Monday, November 5, 2012

SIXTEEN: Law (1/2)

Law Human Testing Lawsuit Dismissed...In September, a lawsuit brought by the International Committee on Offensive Microwave Weapons (ICOMW) was dismissed in the U.S. district court in Washington. "We were asking the court to enforce a presidential memorandum which bans involuntary research on human subjects," said the group's director, Harlan Girard. The Philadelphia-based organization had alleged that the DOD and the CIA have conducted such experiments in their efforts to develop weapons systems using EMFs, lasers, microwaves and sound waves (see MWV, M/J98). The judge ruled that the group did not have standing to bring suit because the people alleged to have suffered from such testing were not ICOMW members. She acknowledged that Girard himself was a member, but stated that his own complaints were "too generalized and nonspecific to support a complaint." Girard told Microwave News that the ICOMW could not afford an appeal. Instead, he said, the committee plans to raise the matter with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. A new report from the Coalition Against Torture and Racial Discrimination, an alliance of 15 U.S. human rights groups, states that the lawsuit's charges deserve attention. "Given the past history of secret experimentation by the government," the anti-torture group declares, "these allegations of continuing...government-sponsored human testing should not be dismissed without more thorough, impartial investigation." (Microwave News 9/98) One of the few MKULTRA victims to receive compensation from the LSD era of mind control was a Canadian citizen whose husband was a member of parliament. In the US the Olsen family received compensation after thirty years in part because Olsen was a government scientist from a distinct socioeconomic bracket. The use of prisoners, mental patients, children, and generally people from lower socioeconomic levels of society means that these people cannot fight back. The hurdles of the legal system and years of effort are beyond their means to overcome. A successful lawsuit from a former NSA employee details how he was targeted by his fellow employees and the methods used. (excerpt) United States District Court US District Court Judge, Staley Sporkin DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA John St Clair Akwei vs. National Security Agency Ft George G. Meade, MD, USA (Civil Action 92-0449) NSA Signals Intelligence uses EMF Brain Stimulation for Remote Neural Monitoring (RNM) and Electronic Brain Link (EBL). EMF Brain Stimulation has been in development since the MKULTRA program of the early 1950s, which included neurological research into radiation (non-ionizing EMF) and bioelectric research and development. The resulting secret technology is categorized at the National Archives as "Radiation Intelligence," defined as "information from unintentionally emanated electromagnetic waves in the environment, not including radioactivity or nuclear detonation." Signals Intelligence implemented and kept this technology secret in the same manner as other electronic warfare programs of the US government. The NSA monitors available information about this technology and withholds scientific research from the public. There are also international intelligence agreements to keep this technology secret. The NSA has proprietary electronic equipment that analyzes electrical activity in humans from a distance. NSA computer-generated brain mapping can continuously monitor all of the electrical activity in the brain continuously. The NSA records and decodes individual brain maps (of hundreds of thousands of persons) for national security purposes. EMF Brain Stimulation is also secretly used by the military for brain- to-computer link (in military fighter aircraft, for example). For electronic surveillance purposes, electrical activity in the speech center of the brain can be translated into the subject's verbal thoughts. RNM can send encoded signals to the brain's auditory cortex, thus allowing audio communications direct to the brain (bypassing the ears). NSA operatives can use this covertly to debilitate subjects by simulating auditory hallucinations characteristic of paranoid schizophrenia. Without any contact with the subject, Remote Neural Monitoring can map out electrical activity from the visual cortex of a subject's brain and show images from the subject's brain on a video monitor. NSA operatives see what the surveillance subject's eyes are seeing. Visual memory can also be seen. RNM can send images direct to the visual cortex, bypassing the eyes and optic nerves. NSA operatives can use this surreptitiously to put images into a surveillance subject's brain while they are in REM sleep for Every thought, reaction, motor command, auditory event and visual image in the brain has a corresponding "evoked potential" or set of "evoked potentials." The EMF emission from the brain can be decoded into the current thoughts, images and sounds in the subject's brain. The NSA's Signals Intelligence has the proprietary ability to monitor remotely and non-invasively information in the human brain by digitally decoding the evoked potentials in the 30-50 Hz, 5 milliwatt electromagnetic emissions from the brain. The frequency to which the various brain areas respond varies from 3 Hz to 50 Hz. Only NSA Signals Intelligence modulates signals in this frequency band. TABLE 1: An example of EMF Brain Stimulation Brain Area Bioelectric Resonance Frequency Motor Control Cortex 10 Hz Auditory Cortex 15 Hz Information Induced Through Modulation Motor impulse coordination Sound which bypasses the ears Visual Cortex Somatosensory Thought Center 25 Hz 9 Hz 20 Hz Images in the brain bypassing the eyes Phantom touch sense Imposed subconscious thoughts Senator John Glenn sought to pass legislation in Congress that would make the use of human guinea pigs less likely. Here are excerpts from his speech on the Senate floor. ―The Plain-Dealer uncovered much evidence to suggest that the Federal Government continues to sponsor research where informed consent is not obtained. And this fact disturbed me greatly also. On August 15, 1994, the New York Times reported on ethical and legal questions regarding a company's efforts to promote a drug that can make some children grow taller than they otherwise would. The drug in question, Protropin, has been approved by FDA for use in children whose bodies do not make sufficient quantities of human growth hormone. However, once approved, doctors may prescribe it for other purposes at their discretion. In this case the company was apparently surveying schools for short children and then trying to funnel those children to doctors who would prescribe the drug whether or not the children lacked the human growth hormone. This unapproved research was occurring without the oversight of an IRB. And at least 15,000 children have taken this drug.‖ On November 14, 1996, the Wall Street Journal published an article that examined the practice at one pharmaceutical firm, Eli Lilly and Co. in using homeless alcoholics in their clinical trials. The article raises some disturbing questions about the quality of the phase I trials conducted by this one company. Also serious ethical questions are raised concerning the appropriateness of paying homeless alcoholics significant sums to be human guinea pigs. It is not clear from the article whether these tests were reviewed by any IRB. What the government lacks in hard data about humans, it more than makes up for with volumes of statistics about laboratory animals. I wonder how many guinea pigs were used in U.S. research? The Agriculture Department knows: 333,379. How many hamsters in Ohio? 2,782. So we have all this data on animals and little on human beings. I would hasten to add that the guinea pigs the Plain-Dealer refers to are the four-legged kind too and not the guinea pigs that are human being used for research. (The Animal Welfare Act is more protective of mice than any law that applies to men.) The intent therefore of this legislation is twofold: First, to fill in the gaps of coverage of the common rule by requiring all research involving human subjects to abide by the rule; and second, to elevate the importance of conducting research ethically, the bill provides criminal fines and penalties for failure to comply with the requirements of this law, and by extension 45 CFR 46. No Federal agency, other than HHS, has applied the additional protections described in 45 CFR 46 for vulnerable populations--pregnant women and their fetus, children, prisoners--to their own research. So the purpose of this legislation is to help close the gaps that exist within the current system for protecting research subjects. ―Specifically, the advisory committee recommended that informed consent of all human subjects of classified research be required, and that such requirement not be subject to waiver or exemption. Under current rule and executive order, it is possible to waive informed consent and IRB review for classified research. Title II of this legislation would prohibit the waiver of either informed consent or IRB review for classified research. I do not claim to have the magic bullet solution with this bill. However, I believe there are some key principles which should guide the Senate's consideration of this legislation. These principles are: First, informed consent and independent review of experiments involving human subjects must be required. Second, anyone who violates the right of research subject to have informed consent, should be held criminally responsible for that violation. I want to put this in personal terms once again. You can imagine your spouse, husband, wife, father, mother, children, being experimented on without your knowledge or their knowledge. That is unconscionable, and we should not permit that. This legislation will close many of the loopholes that permit that to happen now.‖ The current law allows patients not to receive informed consent and provides no criminal penalty. Waivers are routinely granted for classified research projects that use human subjects, in other words, if I have an experimental drug that is classified, legally I don‘t have to tell you. The Animal Welfare Act is far more protective of animals used in scientific experiments than any legislation pertaining to human beings. The very good reason for this bizarre legal twist coming from the country that held the Nuremburg trials, is that it is necessary to use human beings in classified testing of military technology. The final proof of necessity over ethics is that Senator Glenn‘s bill was defeated, and it is still for all intents and purposes still ―legal‖ to use American citizens as cannon fodder for experimental science, both military and