LOL, that's a BIG assumption.
Let me just say that throughout my scientific career, I have seen a lot of respect directed towards Dr. Fauci. He is almost a superman of science. Participating in over 1,000 studies while acting as head of NIAID... I've never personally known a scientist to have over 200 publications in their career, and I've never personally known an agency head or even department head to have time to do research. Certainly, when I was head of a department with over 100 scientists, technicians, graduate students, and interns, there was no way I could have found time to do a research project.
Now, as for Dr. Fauci's AIDS research activities. All I read in your post was a bunch of inference and implication, for instance, talking about the Nuremberg code and then about pediatric AIDS studies in order to create the false impression that the AIDS studies violated worldwide human research ethics. If there is concrete evidence that Dr. Fauci went forward with pediatric AIDS studies without ethical oversight and approval, where is it?
And please explain how the medical community is supposed to develop drugs and treatment protocols to treat pediatric AIDS unless they do studies on pediatric AIDS patients? The FDA will never approve a drug for use in children without it being tested in children within the age group the drug is intended to treat. With the exception of the animal rule, it is impossible to get FDA approval for any drug without human clinical trials. (The animal rule is intended for certain situations in which human studies are unethical or unfeasible.) Product Development Under the Animal Rule Guidance for Industry
As for deaths of children enrolled in the clinical trials, we *are* talking about children who have a disease that is always fatal without treatment. Yes, people who have fatal diseases can and do die during clinical trials without any violations of ethics laws. And (referring to the World Tribune article), if drugs with known toxicities are the only treatments available for AIDS, why *wouldn't* the research community be interested in seeing their efficacy in children? If the drugs are effective, then the toxicities are a reasonable trade-off for preventing the child from dying from AIDS.
Your youtube links only go to some long conspiracy rant in which unrelated items are conspiratorially linked in order to convince people who do not understand the scientific process or method.
You link to a Gateway Pundit article which starts out with lies and does not provide a single link to the medical literature. Nope, that isn't a credible source.
The World Tribune article does no better. It is capitalizing on the fact that most people have no clue about the clinical trial process in order to generate traffic. It says "The Associated Press reported in June 2005: “The government has concluded at least some AIDS drug experiments involving foster children violated federal rules designed to ensure vulnerable youths were protected from the risks of medical research,” but where is the link? Where is a citation to the AP article? Why no information that would enable a reader to independently review the source data?
And then the World Tribune article asks, "Why wasn’t Fauci’s NIH interested in competitive AIDS research?" This question is meaningless. First of all, the NIAID headed by Dr. Fauci is subsidiary to the NIH, so there is no "Fauci's NIH." Second, what do they mean by "competitive AIDS research?" The answer provided in the article was equally nonsensical. In order to determine whether there was, in fact, competition in the AIDS research field at that time, I did a search in Pubmed for ((HIV) AND (pediatric)) AND (children) and found that several research groups all over the world were doing HIV studies in children. So, there was actually a lot of competition there.
I presume that you linked the "COMMITTEE ON FINANCE UNITED STATES SENATE" report as "evidence" of Dr. Fauci's supposed evil wrongdoings, but that is a report on the foster care system. It talks about abuse of foster care children and how oversight of the system is ineffective. And so forth. I searched the document for "research", "study", "studies", "trial", and "clinical" to see if there was any mention of enrolling children in research studies, and found nothing. Any mention of research was referring to research of foster children welfare. The only mention of "trial" was in conjunction with the word "criminal." The word "clinical" referred only to medical care of the children. If there is some smoking gun evidence there to prove that Dr. Fauci was doing experiments on children similar to those done by Japan Unit 731 during WWII, I could not find it.
Finally, the 360 News Las Vegas article is just another conglomeration of anti-medical science conspiracies. A lot of innuendo, a dearth of fact.
In the future, be very careful with your references. If you are trying to relay information, use credible references such as those found in the medical literature. Conspiracy websites and youtube videos do not count as references. And government documents are fine, but read them yourself first to make sure they say what you expect them to say. Being a scientist, I do not just take things at face value without checking them myself. I actually do review links and so forth.