 |
|
|
in San Francisco |
|
Interview by Jack Nichols
"Most in the local AIDS community," wrote Tanya Pampalome in the San Francisco Examiner (December 13), "were jubilant when Michael Petrelis and David Pasquarelli were charged last month with criminal conspiracy, stalking and making criminal threats, and held on $500,000 bail."
San Francisco Frontiers news editor Tim Kingston
District Attorney Terence Hallinan told the Examiner that their behavior constituted "terrorism" and that he planned to prosecute them on all charges. Michael Petrelis's AIDS activism pre-dated the creation of the original ACT UP. In the mid-1980s he co-founded, with Marty Robinson and others, New York's pioneering Lavender Hill Mob. Subsequently he moved to San Francisco, more recently joining forces with David Pasquarelli whose group took over ACT UP San Francisco. Pasquarelli began a denialist's crusade, denouncing the HIV theory as well as those HIV drugs currently offered by the medical establishment. Petrelis does not share Pasquarelli's anti-HIV views, but the two men became allies, nevertheless, agreeing about certain sex freedom issues and what they've called the scare tactics of the AIDS "industry." More recently they seem to fear the onset of "AIDS quarantine" and have protested accordingly. Petrelis, also eager to witness the re-opening San Francisco's baths, examined and critiqued disease statistics, sending his biting criticisms to media outlets. He was GayToday's October 2000 interviewee. Among the more vocal San Francisco critics of both Petrelis and Pasquarelli, is January's GayToday interviewee, Tim Kingston.
Kingston then intensively covered AIDS and AIDS activism between 1986 and 1993, when, he says, "the death toll became too heart-breaking". Even so, he kept his eye on the pandemic. "I wrote one of the first ever stories castigating Burroughs Wellcome for the price of AIDS drugs," he told GayToday, "and I specialized in writing stories of drug gouging pricing by the pharmaceutical industry." "Finally and most relevant," he says, "I have covered ACT UP SF from its birth to its demise. I have covered its demos, its actions, its internal schisms, its successes and failures. I covered the split of ACT UP into ACT UP San Francisco and ACT UP Golden Gate, now Survive AIDS. I covered the destruction of ACT UP SF at the hands of Messers. Pasquarelli and Bellefountaine. And I have covered the transformation of ACT UP SF into AUSF, a transformation of an AIDS activist group into an AIDS denialist group that has done its best to negate everything the group once stood for. I have covered AUSF antics from Vancouver to the Bay Area and have even -- oh joy -- been personally attacked by the (denialist) group." Jack Nichols: Tim, East Coast author Scott Tucker, a co-founder of ACT UP Philadelphia told GayToday that "Petrelis has a wide reputation for being erratic and abrasive, but he has also asked some of the rude questions which have crossed the minds of others who have kept quiet ... about inflated salaries for the executives of some AIDS agencies ... and about seeming contradictions in epidemiological data." Have such questions crossed your mind too?
Tim Kingston: Before I say anything I would like to
stress these are my opinions and not necessarily those
of San Francisco Frontiers.
Now, of course such questions have crossed my mind, and I have covered the controversy around the salaries paid to non-profit directors. One thing I have, however, noticed is a great hue and cry about inflated salaries of non-profit directors, but there is rarely such a controversy about the salaries paid to for-profit company directors. And there is even less coverage of the gap between what is paid to those who work for for-profits and the CEOs in charge of them. For instance, the chief executive of Tyson Foods was just given a $2.1 million bonus despite the fact the company has just been indicted for deliberately flouting immigration laws and hiring illegal immigrants for minimum wages. However, that is not the point at issue here. The issue is what Michael Petrelis has been up to. Sure, Petrelis has been on the right side of some issues-upholding the Coors boycott being one. But then Petrelis was also thrown out of New York for being an extremely loose cannon. He has since bounced around the country making himself unwelcome wherever he lands. His reputation for being "erratic and abusive" is well deserved, and his behavior in San Francisco has gone from merely abusive to criminal as he has allied himself with the AIDS deniers of Act Up San Francisco (AUSF). Even before linking with AUSF, Petrelis' accountability project-ostensibly aimed at promoting fiscal accountability in AIDS Service Organizations-was working with individuals ideologically predisposed to attack AIDS funding and ASOs such as Republican Rep. Tom Coburn. That particular congress member is an antigay enemy of AIDS funding who has repeatedly gone after federal AIDS prevention and research money. Shortly after being contacted by Petrelis, Coburn used the "accountability" project's propaganda to attack AIDS funding. Petrelis has done this repeatedly, that is making alliances with right wing anti gay groups in D.C.. Petrelis has been doing his best to get the Ryan White CARE act defunded. He even sent a letter to then Senator Jesse Helms in 2000 alleging-inaccurately-that CDC money was being used in San Francisco to fund pornographic websites advocating unsafe sex. Are these the actions of a queer community activist? If he is so concerned about the community why is he in bed with the likes of Coburn, Helms and the various other extreme right wingers? As far as the seeming contradictions in epi data go, that is precisely what they are: "seeming." Petrelis has drawn conclusions about AIDS prevalence and incidence that are not upheld by data. Jack Nichols: Quite honestly, I've ignored the anti-HIV tirades that David Pasquarelli has been sending GayToday and other news outlets. While, for a time, he got some support from South Africa's new president who also denied the HIV theory, his reasoning and his writing abilities have yet to convince me that he knows what he's talking about. Over a year ago I received notices of anti-HIV squabbles taking place at a Project Inform meeting-if I recall properly. There were charges of fisticuffs and evictions and police callings. Being in San Francisco, I'm sure you have a better take on the reported threats and squabbles that erupted then and even since then, right? Tim Kingston: There have been much more than fisticuffs and squabbles. I took the liberty of reviewing past issues of San Francisco Frontiers for stories about Petrelis, Pasquarelli and AUSF. I came up with almost three dozen stories detailing numerous incidents of threats, harassment, stalking, physical attacks, bullying behavior and the resulting lawsuits. The count does not include personal stories recounted to me by AIDS activists who have been confronted in the street, screamed at from passing cars and generally terrorized by "members" of AUSF whose favored method of political discourse is highly personalized and obscene invective. Neither does it include my own or other journalists personal experience with these individuals. And that is only the incidents that I know about.
ACT UP San Francisco's David Pasquarelli
To set the stage, Pasquarelli and Michael Bellefountaine arrived in San Francisco in the early 1990's and proceeded to take over ACT UP San Francisco, which was ailing badly after its split from ACT UP Golden Gate in 1991. The group had lost many members to AIDS and burnout. Pasquarelli and Bellefountaine chased all the original members out through a process of manipulation and harassment. They have not stopped since. Said one former ACT UP San Francisco member I interviewed in 1996, "What I get from them [is that] they are right and everyone else is wrong. Their way is the only way. It is like dealing with pharmaceutical company representatives or Dr. Marcus Conant when he was pushing AZT, or Christian Fundamentalists for that matter. There is no discussion with them. They have all the answers and from that comes a very pompous egotistical attitude where they have no trouble being abusive to other people. They have no trouble being abusive to PWA's, being abusive to women, etc. etc. etc. It is a very rigid way of thinking." Thus, as early as 1996 AUSF was disrupting meetings and gatherings. They broke into a Project Inform dinner and got into fights with attendees that left at least one individual bleeding from injuries due to flying glass. The same year they disrupted a Community Consortium meeting about AIDS treatments in a way that reminded one attendee "of the brown shirts." There were instances of telephone threats, alleged bomb threats and sidewalk intimidation. They also like to spit in people's faces. Here is a sample of their phone "zaps" left on AIDS Treatment News' John James answering machine: "John James you are an ignorant fuck, we are going to blow you out of the water [and] the entire paradigm on which you have built your fortune, you little negative fuck." Charming. These sorts of messages are standard operating procedure. They are also illegal. (Not to mention James' HIV status should be irrelevant to people who don't believe in HIV. But then this was during the days when AUSF asserted the photographic chemical developer DNCB would cure AIDS.) When another AIDS activist had the temerity to criticize the group in 1996, Michael Bellefountiane the other main AUSF organizer alongside Pasquarelli came up to him "put his finger in my face and said we are going to get you next!" Among the other coups engineered by AUSF was their harassment of Girl Scouts selling cookies in the Castro. AUSF members yelled at, and accused the young girls of being antigay. These were children being yelled at by large grown men. That's real brave. What is particularly ironic is that the Girl Scouts are pretty damn queer friendly, unlike the Boy Scouts!
At the 1996 Vancouver AIDS conference they poured fake blood over AIDS researchers. In August 1996 they disrupted a city Health Commission meeting and concluded by spitting in the face of yet another female Health Department staffer. In October 1996 they poured soiled cat litter over Pat Christen director of the SF AIDS Foundation at a community forum, a real bright idea in a room full of PWAs with suppressed immune systems. In 1997 they disrupted a Post Exposure Prophylaxis meeting totally preventing any discussion of the issue. In 1998 Petrelis hooked up with Tom Coburn to attack ASOs and formally demanded an audit of federally funded AIDS organizations. In 1999 a forged letter was distributed to congress purportedly penned by rep. Nancy Pelosi casting doubt on federal funding of AIDS organizations. Petrelis was strongly suspected of involvement, as he was of another forged letter this time allegedly by AIDS Office director Dr. Mitch Katz. In 2000 ACT UP Golden Gate changed its name to Survive AIDS to distance itself from AUSF. AUSF then promptly put up signs all over the Castro saying Survive AIDS.com which directed net searchers to the AUSF website. On April 17, 2000 members of AUSF including Pasquarelli attacked a forum on structure treatment interruption sponsored by Survive AIDS and Project Inform. They brawled with attendees, pushed a Project Inform staff member (female again!) over, causing her minor injuries, and hurled 1000mg Vitamin C size pills at the speakers from point blank range. Pasquarelli called the attack "high drama performance art." Said another AUSFer "Our purpose was to stop Martin Delaney and Steven Deeks from speaking. If that was stopped we have succeeded in education the community." Such attacks brought on a bevy of restraining orders filed by the city and AIDS organizations. They were repeatedly ignored. In October 2000 Petrelis and two other AUSF members subsequently entered the SF AIDS Foundation's client services office and trashed it, while also taking photographs of clients, a slight violation of their confidentiality.
You be the judge if that sounds like a death threat. Other individuals including reporters and their families received similar calls. This has been a consistent pattern for at least five years. Is there any wonder that people in San Francisco are ticked off, irate and frustrated? There have been repeated community letters, campaigns, complaints and lawsuits. Nothing has stopped AUSF and now it has finally come to criminal charges. Given the above context is this any surprise? Michael Bellefountaine told me in an interview for a 1996 article that "We expected a backlash. We thought it would be stronger than this." Well dear Michael it looks like you finally got your wish! The only surprise is that Bellefountaine is not in jail with Pasquarelli and Petrelis-but there is apparently an outstanding warrant for his arrest in Southern California. Jack Nichols: Both Petrelis and Pasquarelli insist they're innocent of these latest charges but, of course, they'll both probably sit in jail until tried in court. The rather high bail set for them--$500,000 each-will keep them there. Since Petrelis is reported to be HIV-positive, what about his receipt of needed medicines in jail? I know you think they're both guilty, but do you really think they're so very dangerous? Petrelis, at least, seems to me to be one unlikely to use violence as a strategy. I only know Pasquarelli through his group's clumsy avalanches of emails, however. Tim Kingston: Two questions two answers. First, if one has to be in jail with HIV the San Francisco jail is probably the best place in the world to be. Sheriff Michael Hennessey runs one of the better AIDS programs around. In any case given the stink that Petrelis and co are capable of raising Hennessey would be an idiot to do anything to get in the way of their medical care. Anyway since when does Pasquarelli care about his HIV status? He does not believe in AIDS. Two, the issue is not how dangerous they are. Both individuals have repeatedly shown themselves incapable of respecting both temporary and permanent restraining orders. Judge Julie Tang was quoted specifically saying that the pair's strong ideological stance on the issues made it unlikely that they would respect any of the restraining orders now in effect. Thus they were to remain in custody. In the latest outburst about syphilis both men either violated or ignored similar preexisting orders. What are the city and other organizations supposed to do, get restraining orders from every group after Pasquarelli and Petrelis engage in yet another round of harassment? Frankly it is unclear how dangerous the pair are. Will they escalate their actions from the threats they have been making? I don't know. Jack Nichols: You say that Petrelis and Pasquarelli are particularly dangerous because they're hoping to engender similar views among progressives in this country. You say they are "incredibly skilled at distortion, manipulation and outright lies, and they know how to package their statements so as to appear progressive." You also note that "by their activities they have stepped out of the ranks of progressive activist and into the ranks of reactionary opportunists." This sounds like fearing their ideas more than fearing them because of violence. What do you think? Tim Kingston: This is a question about politics, not their actions. I have detailed their actions. I do not advocate jailing them for their political stance. This is not fear, it is warning. What I am saying is a warning to the community about these individuals way of justifying whatever they do using politically progressive rhetoric. We have already seen numerous people on the East Coast buy that rhetoric hook, line and sinker. I would draw people's attention to a group called the New Alliance Party (now reformulated as the "Reform Party") that was courting the queer community in the late 1980's. That group talked the progressive talk, but didn't walk the walk. Lenora Fulani was a black figurehead on a white organization that operated as a political cult run by a shadowy figure once associated with Lyndon LaRouche. The group recruited progressive queers, but simply used them as fodder for their own organizing efforts, which did not aid queer progressive or socialist organizing in this country one bit. The New Alliance Party was a parasitical political operation. I would suggest that AUSF in the form of Pasquarelli and their partner Petrelis is very similar. They and AUSF simply drain energy and effort that could be more productively used elsewhere. As one person I interviewed in 1996 put it: "Frankly the cause of AIDS advocacy would be better off without 'em.They are kind of like a cancer on the movement. It is time to excise it." Jack Nichols: While Pasquarelli's anti-HIV theorizing lacks credibility as far as I'm concerned, but since you, as a journalist, have often critiqued the big pharmaceutical companies' price gouging, what do you think of Pasquarelli's perspectives on HIV drugs? Is there any truth to them? Tim Kingston: Which perspective? That the drugs are overpriced or that they are poisons that cause the disease called AIDS?
Jack Nichols: I've heard that Pasquarelli and his local cohorts often berated John S. James, the venerable publisher of the much-respected AIDS Treatment News. In fact, I was told, James found it difficult to walk down the street without being non-violently harassed and recently moved away to Philadelphia. Do you know anything about that? Tim Kingston: That is an exaggeration. Yes I believe they harassed him when they saw him. But it is not as if they are sitting there staking out his house. As far as I know ATN moved because of the dotcom boom that was evicting all and sundry from San Francisco and James did not want to be the next one evicted. Jack Nichols: William Dobbs, a New York attorney who founded Sex Panic in 1997, says that "Petrelis and Pasquarelli conducted a 'phone zap' as part of a campaign against possible AIDS quarantine. They called, and urged people to call, public health officials and news reporters. Their vigorous efforts against the proposed Model State Emergency Health Powers Act have stirred strong emotions. While we (and others) may disagree with them on politics or tactics, the history of AIDS has often compelled aggressive responses by activists. The prospect of high bail and escalating criminal charges for protest is a genuine threat to civil liberties." How would you reply to Dobbs about this? Tim Kingston: My first reaction would be unprintable. On reflection The Model State Emergency Health Powers Act is quite simply an added on fig leaf to justify their latest antics. There is a big difference between a phone zap and hateful, threatening, criminal harassment. The "P" twins did indeed call public health officials, and screamed abuse at them, and reporters. When the progressive group Fairness and Accuracy in Media calls for critiques and zaps of media coverage they always note that being polite has more effect than being abusive. AUSF has never, ever, not been abusive. I am sure that Dobbs would agree that agent provocateurs have justified many a crack down on civil liberties. The solution is to remove the provocateurs and expose them as either paid agents of the state, or by their actions, as good as the same, then isolate them and ignore them. Not build a campaign defending their indefensible actions. Look, we all know how well loved reporters are. We all know that reporters are used to fielding irate calls. Does this not tell us something that even reporters filed suit against these guys? I emphasize that what the "P" twins are doing is not protest. I repeat what they are doing is stalking, harassing, threatening, sometimes physically attacking and bullying anyone they disagree with or who stands up to them and publicly disagrees. That is not protest. It is how the National Front in England and the Brownshirts in Germany acted. The high bail is justified. It is not a threat to civil liberties. It has taken five years for the situation to get to this point. The charges are a last resort to control this group. Jack Nichols: Dobbs, in his open letter to GayToday and other media outlets, says he thinks charges against Petrelis and Pasquarelli are "out of proportion to the harms alleged." District Attorney Hallinan has "dusted off the books", Dobbs charges, "to bring a laundry list of more than two dozen felonies and misdemeanors including harassment and stalking, with possible penalties of many decades in prison, suggesting a political motivation for the prosecution." 'Terrorism' characterizations, he says, "appear cynically calculated to inflame passions." Do you think the District Attorney's charges of terrorism are fully warranted?
As far as charges of terrorism goes I believe that was a mistake, particularly at this point in time. But "cynically calculated to inflame passions"? No. It was a hysterical panicked reaction that many people have backed away from. As far as I know even the FBI took one look at the mess in San Francisco and went, "No thanks, we are staying away from this snake pit." The terrorism charges are a stupid result of people who are fed up and frustrated. I would be willing to use the word terrorism reluctantly and with a small "t." The situation is much more similar to the terror inflicted in domestic battery than terror with a political motivation. Jack Nichols: You note that in their statement, Petrelis and Pasquarelli not only claim that they're innocent, but they say they never visited the homes of their accusers, as charged. Furthermore, they insist, they never talked to any of their accusers' children. They state: "Claims that we engaged in such appalling acts are patently false and derived from the unacceptable societal stereotype of the big, bad homosexual that preys on little kids." What do you think about this? Did they themselves actually talk to the accusers' kids, do you think? Tim Kingston: That is a perfect example of their word games. Granted I have not read the full charge list, but the charges as I understand it refer to telephone threats NOT visiting the homes of their accusers. It's a straw man. Now I obviously do not know exactly whether or not they talked to the children, but I would not be at all surprised if they did. I believe, personally, that they did, or at very least left threatening obscene messages that the children heard. Now having denied the accusation Petrelis and Pasquarelli turn around and make themselves the victims in the situation, portraying themselves as gay men victimized by "unacceptable societal stereotype[s] of the big, bad homosexual." Their chutzpah is impressive, astounding and almost entertaining. Jack Nichols: As you know, Scott Tucker, in his letter we published in GayToday, said that he thought, in the absence of a strong AIDS Activist movement, that the main point about which the imprisoned men are right is that "AIDS, Incorporated will never serve the needs of mere queers unless there is continued friction between some folks with high salaries and some folks who still get sexually transmitted diseases." What do you think about this point? Tim Kingston: OK so if that is true what does that have to do with the activities of these two? Look at their history. Look at what they have done to AIDS activism. They destroyed ACT UP San Francisco. They scared people away from activism. They have given AIDS activism such a bad name in San Francisco that ACT UP Golden Gate felt obligated to change their name. Doctors in San Francisco refuse to speak at community forums. Both Dr. Donald Abrams and Dr. Bill Owens are two AIDS physicians that have said as much. What has that to do with activism? AUSF members feel they have every right to prevent PWAs in San Francisco from getting information that may help save their lives. I have detailed the empirical evidence of them doing this. More damning they have actually admitted that is their intent. To quote a 1997 article in SF Frontiers` about yet another AUSF disruption: "One frustrated audience member asked Michael Bellefountaine, "Do you want to give me some credit for being intelligent enough to listen to the information that is being presented and draw my own conclusions?" "No," retorted Bellefountaine." That just about says it all doesn't it, really? My personal feeling about AIDS Inc, assuming that refers to the none profit sector, is curiosity about why all the attention on charities actions, when it is the failure of the government and private sector to offer decent medical care that has led to the charities taking such a huge role in providing care and services. I personally am more irate about CEOs golden parachutes after laying off thousands of workers than the salaries of ASO directors. From what I have seen ASO director salaries are, with a few exceptions certainly not in the top ranges that charity directors make. I am willing to be proven wrong, but I think we all have more important things to worry about. Jack Nichols: Could you give me your personal impressions of Michael Petrelis? Tim Kingston: Four words: opportunistic, hypocritical, loose cannon. This is a man who believes that HIV causes AIDS, but is willing to work with anyone to pursue his personal vendetta's disguised as politics. AIDS deniers? Sure, so long as they go after ASO's. Rightwing congressmen? Fine, so long as they go after ASO's. If that is not opportunistic and hypocritical I don't know what is. Jack Nichols: How about David Pasquarelli? What's he like?
Their tactics include personal abuse, vicious sexism, verbal and mental gymnastics involving complete political and personal inconsistency. Pasquarelli will say whatever is of benefit to his particular needs at that particular moment. To say Pasquarelli is misguided would be wrong because he knows just what he is doing. I would believe he considers himself a revolutionary dissident of sorts, critiquing the "establishment," but he reminds me more of Roy Cohn tearing down those he hates using any and all weapons available at his disposal. Pasquarelli is smart but also rather a media whore like Cohn. He has a burning desire for name recognition in print no matter how critical it is. Jack Nichols: If these two men are put away for decades, will ACT UP SF continue their denialist work and, possibly, continue to annoy The City's AIDS establishment? If so, it would seem to me, it would be like locking up two Osama bin Ladens without touching the Al Qaeda organization at all. In other words, are there more denialists who'll hatch from the same place where Petrelis and Pasquarelli came from? Tim Kingston: For goddess's sake! I would put my rent money that they will not be put away for decades. My guess is at the most extreme they will be seeing the inside of a jail and orange jumpsuits for a couple of years. I think comparing them to Osama Bin Laden gives them a bit too much credit and power. Maybe the Symbionese Liberation Army would be more appropriate. I don't believe there are more denialists who will hatch. But there is still one on the loose, who has kept a remarkably low profile of late. That would be Michael Bellefountiane, David Pasquarelli's partner in crime who was a primary architect of many of AUSF's attacks on other AIDS activists and organizations. I would say, however, that if Michael Petrelis, David Pasquarelli and Michael Bellefountaine were out of action then the core of the San Francisco AIDS denialist bullyboys would be out of business. The other individuals involved just don't have the same drive, mania for publicity, and organizational ability. Besides they would be probably quite happy to roll in the dollars from their highly profitable "medical marijuana" business. (Just as an aside I have always found it interesting that AUSF has funded itself through selling medical marijuana-and purchased property in San Francisco-to people with HIV/AIDS when they don't even believe AIDS is real.) Jack Nichols: Isn't it possible that San Francisco's District Attorney may make martyrs out of Petrelis and Pasquarelli? No doubt they can still disseminate their views from prison. Tim Kingston: Of course they want to be martyrs. I am willing to take the risk if it will keep them out of our hair here. And frankly with them in jail I can't see them creating a movement for their release, although that is what they are doing their best to create. As far as disseminating their views I am not sure that they will be able to do that. From what I understand the San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessey is not all that pleased with the press releases issued from prison, and may take steps to prevent further releases. I remain neutral on that particular point. Jack Nichols: Thanks very much, Tim, for sharing your views about the PP Duo, which reflect the feelings, no doubt, of many in San Francisco. In closing, I'd like to know what you think of the state of AIDS activism in San Francisco. Has there been a sad decline? Which groups are most effective now and why?
ACT UP East Bay has been effectively working with anti corporate globalization protest groups agitating for lower world wide drug prices. Survive AIDS has been keeping a very low profile and has been involved in few campaigns. Judy Greenspan has been very active in prisoner advocacy work involving medical care in the California prison system. Project Inform's Treatment Action Network has conducted letter-writing campaigns, but overall AIDS activism here is at a very low ebb, and has been declining ever since the early Clinton years. |
Kingston is currently the News Editor for San Francisco Frontiers
and has worked as a San Francisco journalist since
1984, first with the Pacifica station KPFA and then
(during its heyday) with the San Francisco Bay Times.
He covered the very first AIDS activist protest in The
City, organized by Citizens for Medical Justice, which
later became what he calls the "real" ACT UP San
Francisco.
Michael Petrelis 
A group of AIDS denialists protest in San Francisco 
San Francisco District Attorney Terrence Hallinan 
David Pasquarelli 
Tim Kingston 
© 1997-2002 BEI