non-military. Soldier cannot sue government for LSD experiments - U.S. v. Stanley, 479 U.S. 1005 (1986) In February 1958, James B. Stanley, a master sergeant in the Army stationed at Fort Knox, Kentucky, volunteered to participate in a program ostensibly designed to test the effectiveness of protective clothing and equipment as defenses against chemical warfare. He was released from his then-current duties and went to the Army's Chemical Warfare Laboratories at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Maryland. Four times that month, Stanley was secretly administered doses of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), pursuant to an Army plan to study the effects of the drug on human subjects. According to his Second Amended Complaint (the allegations of which we accept for purposes of this decision), as a result of the LSD exposure, Stanley has suffered from hallucinations and periods of incoherence and memory loss, was impaired in his military performance, and would on occasion "awake from sleep at night and, without reason, violently beat his wife and children, later being unable to recall the entire incident." App. 5. He was discharged from the Army in 1969. One year later, his marriage dissolved because of the personality changes wrought by the LSD. On December 10, 1975, the Army sent Stanley a letter soliciting his cooperation in a study of the long-term effects of LSD on "volunteers who participated" in the 1958 tests. This was the Government's first notification to Stanley that he had been given LSD during his time in Maryland. After an administrative claim for compensation was denied by the Army, Stanley filed suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U. S. C. 2671 et seq., alleging negligence in the administration, supervision, and subsequent monitoring of the drug testing program. The court found, under Justice Scalia, that Stevens was not legally able to sue. The dissenting opinion written by JUSTICE BRENNAN, with whom JUSTICE MARSHALL joins, and with whom JUSTICE STEVENS joins as to Part III, concurring in part and dissenting in part: ―In experiments designed to test the effects of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), the Government of the United States treated thousands of its citizens as though they were laboratory animals, dosing them with this dangerous drug without their consent. One of the victims, James B. Stanley, seeks compensation from the Government officials who injured him. The Court holds that the Constitution provides him with no remedy, solely because his injuries were inflicted while he performed his duties in the Nation's Armed Forces. If our Constitution required this result, the Court's decision, though legally necessary, would expose a tragic flaw in that document. But in reality, the Court disregards the commands of our Constitution, and bows instead to the purported requirements of a different master, military discipline, declining to provide Stanley with a remedy because it finds "special factors counseling hesitation." Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents,403 U.S. 388, 396 (1971). This is abdication, not hesitation. I dissent.‖ Before addressing the legal questions presented, it is important to place the Government's conduct in historical context. The medical trials at Nuremberg in 1947 deeply impressed upon the world that experimentation with unknowing human subjects is morally and legally unacceptable. The United States Military Tribunal established the Nuremberg Code as a standard against which to judge German scientists who experimented with human subjects. Its first principle was: 1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. TARGETED INDIVIDUALS: The typical targeted individual (TI) is female, in her early 40‘s, Caucasian, single, above average intelligence, who has been aware of being targeted for approximately 10 years or perhaps as far back as childhood. In the beginning they describe a gang stalking phase that may last 1-2 years where organized groups target them in the community for what the KKK referred to as mobbing. In effect the TI is harassed everywhere they go by strangers who say inappropriate things to them, often of a personal nature that no one else could know but themselves. Strangers will mob an empty store moments after the TI enters, block their progress down the aisles or at the checkout counter. When the TI returns home their home may have been entered and left in disarray and personal items sabotaged. A tactic of psychological warfare is to take away the targets safety and security needs by entering the home at will. One story, not uncommon, is of a female target who was home alone and looking for a battery (ELF drains batteries) and remarked out loud, ―Why can‘t I find any batteries‖, the next day when she returns home the drawer is full of a dozen batteries. She wanted to call the police and tell them her home has been entered and her drawer is now full of batteries...this is impossible. Who would believe that someone broke into her home and did not steal anything, but instead deposited a dozen batteries and left. She has lost her safety and security needs and is unable to tell anyone about it for fear of being perceived as crazy. Most of these harassment events are designed so as to sound totally outlandish to anyone who is not a target of Cointelpro type activity. Part of the genius of the remote attacks is that they are hidden within a backdrop of several million mentally ill. The attacks are designed to mimic the effects of mental illness. Business and personal relationships are difficult if not impossible for the average TI. Health problems often occur with constant attacks from non-lethal weapons that leave people physically and mentally debilitated. Besides being slowly driven out of their minds by voice to skull attacks that feature live and recorded voices cursing them during all of their waking hours, microwave attacks literally cook them from the inside out. The ELF attack records the wave form of their EEG and downloads their ―inner voice‖ which is broadcast to the harassment groups through the internet and other means. Physical trauma and constant harassment by strangers in public places raises the stress level of the target to artificially high levels and pegs it there in an effort to mentally break down the target in a manner similar to what was done in the lab under MKULTRA. The psychological toll begins to instill paranoia and psychosis, which is when the manipulation of perception and the effort to ―reprogram‖ the thinking patterns of the TI begins in earnest. It is common to manipulate the behavior and speech of the people around them in social situations such that one is unsure just who is saying things to harass them and who is prompted to speak on sensitive topics by remote manipulation using the Smirnov or Malech patent. Some TI‘s report that the voices are trying to trick them into acts of violence, such as entering a school and shooting people. This is instructive in the wake of the wave of school shootings and other apparently spontaneous acts of random violence that have no clear motivation. The effort to cause school shootings is a classical destabilization campaign to raise the level of fear in society that promotes acceptance of repressive measures by the parents but also has led to school children living in fear and seeing armed uniformed men in the school that normalizes their acceptance of living in a police state. A main component of this form of mind control is the manipulation of belief systems in an experimental fashion in an effort to learn how to perfect the art of control through remote means. These horrific attacks continue for years in a terminal experiment that will end only with the death of the subject. Family members of TI‘s are brought into the program as well, targeting several generations at once. The victims have appealed to elected representatives for years but out of fear or complacency Congressmen have taken no action whatsoever despite being deluged with appeals for help from several thousand desperate people. TI attempts to organize with each other have tremendous obstacles, they are traumatized, isolated and have varying degrees of paranoia and psychosis that have been instilled. The technology is very effective at breaking up relationships and setting groups of people against each other, so for decades no real progress has been made toward creating a TI organization able to fight back in the political or legal arena. Once a new psychology or belief system is installed in the TI, often the nature or intensity of the attacks will change, but this varies from person to person. There is a great deal of variation in the attacks on TI‘s where in some people only have gang stalking activity and other people might have only electronic harassment, of which there are a variety of, while most TI‘s experience the full gamut of person on person attacks as well as electronic torture of the mind and body. Demonizing the victims is another technique that will be used to ``justify'' the unjustifiable. How would your life look if you had been under 24-hour harassment and thought surveillance (and/or other invasive surveillance) for years, and your worst enemy got to edit this down to ``support'' any picture he wanted to paint about you? Remember, you do not get a bit of due process, you cannot face your accuser or hear the charges against you, and the audience for this farce may well be too stupid or caught up in voyeurism to understand what is really going on. The Weed and Seed program is touted as a method to prevent violent crime and drug trafficking in select neighborhoods using multiple government agencies, Federal, State, and local authorities to mobilize residents in a targeted are to assist law enforcement in identifying and removing violent offenders and drug traffickers from their neighborhoods. All these actions lead to rejuvenating ―seeding‖ operations to bring back desirable elements to replace the people who have been weeded out. Just how the many agencies in tandem with locals weed out the bad elements is not spelled out. The program is sponsored by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) which on their website proudly proclaim that non-lethal weapons are being distributed at the local level to fight crime. Just what kind of non-lethal weapons are being used and on whom, is not exactly clear. One such system openly displayed by the NIJ for dissemination to local authorities is the active denial system and the milliwave radar system for burning human beings and seeing into private residences respectively. (NIJ) The Milgram Experiment Subjects were recruited for the Yale study through newspaper ads and direct mail. The experiments occurred in two rooms in the basement of Linsly-Chittenden Hall on the university's Old Campus. The experiment was advertised as lasting one hour, for which the respondents would be paid $4.50 ($18.70 adjusted for inflation in 2006). The participants were men between the ages of 20 and 50, from all educational backgrounds, ranging from an elementary school dropout to participants with doctoral degrees. The participant and a confederate of the experimenter, who was an actor pretending to be another participant, were told by the experimenter that they would be participating in an experiment to test the effects of punishment on learning. The "teacher" was given a 45- volt electric shock from the electro-shock generator as a sample of the shock that the "learner" would supposedly receive during the experiment. The subjects believed that for each wrong answer, the learner was receiving actual shocks. In reality, there were no shocks. After the confederate was separated from the subject, the confederate set up a tape recorder integrated with the electro-shock generator, which played pre-recorded sounds for each shock level. After a number of voltage level increases, the actor started to bang on the wall that separated him from the subject. After several times banging on the wall and complaining about his heart condition, the learner gave no further responses to questions and no further complaints. At this point, many people indicated their desire to stop the experiment and check on the learner. Some test subjects paused at 135 volts and began to question the purpose of the experiment. Most continued after being assured that they would not be held responsible. A few subjects began to laugh nervously or exhibit other signs of extreme stress once they heard the screams of pain coming from the learner. If at any time the subject indicated his desire to halt the experiment, he was given a succession of verbal prods by the experimenter, in this order: 1. Please continue. 2. The experiment requires you to continue, please go on. 3. It is essential that you continue. 4. You have no choice, you must continue. If the subject still wished to stop after all four successive verbal prods, the experiment was halted. Otherwise, it was halted after the subject had given the maximum 450-volt shock three times in succession. Before the experiment was conducted Milgram polled fellow psychologists as to what the results would be. They unanimously believed that only a sadistic few (0.1%), would be prepared to give the maximum voltage. In Milgram's first set of experiments, 67.5 percent (27 out of 40) of experimental participants administered the experiment's final 450-volt shock, though many were quite uncomfortable in doing so; everyone paused at some point and questioned the experiment, some even saying they would return the check for the money they were paid. No participant steadfastly refused to give further shocks before the 300-volt level. Variants of the experiment were later performed by Milgram himself and other psychologists around the world with similar results. Apart from confirming the original results the variations have tested variables in the experimental setup. The percentage of participants who are prepared to inflict fatal voltages remains remarkably constant, between 61% and 66%, regardless of time or location. (Milgram) Triggers: In South America the intelligence services of US client states were often chosen and trained by the US intelligence agencies. The use of torture has been wide spread and applied with a zeal that is hard to imagine. The general idea of torturing a dissident or critic of the government was to physically and emotionally break the victim. The psychologically traumatized victims were then released back onto the streets of the community to serve as a warning to others who might contemplate openly challenging the authoritarian government. When people observed the shattered remnant of the person that once was vibrant and proud, they would think twice before raising their voices in protest. One tactic of mind control is the use of ―triggers‖, a stimulus delivered to the victim that will evoke a memory of previous abuse. One example of this is the use of a coke bottle. When South American dissidents were taken into custody and tortured it was common practice to use a coke bottle to sodomize the victim with. This initial act was designed to produce pain and suffering, as well as humiliation. Once the person was released back into the community, every time they came into contact with a coke bottle or even a coke commercial the stimulus of seeing the product or hearing the advertising jingle would ̳trigger‖ other words they would immediately relive the pain, suffering, and humiliation of the initial torture. Since coke is the world‘s most widely advertized and recognized symbol the victims of torture might be forced to relive their suffering every time they turned on the TV, radio, went into a store, or simply walked down the street. Street Theater: "Street Theater" is a feature of the gang stalking used on targeted individuals in tandem with electronic harassment. "Street theater" is activity performed by persons complicit in the electronic weapons harassment, but are "skits", as opposed to direct bodily attacks performed with the electronic harassment equipment. These "skits" are designed to imitate "the breaks" of normal living. Additionally, they are performed in such a way that the target, and ONLY the target, knows they are being harassed, but cannot convey to others that this is indeed harassment. Feelings of total hopelessness is one apparent purpose of these "skits". (What is impossible to convey to people who are not targeted is that what is different about mind weapon research skits is QUANTITY. When you encounter "normal breaks of life" several times a day EVERY DAY, you are no longer talking about "normal". Several "breaks" a day, of a type which you might expect every couple of months, is not natural or random. But try explaining this to someone who is not targeted.) Another apparent purpose of such "skits" is to discredit and isolate the target so that others will regard him or her as a "crank" and a "nut case". Far from simple "pranks" or "practical jokes", these skits provide the mind weapon researchers with extremely good cover. If the target is ever coerced into contact with psychiatry, the psychiatrists' legal powers of imprisonment (without due process of law) dramatically increase and reinforce the isolation and labeling of the target. Many people know in advance that what they are experiencing will discredit them, and will thus put off complaining about or often, even admitting to themselves that they are being targeted. So although "street theater" seems to have a comedic ring to it, this component of gang stalking is one of the most serious forms of attack on individual targets and is perfect cover for the perpetrators. One example of street theater, keeping the previous example of ―triggers‖ in mind, might occur as the target is walking down the street in public, and a person steps in their way...the target looks up at them and notices that they are drinking a bottle of coke. The stranger looks into their eyes at close range, sneers a malicious sneer, and says ―you like coke, don‘t you?‖. Normally this would not be out of the ordinary, but considering the target was assaulted with a coke bottle the previous month and is trying to forget the violation, it takes on a whole new meaning. Typically many people are involved in Street Theater, so as the target steps around the initial perpetrator, trying not to think about what happened to them (and failing), they look up and are confronted with another perpetrator holding a coke bottle, licking the rim in a suggestive manner while making direct eye contact and sneering or laughing at the target. This seemingly innocuous act might be repeated by 10-20 people a day for months and years. The stimulus that is repeatedly delivered in street theater will become a trigger that the target is helpless to escape. If in the future, an innocent citizen drinks a coke in front of the target they will be triggered again, and may consider the act sinister, even though there is no intent to make the victim of torture relive their experience. A secondary effect of the coke bottle skit is to make the target seem like a paranoid schizophrenic if they attempt to explain to the health care professional that 10-20 people a day are drinking coke in front of them and laughing or smiling at them. The target is alienated from the community and is unable to seek help from authorities or the mental health community. Street theater takes many diverse forms, and here are a few examples:  On foot, far more often than in normal life, you have people cutting you off in store or bank lineups. Or you constantly find people getting "in your face" as you walk, both outdoors and especially in buildings and malls.  While driving, far more often than in normal life, you have cars speeding up to stop signs just ahead of you and brake to a stop part way into the intersection.  While driving, far more often than in normal life, you find other cars behaving in ways which block your progress. Mall parking lots are favorite places for this type of staged activity. Try explaining that to friends and see how many believe it is deliberate.  While away from home, more often than in normal life and at times you know you did not leave them, dirt or food droppings appear in your house or apartment.  While away from home or work, belongings turn up missing and you know for certain they were there when you left. Some days later these belongings may turn up in a place you know they were not, yet you cannot ever convince others this was theft and return.  While away from home, you find damage to clothing or furniture which you know did not occur from normal wear.  While at home or at work, you find bizarre, loud, annoying noise incidents which others nearby seem to "not notice" or "don't care about".  While in the supermarket checkout line, you find someone reaching into your shopping cart to remove an item -- apparent purpose to force you to make another trip to the store prematurely. These are just some examples of "street theater". The number of variations on this "wear- you-down" activity seems unlimited, based on reports. Obviously the "researchers" put a great deal of priority and work on this aspect of their modern-day atrocities against humanity. Those targeted pray that the large number of targeted individuals we know are "out there" will eventually wake up and realize their quality of life is being stolen from them, and assist in exposing this thoroughly illegal activity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology (Blass, 1999)

No comments: