that the court
ruled in favor of his claim that the military commissions system being
used to try detainees like him was illegal. Republican senators then
sponsored legislation to fix the tribunals. They did not do the job
well, but the issue might never have arisen without the lawyers who
argued on behalf of Mr. Hamdan, some of whom wore military uniforms.
In order to attack the government lawyers, Ms. Cheney and other
critics have to twist the role of lawyers in the justice system. In
representing Guantánamo detainees, they were in no way advocating for
terrorism. They were ensuring that deeply disliked individuals were
able to make their case in court, even ones charged with heinous acts
— and that the Constitution was defended.
It is not the first time that the right has tried to distract
Americans from the real issues surrounding detention policy by
attacking lawyers. Charles Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of
defense for detainee affairs under George W. Bush, urged corporations
not to do business with leading law firms that were defending
Guantánamo detainees. He resigned soon after that.
If lawyers who take on controversial causes are demonized with
impunity, it will be difficult for unpopular people to get legal
representation — and constitutional rights that protect all Americans
will be weakened. That is a high price to pay for scoring cheap
political points.
"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci