HIV Innocence Group on Hiatus: OMSJ Takes Over in Research Capacity

The activities at Clark Baker’s HIV Innocence Group appear to have come to a drastic halt. As I recently reported, Baker has not posted a single case to his website since November of 2013. I can only assume it is because of this website where I have meticulously documented the proof that said Group is an allusion of what Baker is presenting to the public. Perhaps other defense attorneys are using this site as a source for properly vetting Mr. Baker. Most attorneys do not want their hard work attributed to someone whose only contribution is making a phone call.

But what has become of Mr. Baker? It seems he has switched his focus to Research. The comment below is from RA facebook posted September 2013: (NOTE: bolding is mine for all sources)

 Clark Baker Having been involved in MANY cases since 2008, I’m convinced that HIV and AIDS are real. We’ve photographed HIV and continue to engage in HIV/plasma experiments using electron microscopy.  It’s also hard to avoid the fact that most living organisms, including humans, eventually die from conditions that compromise health and lead to an Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) and death. But like Mullis and Duesberg, we found NO REPRODUCIBLE PROOF that HIV causes AIDS. If such a proof existed, OMSJ has the funding and resources to prove it ourselves.  But we’re not at dead end – I suspect that we’ll soon ask HIV researchers that question in one or more videotaped depositions. Stay tuned.

 Personally I will believe it when I see it.

At least one person seems to believe what Mr. Baker tells him. Martin K. Barnes has been involved in the AIDS Dissident movement for quite some time but he seems to be more comfortable behind the scenes. The email below from January of 2103 was part of an email list meant only for other dissidents. Because the list is comprised of dozens of names and addresses and has been so widely circulated it was not hard to come by; especially 18 months later. Of course when we “orthodox” communicate via an email list, it’s a Big Conspiracy with the direct goal of bringing down Clark Baker and will get you sued in Federal Court. (sarcasm intended)

 ——– Original Message ——–
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 14:54:58 -0500

To: HIVAIDS Dissent List

Surprise…The Office of Medical and Scientific Justice— besides winning 49 court cases and counting– has begun to do much of the research that was suggested last June at our conference in Vers-Pont-du-Gard! This research, Clark explained, is being carried out at major universities. It compares viral loads, antibodies and phylogenetic analysis in samples that are HIV+, HIV-, and HIV- with various illnesses. The results so far, explained Clark, seem to be confirming– simultaneously– views held by RA, Perth, HEAL and even our conference chair, Etienne de Harven! 
This seemed impossible to me at first, but once Clark showed me slides on his computer and explained their origin, I understood where he was going with the research. But due to the explosive political nature of this information I cannot explain more about it at this time. We have to keep this quiet for now until the work is finished. 
But I will say this much. Clark has commissioned this research for defense against prosecutions based on phylogenetics. But on the way he is apparently building a case for the non- existence of infectious HIV! I have registered for a monthly contribution to OMSJ to help finish this research and support OMSJ’s continuing success in court. Clark expects the results to be available in 2013.
Do you have any disposable income? Would you be willing to set up a monthly payment to OMSJ?  Let’s let Clark know we are here and that we support his work! Please donate using this link:
Let’s make 2013 the year that the AIDS paradigm crumbles!
Martin K. Barnes

Just from those two sources we can gather lots of information about this research. (How much of it is actually true remains to be seen.)

·         What: Phylogenetic & EM Research

·         When: Since June of 2012 = 24 months ago

·         Where: “Major Universities”

·         Why: Manipulate the Court (and because they said so)

·         How: Unlimited Funding (& Resources)

 Before delving into the specifics of what has been presented so far, there is one more source I need to post. Below is part of an email from Andrew Maniotis dated December 2013.  The full email is posted at the Immunity Resource Foundation website. The IRF was started by Joan Shenton and is basically a repository for “educational” information on dissident ideas. The email is incredibly interesting and contains much information:

 We’ve set in motion today, the erection of an “HIV” viremia testing lab in Houston, Texas…

 I’ve had literally hundreds of people come to me to test them during the past year or so, yet EM labs throughout the world, including PERTH’s are afraid to test our split samples, once they know what we are doing, and the EM lab managers go running for the woods when they figure out what we are asking them to do. This is why we need our own testing lab run by me and Dr. Jonas Moses. I have 5 perfectly processed samples that appear in [a] paper. Which is why we need to get this lab going, and we are seeking more funding. I’ve decided to donate all the CONTRACT RESEARCH LABORATORY that tests for many things, using an electron microscope analysis that we have obtained at first through Baylor College of Medicine, run by a friend of mine at first, until our JOEL 2000 EM is installed.


The first thing I notice is a huge discrepancy. Mr. Baker claims “major universities” are willingly taking part in this research. Dr. Maniotis, on the other hand, acknowledges that not one single EM lab in the entire world will help them. Maniotis seems to be implying a conspiracy among these institutions to subvert the truth. The more likely scenario is the samples are not adequate/proper for this application. I have discussed this before. One thing that does give me pause is Dr.  Maniotis’ claim they used the EM at Baylor College of Medicine “at first…run by a friend of mine”. This could mean Maniotis’ friend surreptitiously allowed them to use the EM until they were caught. It could also mean that Baylor knowingly allowed the usage. I am not sure, but I have contacted Baylor College of Medicine and they are looking into it. I will post an update when the investigation is complete.

Where is this paper with the “5 perfectly processed samples” that has been finished since at least December of 2013? Is it in the middle of the peer review process? I do not know. I sent a request for details about the paper via Joan Shenton @ IRF, the source of the email. Ms. Shenton was gracious enough to include me in the email chain when she forwarded my request to Dr. Maniotis. My personal policy in these situations is to wait approximately one week and send a follow up request; wait about another week and send a third request and then drop if it I do not get a response. This is the protocol I followed in this situation and I did not get a response. Surprise! If anyone has any information please contact me.

However, there is some interesting yet cryptic information from our favorite whacky dissident, Elizabeth Ely. I know she is emotional but that does not discredit all her information. The thread is from April 30, 2014. I have only included Ely’s comments as they are the only pertinent ones:

Elizabeth Ely I’ve noticed that the goons and Internet shills talk endlessly about how demands for electron microscopy of HIV are misleading — right at the point where they are obviously informed that there is a paper waiting to be published on just that. They call more attention to the issue.April 30 at 11:11pm

Elizabeth Ely Yes, it’s waiting to be published. They’re stalling. I cannot say more. My grief is too deep. April 30 at 11:14pm

Elizabeth Ely I have a draft. I’m going to burn it the day the author of it dies. April 30 at 11:16pm

Elizabeth Ely I had the audacity to believe in someone, without cynicism. I believed in this paper, this project. Now all I hope for is that the other side will blow itself up, as it is doing, very ably, right now. . . . The paper says that HIV-positive people with all kinds of “viral load” counts are HIV negative when tested by EM. No exceptions. All of them. . . . The second-best thing they deplore over there is the truth. The first is love without cynicism; that is their enemy. April 30 at 11:19pm

Yes, very dramatic and cryptic, but it proves a paper has indeed been written and Ely has a copy. But who wrote it? Ely confirms the author is Maniotis a month later on May 25:

Elizabeth Ely 1. HIV is real, if you call what the government labs call “HIV” by that name also. You can actually get ahold of this — well, some people can get ahold of it — and put it under an electron microscope and see what they’re calling “HIV.” Whether this substance is pathogenic — disease causing — at all is not important, because nobody has yet been able to find these things they call “HIV” viruses in the blood of an HIV-positive person. This has happened repeatedly and is the subject of an upcoming paper by Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D. — also a fact used in the defense of at least three criminal cases to-date. In other words, you can see “HIV” from a government sample under an electron microscope, or what they’re calling “HIV,” but you can’t see it in the blood of HIV-positive persons. 5 hrs

It is strange the way her tone has changed in one short month. The first melodramatic thread sounds as if all hope for publishing the paper is gone. One month later it is as if Ely’s lithium has kicked in and all hope is restored. The fact remains: A research paper on EM written by Dr. Maniotis is complete and has been for at least 6 months. So where is the paper? Why has it not been published? Has even JPandS refused? Dr. Bauer, can you help get this paper published? I am asking anyone and everyone to please contact me if you have any information.

How: Funding & Resources

The funding is probably the most fascinating part of this entire revelation. Of course as with most things relating to Mr. Baker, documentation is hard to come by.  The most recent OMSJ tax returnsare for 2012 and I found them using Guidestar. For a 25 page document, there are very few boxes filled in. It does, however, show that OMSJ has been getting donations in significantly larger dollar figures:

2009: $38,582

2010: $93,930

2011: $124,331

2012: $421,590

That is a sizable asset jump from 2011 to 2012.

However, the expenses are equally important especially considering Baker started his research in June of 2012. With research being a very costly endeavor one would logically assume a big portion would be itemized for 6 months of research. So, out of the $326,850 in expenses Baker had in 2012, how much is shown on the tax form for research? You guessed it: ZERO. Unless line 24e “other expenses” is for research. But I do not believe much phylogenetic or EM research could be done on $2,968! Baker did have a positive balance of $89,284 going into 2013 and if his donations continued into 2013 apace with the increase into 2012, Baker should be sitting on some nice funds for his research.

But wait: What about other expenses for OMSJ? Legal fees alone should be substantial. Baker filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts against “John Does 1-10” in January 2013 and used Farber’s attorney Miltenberg who is not cheap. He also has to pay a 2nd attorney in Massachusetts as local counsel. He also lost arbitration against me in 2013. The $1,700 in filing fees is not so bad, but his attorney fees will have been much more substantial. After he lost that arbitration against me (and was found Guilty of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking) he turned around and filed a Federal Lawsuit against me. His attorney fees will be massive in that case (not to mention he will have to pay my attorneys fees when he loses).  Don’t think that he will not have to pay any fees until the suit is over. I am sure he paid his attorneys a substantial retainer as well as paying them more when that retainer was used up. From the volumes and reams of paperwork he has submitted, his is paying handsomely.

Why? M-O-U-S-E

I do not think any of this “research” will see the light of day. Two years have now elapsed since Baker has begun this “research”. By now there should have been some concrete results. I am hoping and begging that we get a chance to see it. Hell, I may even donate to OMSJ myself.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: