Re-posted with thanks, from Josh Del Sol at Take Back Your Power, who brought us the video documentary of that name on Smart Meters. This is reportage on the recent FCC rollout of 5G, where reporters’ concerns about wireless harm to humans, including the dangers of cancer, were repressed openly at the meeting, as the enclosed video shows. Please read the whole article with care, please watch the video, and please take personal action to contact Senators and Representatives to educate them toward stopping this rollout, as recommended below, because 5G is a blanket technology that will operate at ultra-high microwave frequencies, and, from all accounts, will most definitely cause infinite harm to humans, animals, and our environment. Children would be most at risk.
One huge takeaway from this reportage and activism initiative is that it is time to let lawmakers know we are going to hold them personally accountable and liable for their actions in kowtowing to industry lobbyists and letting harmful legislation through, as Josh del Sol advises below, a realization that we could apply in all other activism as well.
Excerpt: “Here’s some snippets from FCC Chair Wheeler, at his June 20 press conference:
“5G will use much higher frequency bands [24 to 100+ GHz]… antennas that can aim and amplify signals… massive deployment of small cells… tens of billions of dollars in economic activity… hundreds of billions of microchips… if something can be connected, it will be connected… unlike other countries… we won’t wait for the standards…”
– Tom Wheeler, FCC Chair [on video above]
Paraphrased: “We can’t let life get in the way of profit. We want to make billions from all of you, and control everything. And in doing so, we’re not only going to willfully ignore science, we’re going to remove the idea of standards and initiate a free-for-all.”
In a public meeting at FCC headquarters on July 14, the agency which once served the people instead acted like tyrannical thugs, in an escalating series of remarkable events. [watch video above]
First, they prevented wireless science advocates from displaying a simple sign, violating their First Amendment rights in a public venue. Then, a security guard forcefully prevented a t-shirt from being taken out of a bag, by a former Congressional candidate with opposing views.
Next, a Bloomberg reporter had his credentials confiscated — almost unbelievably — for merely talking with the former Congressional candidate.
Following these incidents, the reporter, Todd Shields, was visibly irate with FCC Commissioner Tom Wheeler — who also happens to be the former president of CTIA, the wireless industry’s lobbying organization.
“Moments ago I was attempting to talk to to some people who came to attend the meeting and have concerns about radiation and 5G. And your security force intervened — told the guy he couldn’t show me the t-shirt he wished to display at the meeting, forced him to put it away, and confiscated my FCC-issued ID. Is this consonant with the discussion that ought to be taking place here, and what’s your reaction to this action by your staff?”
-Todd Shields, Bloomberg reporter, to FCC Chair Wheeler [on video above]
And in the Q&A that followed, the former Congressional candidate Kevin Mottus successfully added another dose of truth the narrative.
“Hey Tom, with the NTP study showing wireless causes cancer sub-thermally, how can you proceed with more wireless expansion, with FCC standards only recognizing thermal effects — ignoring thousands of studies showing cancerous effects, neurological effects, reproductive harm, immune system disorders… people are being electrosensitive…”
-Kevin Mottus, former Congressional candidate, to Wheeler [on video above]
After about 20 seconds of yielding the floor to Mottus, Wheeler interrupted, dodged this very appropriate question, and diverted to an FCC-compliant journalist:
“Lydia, do you have a question?
(Which, on the video, almost sounds like a Wheeler Freudian slip: “Litigate. Do you have a question?”)
Why is the FCC resorting to Gestapo-like tactics of suppression and outright intimidation?
The issue here, is that the Federal Communications Commission just rubber-stamped their rollout of “5G” cellular technology, which while increasing throughput, would blanket all planetary life with ultra-high microwave frequencies — 24Ghz and up. The fact that these frequencies have never been tested as safe is not stopping corporate-government plans for an unleashing of “massive infrastructure”.
But there have been thousands of published peer-reviewed studies that indicate the proliferation of microwave (wireless) technologies is not safe to biological life. (See meta-study links here, here, here and here.)
So, because there’s a lot of money in a wireless economy and the data-harvesting that comes with it — trillions, in fact — Big Industry has bought the science, bought lawmakers, ruled the proliferation of microwaves as “safe”, and infiltrated the FCC along with most international health agencies.
And in the face of this willful, for-profit negligence, instead of employing conscience and responsibility, they’re actively silencing all opposition. You know, those of the human species that pay attention to passé concepts like science and reason.
Here’s some snippets from FCC Chair Wheeler, at his June 20 press conference:
“5G will use much higher frequency bands [24 to 100+ GHz]… antennas that can aim and amplify signals… massive deployment of small cells… tens of billions of dollars in economic activity… hundreds of billions of microchips… if something can be connected, it will be connected… unlike other countries… we won’t wait for the standards…”
– Tom Wheeler, FCC Chair [on video above]
Paraphrased: “We can’t let life get in the way of profit. We want to make billions from all of you, and control everything. And in doing so, we’re not only going to willfully ignore science, we’re going to remove the idea of standards and initiate a free-for-all.”
If unchecked, what could this lead to?
The implications of all of this are very far-reaching. How far? Well, to find out, let’s start with what we know.
It’s pretty clear at this point that we have a government that has been taken over by corporate interests. In order to increase their power and control even more, they plan to exponentially ramp-up the deployment of technology everywhere, which a vast body of science clearly says is harmful.
If unchecked, this will almost certainly lead to an increase in cancer and other ailments associated with exposure to electromagnetic radiation. Haven’t we had enough of for-profit agendas putting profits before health?
From a surveillance standpoint, we already know there is a sinister spying agenda operating behind the scenes. The rollout of “5G” technology — especially in the standardless, profit-centered way Wheeler describes — would indeed open up a considerable new threat to basic rights.
If everything is connected, you can bet that as many details as possible about our actions will be tracked and stored somewhere — like the $2B NSA facility in Blufdale, Utah. And there is extraordinary market value in this. A director at NARUC stated that the value of data harvested just by “smart” utility meters will likely be worth a lot more than electricity itself, which is a $2.2 trillion market globally.
But besides being creepy and making the 1% even richer, there are clear warning signs that a control-oriented governing system could easily take an indexed catalog of all of your actions and use it against you in a multitude of ways.
For example, increasingly-instrusive “pre-crime” operations are already planned in Miami. And insurance providers are checking their customers’ facebook data to influence premiums and even coverage availability. So it’s really not unreasonable to see how a governing body concerned primarily with staying in power, could restrict rights or remove “privileges” for behavior that is deemed to be not aligned with national interests.
So, tracking is not ok unless we are absolutely convinced that the governing body of that system truly respects individual rights and has the best interests of the people in mind. And right now, we are not even close to having such leadership in our governments.
Wheeler’s vision of 5G would significantly enable those who are motivated by power and money to use technology to rule over everyone else. In order to protect our lives and future, we must not allow that to happen.
While we would all like to have fast internet, we must now look closely at the downside of this technology, and take constructive action. This can understandably be difficult, due to the considerable attachment that we have to both our devices and the sense of immediate gratification that we obtain from using them.
How we will save our world: Individual responsibility, accountability and liability
In addition to an interview with Kevin Mottus, last Sunday I skyped with Dafna Tachover, an Israel-based attorney who was present at “G-Day”, last Thursday.
Tachover, who is among millions now who have directly experienced microwave radiation harm after becoming sensitized to it, says that the only way forward is individual accountability and liability. In my view, she is obviously right.
“Until there’s personal accountability and liability, this systematic problem that repeats itself will happen again, and again, and again, and it has been. So, we learned that the tobacco industry was lying to the public, bluntly — to the public, to the government, to health organizations — without any hesitation…. Was anyone sued? No. Was anyone found personally accountable? No. So that’s actually what enables this kind of behavior to happen again and again.”
“This is the action we should take: we should make it clear to those government people — or you know, if we talk about wi-fi in schools, the school principals, who do have personal responsibility and liability to protect children’s health — to make sure they know they will be found personally liable for the harms they cause. They have a position of trust, and they betrayed that trust. And they should be found liable. It should be civil liability and criminal liability.”
-Dafna Tachover, attorney [on above video]
Former Congressional candidate Kevin Mottus spoke about the urgency of the situation.
“My background is as a medical social worker. And when I was in the hospitals I saw young salesman and lawyers coming in with brain tumors, and healthy otherwise, other than the tumor — and doctors asking them about their cell phone use. So I was clued in very early with these heavy users and the tumors it was causing.”
“Schools are now our most dangerous places to be. You have 20-40 wireless transmitters in their iPads and wireless laptops, and then you have 2-3 commercial-grade wireless routers…. So you have, really, the setting of the most significant exposure in our country, and the most vulnerable population being exposed are small children — which we know are 3 to 4 times as sensitive to all environmental hazards.”
“We are microwaving our population and wondering why our cancer is going through the roof and chronic disease is going through the roof. It’s really very sad.”
“I spoke to Congressman Grayson from Florida, and while I was talking with him, one of his staffers, Joe, came up to me. And he said, ‘What are you talking about?’ I said, ‘I’m talking about wireless cell phones causing brain tumors.’ He said, ‘That’s interesting, because I had a brain aneurysm and I’m lucky to be alive. It’s also interesting because my buddy just died from a brain tumor.’”
“So, people are definitely getting sick. And you need to ask them, ‘Does your face tingle when you use your cell phone?…. Do you have difficulty sleeping? Have you ever gotten nauseous using the phone? Do you feel funny when you’re around wi-fi, or getting close to it?’ And you’ll be surprised — people are getting sick.”
“For instance, I spoke to Congressman Rush. Congressman Rush has a salivary gland tumor, which Israel has associated with cell phone use….”
“We need to stop this before they [FCC] auction the [ultra-high frequency] spectrum.”
-Kevin Mottus, former Congressional candidate, California [on above video]
What can I do to stop this crazy plan!?
FIRST: SEND A LETTER, EMAIL OR CALL
Our friends at parentsforsafetechnology.org have put together an action page for writing, calling and emailing Congress, the FCC and others. Use this platform and templates to let them know firmly that you:
Accept their oath of office to defend the Constitution, and all of your rights
Will hold them responsible, liable and accountable if they do not stop harmful 5G technology in its tracks
Demand the 1996 Telecommunications Act be immediately repealed. (This industry-penned law took away local rights to refuse cell tower installations on health or environmental grounds.)
Demand that the responsibility of electromagnetic frequency (EMF) safety standards be transferred to an independent, science based panel that represents the people. (The FCC has NO ONE who is qualified to protect the health of the people, because it was never part of their mandate.)
This is the “warning shot.” While all know more than letters to our reps will be needed to right the ship, this is where it starts. So do this first.
Mottus is calling on everyone to go to speak with your government reps in DC — and to go in person if at all possible.
“You know where the Congressmen are. You know where all of the committees are. Go. Educate them. Go like the wireless industry goes, time after time, to the FCC.”
Mottus is inviting all anyone who wants to join him in DC for the next session of Congress (between September 6 to October 6), to email him firstname.lastname@example.org.
It is also very important to contact your local governments, to let them know that they, too, will be held individually accountable and liable. In Wheeler’s June 20 talk, he very clearly identified the role that local governments will play, if their plan of 5G is to be “successful” or not.
THIRD: ACCEPT YOUR OWN ACCOUNTABILITY, AND ENVISION THE POSITIVE OUTCOME
This is as much about standing up to the harm-doers and holding them accountable, as it is about holding yourself accountable to do the right thing. Not to take the world on your shoulders, but to do the right thing and stay connected with others who are likewise committed.
In this process, we’re remembering who we are, as co-creators of reality. We’re accepting responsibility for the fact that we let the situation become what it is today, because of our passive trust in those who have become corrupted — but we’re forgiving ourselves, trusting in the greater flow, and coming together.
Though it can be painful to face the situation and accept the necessity of our action, we just have to do it. We’re now seeing clearly that in order for the human species to make it through this threshold, individual rights must be protected.
It is not ok to suppress free speech. It is not ok to suppress science; whenever this happens the resulting harm is enormous. And it is not ok to prioritize power and greed above life itself.
So the only way left is to grow up, individually and as a species. When we do this — by taking responsibility and putting our Inspired Will into the world — we open the door to a future of awakening, freedom and peace for all humanity.
Repost of the article is ok with attribution and link back to this page.
About the Author
Josh del Sol is the director and producer of Take Back Your Power, a revelatory documentary feature film uncovering the worldwide ‘smart’ metering and grid agenda. Watch the film and subscribe to updates at www.takebackyourpower.net, and follow him via twitter @TBYPfilm.
by Ramola D/The Everyday Concerned Citizen/Posted July 22, 2016
Whistleblower David Voigts, former Naval Officer and systems engineer with a background in Surface Warfare, Electronic Warfare, and Nuclear Engineering, who has been walking cross-country for “Targeted Individuals” since mid-spring this year, spoke out recently, both in a Wheel of Freedom interview, and on Facebook (covered here) to condemn the hidden Military/Intelligence programs of non-consensual neuro-experimentation currently underway in the United States of America and worldwide, which he suspects has been operative in the case of the Baton Rouge shooter, Gavin Long.
Image: David Voigts
In a Facebook post on July 18, David Voigts, who is currently in Seymour, Indiana, wrote:
“This is why I’m walking across the country with a huge sign on my back. The US has developed a human-machine interface weapon that spoofs the nervous system. It is being misused to torture American citizens. This shooting in Baton Rouge is one of the outcomes.”
Gavin Long, who adopted the name Cosmo Setepenra, and wrote books on self-improvement, was the young 29-year-old ex-Marine and Iraq war veteran reportedly killed by police in Baton Rouge after he reportedly shot at six police officers, killing three and wounding the others, following the recent reported deaths of Alton Sterling and Philandro Castile at the hands of police.
News reports on investigations into his background as well as recordings of talk show interviews reveal that he had mentioned being targeted and was a member of Freedom from Covert Harassment and Surveillance, a group advocating for those being covertly targeted, assaulted, non-consensually experimented on, and hyper-surveilled in a variety of ways in their communities, including with experimental military directed-energy weapons, biometric and physical surveillance devices, synthetic telepathy, and remote bio-hacking neuroweapons.
Gavin Long’s Story is Still Being Investigated by Alternative Media Analysts Concerned About False Flags
Notably, since this incident is scarcely a week old, analysis of reports of the shooting and of Gavin Long by astute news observers online is still ongoing.
Because Gavin Long was an engaging public speaker and author who questioned government and law enforcement oppression and worked positively to promote holistic healing, natural health, and self-empowerment, observers also note the issue of dozens of holistic doctors being killed today (implicating dark operatives in a pharmaceutical industry keen to keep naturalistic cancer and autism cures under wraps), as being another possible angle to consider.
Gavin Long as Bio-Hacked “Targeted Individual”
The very fact though that Gavin Long has admitted to having been targeted and stalked raises the spectre of ongoing covert targeting and covert neuro-experimentation, the issue that David Voigts is working hard to publicize (and covered in this article), for a media-deceived public. Given that much is still being uncovered and analyzed currently, this writer wishes to underline that it is only the possibility that Gavin Long did indeed engage in these reported shootings, as a deliberately steered bio-hacked “Targeted Individual”, that is being covered in this article. (Since it is still entirely possible this was an engineered event, in which he was not actually involved at all.)
In a statement posted to Facebook July 19 and shared widely, David Voigts wrote:
“I can assure you that if the shooter Gavin Long had not been tortured with the weapons (for at least 18 months) and psychological abuse, he would not have committed these murders. Gavin Long was the third shooter that contacted FFCHS for assistance. The other two being the Navy Yard shooter Aaron Alexis and the Florida State University Shooter Myron May. I’m trying extremely hard to raise awareness about these illegal torture weapons, and how they are being used to abuse civilians.”
Image: David Voigts
He also shared a post by Dwight Mangum which spells out the relation of Targeting to Human Trafficking, a valid concern, since those who are being and have been targeted wrongfully—in large numbers since 9/11/2001—by JTRIG operations and agencies are also being non-consensually rolled into covert neuro-experimentation programs, in Defense contracts that are highly lucrative for contractors and participating research institutions:
“It turns out Gavin Long was a TI and contacted Derrick Robinson a year ago. These are people being abused to help in the illegal agendas to change our laws and security from terrorism that is being falsely portrayed. These are illegal acts of human trafficking.” Dwight Mangum, Facebook
“Targeted Individuals” are Victims of Covert Military/Intelligence/Contractor Experimentation
David Voigts on the road
In an earlier post, David Voigts, who has stated, “I am walking across the country to raise awareness about the misuse of human-machine interface weapons,” had noted:
“The Baton Rouge shooter is the sixth national case that I’m certain was a Targeted Individual. The others being the Navy Yard shooter, the Florida State University shooter, the woman who was shot at (near) the White House (Miriam Carey), Jiverly Wong, and Rohinie Bisesar.”
Other observers also note the other mass-shooting cases of James Holmes, the neuroscience graduate student known today as the Aurora Theater gunman in Colorado who killed 12 and injured 70 others, Seung Hui-Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter who killed 32 and injured 17 others, as well as the Columbine shooters, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, who killed 13 and injured 24 others, as possible victims of covert neuro-experimentation.
In these cases, the controlling brain-computer interface technology—which, by victim accounts, can induce voices, project images, synthesize tastes and smells, and control the motor cortex (taking over movement), among other capabilities—is perfected to the point of being able to literally “take over” the target’s brain, an unsettling possibility explored here earlier in the case of Rohinie Bisesar.
Psychological Warfare: Media Coverage Which Portrays “Targeted Individuals” as Schizophrenics is Deliberate Propaganda and “Perception Management”
What we are witnessing therefore in news reports on Gavin Long across the board from CNN to the Kansas City Star to the New York Times to the Los Angeles Times is no less than a deliberate campaign of “Perception Management”, which is essentially targeting the already-targeted as purveyors of “conspiracy theory” and paranoia about government surveillance. “Blaming the Victim” certainly comes to mind.
Post Baton Rouge therefore, while mainstream media outlets, including the New York Times, rush to quell public concern about covert programs—inclusive of traumatic, 24/7, body-hacking “electronic surveillance” (which all experimentees report as torture)–in our midst by quelling and discrediting the voices of witness, promoting their trademark image instead of “Targeted Individuals” as mentally ill, schizoid, delusional, paranoid, “anti-government”,“conspiracy theorists”, and “self-described”, David Voigts offers a far different picture of the reality of covert military programs, which he says continue to this day.
“This specific program uses human-machine interface weapons (sometimes called hand of god or voice of god weapons) to spoof the target’s nervous system. The system can remotely monitor the target (bio-telemetry). However these systems are bi-directional. They can passively monitor and also provide input.
In simple terms, these people are being tortured. The weapons electrically sync with the nervous system to create sensory information. All the senses can be spoofed but targets typically suffer from auditory or tactile and occasionally olfactory input.
The weapons system is used in the context of a psychological warfare campaign. The goal of the campaign is to drive the target into isolation where the abuse is most effective.”
US Holocaust Museum, 2016/Image: David Voigts
As many have reported, this psychological warfare campaign tragically corrals whole communities and neighborhoods around “targets” through deliberate acts of deception, slander, and lies, convincing neighbors and others to assist in surveilling and tracking victims with physical-surveillance devices and cell-phone-apps, thereby, horrifyingly, multiplying the assault on victims. (Victims are often named, falsely, as mentally unstable, “conspiracy theorists,” “terrorists,” “spies,” “domestic extremists,” drug addicts, or sexual predators (prostitutes/pedophiles), in efforts to despoil reputation and create “buy-in” for community assault of targets.)
Media and mental-health-professional collaboration in this military deception essentially serves to keep these horrific covert programs of neuro-experimentation unchallenged by the larger public.
In videos posted to Youtube and his website, resources shared online, interviews with radio shows and web media, links to relevant articles on Facebook, along with photos as he continues his walk, David Voigts has embarked on a tremendous quest to educate and alert the American public to the dangers of this human-machine interface system which is essentially functioning as a weapon.
Public Education on Human-Machine Interface Weapons System/Facebook Photo Journal
Some excerpts from earlier posts as David Voigts trekked across several states, from Delaware to Maryland to West Virginia to Ohio to Indiana, offer further insight into this weapons system:
Made it to North Vernon. I’m camping at Muscatatook park….So for the non-TIs the phrase “Gang Stalking” is a way to tell if someone is a TI.
The purpose of the cross country walk is to raise awareness on this topic.
Image: David Voigts
TIs are non-consensual test subjects for a Perception Warfare weapon. This weapons system spoofs the nervous system. I’ve posted quite a bit of info on this topic. It’s used as a No-Touch Torture weapon in the context of a psychological warfare campaign.
When done correctly the Target will have a fun-house-mirror perception of the world.
This program can be exposed, I just need some support in spreading awareness and finding those folks who are willing to read the research on this topic.
These are not people who are “having a crisis”. They are folks who are being tortured, and no one is helping them.
Brain hacking is becoming part of our daily lives. While there are many positive benefits to this technology – such as restoring sight, hearing, limb function or communicating with those that have lost the ability to speak, – there are also horrible applications of the technology.
At this very moment there are ongoing non-consensual uses of this technology. ..Targeted Individuals are being tortured with body hacking technology.
I am walking across the country to raise public awareness on this crime. I need the public’s assistance in sharing this information.
Belpre, Ohio/Image: David Voigts
I’m walking with a lighted electronic sandwich board and I’ve brought my dog with me. I started on the Atlantic Coast in May, and I’m heading to California. I’m hoping that this human interest story will help propel the plight of these non-consensual human test subjects.
I’m asking each local paper, radio station, and regional TV station if they would like to do a story on the walk.
…This link shows a positive example of how the body’s bioelectricity is monitored. When a irregular heartbeat is detected, corrective input can be applied.
However, the clandestine services have a similar technology that’s used as a weapon. Through corruption, these weapons are available in the private sector for revenge, discrediting, and silencing campaigns.
There is a domestic program “testing” torture techniques that uses an advanced weapons system. The program is illegal and needs to be addressed publicly.
Scientific advancement has created the ability to augment or substitute human senses. There is great positive benefit for the blind, deaf, etc.
However there is an ongoing non-consensual experiment with this technology. The victims are calling themselves “Targeted Individuals.” They are guinea pigs for a Perception Warfare weapon.
I don’t believe in non-consensual human experimentation, and I’d really like to see this experiment exposed publicly.
“Targeted Individuals are Non-Consensual Human Subjects”: These Are Crimes
After the reported tragic death of three police officers as well as the shooter’s death in Baton Rouge, David Voigts is doubly keen to get the truth across, of deadly experimentation behind “Targeted Individuals” to all Americans:
“I knew this was a life and death matter. I’m sorry I couldn’t encourage the public to engage on this issue yet.
As you can see with the killings in Baton Rouge, these types of crimes will continue to happen until the public comes to the realization that these technologies exist and assistance is needed for the torture victims.”
“Targeted Individuals are non-consensual human subjects in testing this technology. Furthermore this tech is used in revenge and silencing campaigns.
I need help in alerting the public to these crimes.”
Reminders from History: Visiting the US Holocaust Museum
Washington Monument/Image: David Voigts
In late May, as David Voigts journeyed Westward from Delaware across the United States of America, he stopped in at Washington, DC, where he walked on the National Mall, photographed the Monuments, and visited some of the Smithsonian museums, as well as the US Holocaust Museum, a monument to honor the Jewish and European victims of Nazi atrocities, including barbaric human experimentation, during World War II, a place he has said earlier inspired him during his Naval training days:
“I was glad to see large tour groups assembled for the presentations. There’s a sociological concept that says a society has a cultural memory of forty years or so. Those monuments help refresh important topics. Nice to see the younger generation learning those important lessons.”
US Holocaust Museum/Image: David Voigts
Stopping in at the Library of Congress, where he appreciated “an exhibit of historical continental maps through the decades,” and handed out brochures on the C&O canal bike path to passers-by, he reports he “didn’t get any reaction from the DC residents,” yet notes his overarching impressions of DC were about the people absorbing the exhibits and monuments:
“The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum had a large model of my first ship the USS Enterprise. However, the single most important part of the National Mall was the people. I was glad to see people experiencing and reflecting upon the history on display.”
US Holocaust Museum/Image: David Voigts
In a moment in our history where we as a people are being surveilled, spied, and experimented upon in the most extreme of ways, including with the little-known but deadly 21st-Century technologies of electronic- and neuro-warfare, by a complex of Military/Intelligence public-private partnerships bent on advancing the Surveillance State (into complete domination of the human mind), David Voigts is doing a heroic job of raising public awareness as he walks alone across the country.
Wheel of Freedom Interview with David Voigts, 6/6/16
Informative Videos on Targeting and Covert Programs from David Voigts:
Ramola D is a writer and independent journalist with a background in science, management, and literature researching issues in science, technology, and ethics relevant to our times, including issues related to Intelligence, Surveillance, Security, and Defense. She runs the solutions journalism site at The Everyday Concerned Citizen, and edits the online literary quarterly, Delphi Quarterly. Her literary journalism, fiction, and poetry have been published widely, more on this at her website. Please follow her online at @EccEveryday, or on Facebook.
This article may be reproduced in full with attribution and linkback. Please share widely.
Heightened Public Concern About Proposed Exclusions of Intelligence Surveillance/Criminal Justice/National Security-Related Activities from the Protections of the Common Rule
by Ramola D/The Everyday Concerned Citizen/Posted July 17, 2016
(With information, analyses, and reviews from Norman Rabin, Karla Smith, Cait Ryan, Nola Alexander, and others. Links and resources include those supplied in public comments by Margaret Zawodniak, Todd Giffen, Steven White, Jeffrey Kaye Ph.D.)
Informed Consent from human subjects was a primary subject of concern presented by activists at the recent May 18-19 meeting in Washington, DC, of SACHRP, the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protection, and in several public comments submitted by human rights advocates and others online.
Those comments emphasized that Informed Consent needs to be made absolutely essential, and neither exempted nor excluded as currently proposed, in all Intelligence Surveillance, Criminal Justice, and National Security-related activities/research, particularly classified research.
Please note: Although a notice was recently released, on June 29, 2016, of a new report published by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, Medicine recommending that the September, 2015 NPRM should be withdrawn–
–the purpose of this article, and all Public Comment Summaries it links to, is to publicize and historically document for a larger public audience the expressed concerns, from the American public, about in-built waivers of Informed Consent being permitted via proposed exclusions (particularly for Military/Intelligence/National Security/Criminal Justice activities/research), in this current NPRM for the Common Rule.
It is also to be hoped that this extended public exposure will inspire serious consideration of these concerns and directly influence any final changes to the Common Rule, as part of the Rulemaking process described at SACHRP, on May 18, 2016 by Jerry Menikoff, Director, OHRP, and Executive Secretary, SACHRP:
“it is inappropriate for a change to suddenly come across that was not part of that discussion – a change to Final Rule should be a logical outgrowth of what was originally presented or something that was appropriately discussed as part of the Public Comment process – that is an appropriate restraint in terms of what the Government can [do] – so nothing new can be added that wasn’t discussed.” Jerry Menikoff, MD, JD, Director OHRP, Executive Secretary, SACHRP
SACHRP May 18-19 Meeting on NPRM for the Common Rule/Focus
SACHRP Meeting, May 18, 2016
Following a period of public comment that closed Jan 6, 2016, this particular meeting of the 11-member strong SACHRP was partially focused on sharing analyses of public comments on the proposed changes to the Common Rule, reflected in the NPRM or Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) posted September 2015. NIH video coverage of these meetings may be found here: May 18 and May 19.
The Common Rule, which comprises Subpart A of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 45, Section 46, establishing the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, is a modified version of the Belmont Report, formulated in 1979, by a National Commission set up to address human subject research protections, and only a distant cousin of the Nuremberg Code of 1947, or the World Medical Association’s Helsinki Declaration (since revised) of 1964, designed to protect all human subjects of medical research, and in particular hold sacrosanct the need to ensure their Informed Consent.
Present at the May 18 meeting, as self-introduced, were:
Nancy King from Wake Forest School of Medicine; Reid Pierce from the University of Pennsylvania, Medical Geneticist; Dan Nelson from the EPA; Christina Heide. Health and Human Services, Office of Civil Rights, HIPAA; Karen James, Department of Veterans Affairs; Stephanie Bruce, Department of Defense; Kevin Praska, FDA; Ann Andrews for Department of Commerce and NIST; Jonathan Green, Executive Chair, Washington University in St. Louis; Holly Fernandez, Harvard Law School; Owen Garrick, Clinical Research, Retiring SACHRP member; Stephen Rosenfeld, Board Chair, IRB; Diana Chinko, Three-Time Survivor Of Early Onset Breast Cancer,
Patient Advocate involved with Researchers/Funders
Nationally, and Los Angeles; Cecelia Chirinos, OHRP; Julia Gorey, OHRP (Executive Director, SACHRP); Jerry Menikoff, OHRP (Executive Secretary, SACHRP); and Jeffrey Botkin, University of Utah (Chair, SACHRP).
Adding particular poignancy to these discussions, also present at the meeting and offering public comment on both days were activists aiming to represent current-day non-consensual subjects of covert human experimentation today in the United States, who spoke strongly and emotionally against the advisability of compromising Informed Consent requirements for any category of research involving humans, including classified research. (Covered further below.)
Executive Summary Presented at SACHRP Meeting Avoids Addressing Public Concern About Intelligence Surveillance/Criminal Justice Exclusions
It is notable that the presentation of an Executive Summary of Public Comments by Lauren Hartsmith, JD, from the Division of Policy and Assurances at OHRP, failed to present public concern about exclusions for Intelligence Surveillance and Criminal Justice activities noted in written public comments.
Non-consensual experimentation activist Joan Dawson, stood up to question this exclusion (of discussion on proposed Intelligence exclusions in the NPRM) and was informed the decision was based “purely on numbers”.
Joan Dawson asks about criteria for exclusion of comments on Intelligence activities from SACHRPS’s Public Comment Summary
Ms. Hartsmith noted that high numbers of comments had been registered for other aspects of the NPRM while only close to 50 public comments had mentioned the Intelligence Surveillance exclusion, and 25 comments addressed the Criminal Justice exclusion.
Although OHRP Director Dr. Jerry Menikoff followed up to note that low numbers did not preclude discussion and consideration by the Committee of important issues in comments (while larger numbers on other aspects might indicate greater public concern on those aspects or institutional concern about regulatory burden and “decrease (in) their profits” regarding those aspects), these were non-specific remarks, not specifically referencing the comments on Intelligence Surveillance exclusions.
“In terms of how the comments are used, it is not just about numbers—this is a governmental process, the genuine goal of all the players is to produce good policy outcomes.
“…Bottom line, numbers are not necessarily the key thing, which is not to say that numbers do not matter.” Dr. Jerry Menikoff, Director, OHRP, Executive Secretary, SACHRP
A preliminary analysis performed by activists for victims of non-consensual experimentation (possibly conducted by classified research) offers further detail:
“We found 85 Public Comments which mentioned “Intelligence” (both victims and non-victims);
a subset of 57 were found that specifically mentioned “Intelligence Surveillance” (both victims and non-victims).
26 victims addressed Intelligence Surveillance (Note: an additional 2 possible victims, 1 probable victim and 2 victim’s spouses also submitted comments addressing Intelligence Surveillance)
62-66 victims submitted comments to the NPRM (there were a total of 86 victim comments including multiple comments by the same person).
In Summary there were approximately 62-66 victims who commented during the NPRM, and 77-81 victims who commented during the ANPRM and NPRM combined.” Karla Smith and Norman Rabin, Authors, Victim Stakeholder Summary (described below)
(The ANPRM was the Advance Notice of the Proposed Rule Making, and was published in September 2011, followed by the Notice or NPRM in September 2015.)
“We had many fewer comments (for NPRM) than we did the Bioethics Commission because victims have given up. They are not getting a response. And they are not welcome at the Bioethics Commission.” Karla Smith, Public Comment at SACHRP, May 19, 2016
Valerie Bonham’s 2011 Letter Stating President Obama’s Bioethics Commission Declines Concern About Covert Non-Consensual Experimentation/Surveillance
Regardless of the numbers involved, close analysis of these particular public comments—comprising the bulk of this article–show that these proposed exclusions to the Common Rule strike at the very heart of meaningful, humane protections for human subjects, and seek to leave all Americans—and others, worldwide–completely vulnerable to exploitation by the “covered entities” of American military and intelligence agencies, in the name of national security, standard intelligence surveillance, and normative criminal investigation.
New NPRM Exclusions Would Further Weaken Protections for Informed Consent in Classified Research
While the intent of the proposed Common Rule, as presented in the NPRM, is ostensibly to protect human subjects from exploitation and abuse while enrolled in research, among the concerning changes proposed is a listing of certain research-like activities as non-research (and therefore exempt from protection by the Common Rule), including (in a list among surveys and questionnaires, oral histories, journalism) Intelligence Surveillance activities, Criminal Justice activities, and National Security-related activities.
As several public commenters note, these changes would not strengthen but explicitly roll back extant implied protections for human subjects in projects covertly or otherwise run by Intelligence, Justice, or Military agencies and contractors in the above categories. A range of institutions focused on defense, national security, homeland security, and criminal justice would stand to benefit from these broad exclusions of unspecified “activities” as not-research, as noted in NPRM language.
Public commenters note that essentially, it appears the NPRM seeks to re-classify research on human subjects being conducted or intended by such Military or Intelligence institutions as routine operation, and not-research.
This is highly concerning because it offers the possibility of shielding research as “activity” and becoming exempt from the Common Rule; researchers will no longer need to concern themselves with matters of Informed Consent, respect for subjects, or letting them opt out—matters already unaddressed in current classified research, as claimed by those stating they are current-day victims of covert government programs.
In the USA, basic requirements for Informed Consent, which once was an essential prerequisite to all medical research post-Nuremberg and post-revelations of inhumane Nazi experiments, have been watered down successively since, to the point where OHRP discussions now reframe the subject in terms of “regulatory burden.”
Opening remarks by Dr. Jerry Menikoff, Director of OHRP at the Department of Health and Human Services, and Executive Secretary, SACHRP, suggested that OHRP was not the only party behind the creation and wording of the NPRM, that policy decisions taken at a higher level also came into play (covered below).
Are Military/Intelligence Agencies Backseat-Driving the NPRM, SACHRP, & the Presidential Bioethics Commission?
Is there an intention behind proposed changes to the Common Rule to explicitly protect ongoing covert activities and research by Military and Intelligence groups—and indeed the precise non-consensual neuro-experimentation and Directed Energy Weapons field-testing that activists are presenting testimony about?
Several factors point to this disturbing possibility, and are considered below.
1. Late Inclusion of the Intelligence Surveillance Activities Exclusion in the NPRM
Noted in public comments are several peculiarities associated with the NPRM proposal to exclude Intelligence Surveillance activities from the protections of the Common Rule. One has to do with the sudden appearance of this proposal in the NPRM in September 2015.
Karla Smith notes, in her joint public comment with activist and researcher Norman Rabin, presented live at the May 19 meeting:
“The September 2011 ANPRM did not discuss or propose an Intelligence Surveillance Activities exclusion, however there were approximately 18-20 public comments to the ANPRM which expressed concerns plausibly related to non-consensual hi-tech and/or military or intelligence or classified human research/experimentation.
“…The ANPRM was followed by a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in September 2015. Though no comments to the ANPRM were found proposing or discussing an Intelligence Surveillance Activities exclusion, the NPRM contained a proposal to exclude unspecified Intelligence Surveillance Activities (NPRM at § __.101(b)(1)(vi)). These activities include defense or national security-related activities.” Karla Smith, Public Comment at SACHRP, May 19, 2016
(Also, please see Question 1 of 4, in Norman Rabin’s public comment below, questioning the late addition of the Intelligence Surveillance exclusion, without any prior public discussion.)
Why were Intelligence Surveillance activities—not mentioned in the earlier Advance Notice–suddenly proposed, 4 years later, for explicit Common Rule exclusion from human subject protections?
Could it be that increasing visibility of covert, non-consensual human experimentation programs through increasingly credible–and cumulative–victim testimonials online these days have caused agencies pursuing secrecy to seek new, unbreachable means of cover?
2. “Various Federal Agencies Responsible for NPRM/Changing the Common Rule”
Public commenters have noted that the language of the NPRM seems too quick to excuse the closed, covered, classified actions of Intelligence Surveillance and Criminal Justice as legitimate, routine, authorized activity, and not research. (Public comments covered further below.)
Joint Federal Creation of NPRM Language: At the SACHRP May 18 Meeting, OHRP remarks implied there was joint strategizing and management of the proposed Common Rule document by various un-named Federal agencies.
Jerry Menikoff, Director, OHRP, noted that “many Federal players were involved in creating this document,” and statements of rule or policy in the document reflected “decisions already made at higher levels regarding what a particular policy decision would or would not be.”
Was this a veiled reference to Military/Intelligence Agency oversight of policies and process?
“I do want to say, often, at least some people act as if OHRP ran the show, and it’s OHRP’s decision on all of these points. In fact it’s been a complicated document, many players within the federal government have been involved. Decisions were made by various people who have various authorities and make these decisions and it has not been that OHRP gets its call on all of this. And I mean that is just the nature of the beast.” Jerry Menikoff, Director, OHRP; Executive Secretary, SACHRP
Listed on the HHS website and included in the NPRM is a list of Federal agencies associated with the Common Rule, who may have helped in creation of the wording in this document, including the Departments of Labor, Justice, Defense, Agriculture, Energy, Education, Commerce, Homeland Security, US AID, EPA, SSA, and NASA, among others. Raising the question: Do all of these Federal departments actually engage in human subject research? Apparently they all have an interest.
Joint Federal Analysis of Public Comment: While presenting the analysis of public comment, Lauren Hartsmith also mentioned that OHRP “took the lead in analysis, but they also had input from other Federal players as well.”
It is telling therefore that analysis of comments on the Intelligence Surveillance and Criminal Justice exclusions was excluded from the day’s presentation.
Was the Military/Intelligence/Justice intent here perhaps to maintain a distant silence on these vitally important matters of national interest, just to not draw attention to the important and insistent issues of Informed Consent and ongoing covert human experimentation being raised by public comment on these exclusions?
Mention of Confidential Government Discussions: In addressing issues of procedure past this meeting in finalizing changes to the Common Rule, Jerry Menikoff mentioned confidential Government discussions before Congressional procedures could follow to turn proposals into Federal Regulation and law. There was mention of the Rule being finalized and submitted in September 2016 before the next SACHRP meeting in October.
Sample Comment, SACHRP Summary of Public Comments/May 18, 2016
“This was public, in the Unified Agenda with a September 2016 date. It’s been in the Unified Agenda many times before, dates have been changed, but there’s a desire to move this thing forward.”
“The final Rule will be a document in many ways similar to the NPRM in that it will point out, discuss the public comments, and it will respond to the public comments. Sort of probably a fine art in which different lawyers will I guess agree in terms of to what level of detail you go into in terms of responding to the public comments, but yes, that is a requirement and it will be done when a final rule, if and when a final rule is announced.
“In terms of…the legislative end of things, I mean, the Legislature is open for Congress to do what it wants to do.
…In terms of my involvement, you know, involvement of the Executive branch with the Legislative branch is a complicated thing and my understanding is, there are actually to some degree confidentiality issues about what I should not or should be talking about, it’s not like there are a lot of interactions but it’s certainly open for Congress to do what Congress may or may not want to do in terms of getting involved in this topic and if they want to pass laws, it’s no different than any other area.
There are restraints in terms of there is a Department of Health and Human Services policy that we’re not supposed to be talking about the deliberations in terms of once public comment is done what the government is thinking about in terms of what the final rule might be. We’re just not allowed to talk about that.”Jerry Menikoff, Director, OHRP; Executive Secretary, SACHRP
3. Information on Acknowledged, Ongoing CIA Research Not Provided to the President’s Bioethics Commission Either
Relevant to this discussion on the NPRM, it is interesting to note that the CIA has offered two late acknowledgments to the President’s Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (PCSBI), one that yes, they are conducting research domestically within the United States, and two, that no, they are not providing further detail on this research because the information is “confidential,” although not classified.
“Confidential” information, by CIA standards, from various sources online, appears to be related to levels of CIA Security clearance, implying information that poses “risks” to national security if divulged, but not “grave damage” as “Secret” information, nor “exceptional threat” as “Top-Secret” information.
The public comment presented by Karla Smith (posted separately here) makes note of a letter dated November 15, 2011, sent by Associate Deputy Director, CIA, V. Sue Bromley to Amy Gutmann, Chair, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (PCSBI), footnoted in the updated 2012 version of their 2011 report MORAL SCIENCE/Protecting Participants in Human Subjects Research, pointing to the domestic nature of CIA research:
The CIA did not report project-level data (on human subjects) to the Commission in 2011 when requested, a fact noted in Moral Science as N/R or Not Reported in tables from the Research Project Database (RPD), and acknowledged with this comment:
“The Human Subjects Research Landscape Project does not provide a robust understanding of research that was not reported because it is classified or because of national security concerns.” Moral Science, Page 170
The full end-note 10, linked to the above statement (emphases below mine) may be of interest, particularly to those Americans alleging non-consensual experimentation on their bodies, plausibly in covert, classified-research projects.
“For example, the CIA did not submit project-level data to the RPD because “the application by the C.I.A. of certain research results may implicate intelligence sources and methods, and thus cannot be discussed in the public domain.” Letter from V. Sue Bromley, Associate Deputy Director, Central Intelligence Agency to Amy Gutmann, Ph.D., Chair, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. (November 15, 2011). The CIA confirmed that all CIA-sponsored human subjects research is conducted in the United States – not abroad. CIA personnel also met with Commission staff to discuss the CIA’s human subjects research portfolio and made records available to appropriately cleared Commission staff. In addition, the Department of Energy provided de-identified data aboutthree human terrain mapping projects that have not been accounted for in the RPD.”
It is worthwhile to reiterate here that the CIA is confessing to conducting research inside the USA, on human subjects, meaning, Americans—which is more than is publicly divulged by the CIA, on FOIA requests, as this writer can attest:
And that the CIA, while apparently sharing some information with Commission staff, refuses to publicly offer details of this human subjects research, although they say it is not classified, but “confidential,” and notably, that “research results” involving this human subjects research being conducted secretly within the United States may implicate “intelligence sources and methods,” which makes it necessary to keep secret.
This information in itself would be worth exploring further, particularly since alleged experimentation being reported today attests to no less than precisely that human brains—people’s own private storehouses of intelligence—are being invaded and remotely influenced or “interrogated” with neuro-weaponry and neuro-implants, and that “non-lethal” radiation weaponry is being used in tandem covertly on bodies, possibly to assist in covert, trauma-based neuro-modification and “interrogation” programs.
If these are the “intelligence sources and methods” of 21st-century interrogation that the CIA wishes to keep secret, then perhaps the entire classification category of “sources and methods of gathering intelligence” should be publicly and stringently questioned.
Clearly their misstep of not obtaining Informed Consent from American experimentees first makes it inevitable that non-consensual experimentation on Americans using these sources and methods should eventually bring these particular sources and methods to light, as current public comment from victims makes evident.
Executive Order 12333/CIA Website
Other non-consensual CIA research on human subjects that Americans will not soon forget is MK ULTRA. And today’s victims aver no less of a holocaust on their bodies and brains in stringent and inhumane experimentation than a new MK ULTRA.
4. SACHRP stepping away from responsibility for Intelligence Surveillance exclusion
Also noteworthy is the fact that SACHRP, whose stated intention is “to advise the Secretary on how to improve the quality of the system of human research protection programs, including the responsibilities of investigators, institutional review boards (IRBs), administrators, and institutional officials, and the role of the Office for Human Research Protections and other offices within the Department of Health and Human Services”, appears to be disavowing itself of any responsibility with regard to Intelligence Surveillance research or “activities”:
“At the December 2015 SACHRP meeting, SACHRP noted that there is public concern about the Intelligence Surveillance proposed exclusion but stated that they do not have the expertise to provide commentary. SACHRP encouraged additional public justification for and description of this exclusion.” Victim Stakeholder Summary (described further below)
This was also noted by SACHRP in their own public comment on the NPRM:
“SACHRP notes there is public concern about this proposed exclusion, but SACHRP does not have the expertise to provide commentary. SACHRP encourages additional public justification for and description of this exclusion.” Victim Stakeholder Summary, Intelligence Comments, Non-TI (described further below)
Who would have the expertise then, if not SACHRP? The specific Government agencies—Military, Intelligence, Justice–potentially requesting and impacted by this proposed Intelligence Surveillance exclusion did not publicly respond to this SACHRP invitation.
“Notably, we did not find any comments that offered the perspective of a current or former Government person or entity who explained specifically why the proposed exclusion would be helpful as a future government policy.” Karla Smith, Public Comment at SACHRP, May 19
Implications: To conclude this section on possible behind-the-scenes management of the NPRM, public discussion of the Intelligence Surveillance exclusions, SACHRP, and the President’s Bioethical Commission, an added concern must be noted, given the numbers of people coming forward as non-consensual victims of classified research today:
If the new Common Rule continues on this path and fully excises all classified research being conducted by Defense, Justice, National Security, or Intelligence agencies from needing to be accountable to or to respect the requirements of the Common Rule in the protection of human subjects, would this also be a way to justify past and currently-extant non-consensual human experimentation that is being widely and insistently reported today, but which these groups haven’t owned up to yet?
Public Comments on Intelligence Surveillance Exclusions Independently Analyzed by Non-Consensual Experimentation Victim Activists
The information below relies in great part on two important analyses of these public comments, submitted to SACHRP by researchers Norman Rabin, Karla Smith, and Cait Ryan: a two-part Victim Stakeholder Summary described as representing “the victims of ongoing Non-Consensual Human Research/Experimentation, plausibly related to the testing of Classified Intelligence Surveillance technologies and/or methods including Remote Weapons testing, Neurotechnologies, and other technologies”.
This Summary, with Norman Rabin, author, reminds SACHRP of the Stakeholder landscape for the NPRM:
“The September 8, 2015 NPRM…has among its stakeholders: the general Public; persons and institutions conducting or likely to conduct future human subject research; and, persons who are currently, or who have been Human Subjects of Human Research, or persons likely to be participants in future Human Research.
“Most prominent and numerous among consensual or non-consensual human subjects who submitted Public Comment to the NPRM, and/or to the preceding ANPRM, are citizens who are victims of alleged apparent non-consensual human experimentation, mainly alleged testing of technology which is plausibly related to the testing of Intelligence Surveillance technologies and methods.” Victims Stakeholder Summary, Intelligence Comments, Non-TI
The term “Targeted Individual” or “TI” which has entered the public lexicon is also used here to denote those claiming victimization by such technology experimentation.
The Victim Stakeholder Summary is divided into two parts, one collecting, analyzing, and presenting comments on the Intelligence Surveillance exclusion from Non-Victim or Non-TI public commenters, and one presenting comments from Victims or Tis.
Describing the concerns of this group in a letter directed to SACHRP, Norman Rabin wrote:
“Please be clear to understand, and to assure action or to urge action, reflecting that:
Our Ongoing Injustice Issue alleges a Large Scale Ongoing, Human Research/ Experimentation Program, which subjects citizens to Severe violations of Human Rights and the most basic, and fundamental Constitutional Rights, including daily liberty, the security of one’s own person and privacy of their body and brain, and freedom from repeated Cruel and/or Inhumane Treatment. This Program is alleged to have 500 to 2000 or so Ongoing victims across the U.S.”
..Because our Stakeholders seem to have been ignored in the Governmental Public Summaries of the ANPRM, it is important for our Stakeholder Summary to be clearly presented to OHRP, and to the Rulemaking, and to SACHRP, so that the very epitome of Rights Violations and Wrongdoing in the name of “Human Research” will not continue to occur. Norman Rabin, Letter to Julia Gorey, Executive Director, SACHRP, May 11, 2016
It must be stressed here that the “victims” this Summary calls attention to are the hundreds and thousands of Americans and citizens worldwide who have been coming forward over the past few decades to report experiences of being experimented upon, with visual and documented evidence of repeated assaults on their bodies and brains with electromagnetic signals of various kinds, including high-powered microwaves, and radiometric and toxicological evidence of non-consensual implantation with RFID chips, bio-MEMs, neuro-implants, and nano-technology.
The very fact that a single person, let alone hundreds or thousands, should come forward to report non-consensual experimentation on their bodies with radiation weaponry or RFID chips should ring a sharp warning bell to all of humanity, that once again, classified, secretive, and abusive human experimentation is indeed taking place in our midst.
Concerns About Covert Intelligence/Justice Activities Evading Informed Consent Expressed By Universities, Advocacy Groups, Physicians, Attorneys, Psychologists
It is important to note first though that concerns about covert Intelligence and Justice surveillance activities weakening protections for human subjects come from a variety of sources, including universities, advocacy groups, physicians, psychologists, attorneys, and concerned citizens.
Humans Harmed Significantly In Past Experiments Hidden by Secrecy and “National Security”
Notable public comments include those of Jeffrey Kaye, Ph.D, psychologist, blogger, and journalist, who has addressed torture in both his psychotherapy practice and writing, and submitted a 7-page comment with 2 pages of footnotes. He is unequivocal in his recommendation that the NPRM’s “intelligence surveillance” proposal, as also “criminal justice” proposed exclusions, and changes to federal policy regarding prisoners be “soundly rejected”:
“Currently, the Department of Justice, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Department of Homeland Security, the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG), and the intelligence agencies that operate under the umbrella of the Department of Defense, are all regulated by 45 CFR 46, and protection of human subjects falls under the Common Rule. There is good reason historically for this, as government agencies, often under the auspices of “national security,” failed to protect human beings who were harmed significantly under experiments undertaken by such agencies.”
“These agencies act under a veil of secrecy, and safeguards on potential misuse of actions considered research, as defined, or even potentially close to [being considered] research, should be strengthened, not weakened.” Jeffrey Kaye, Ph.D, Public Comment, NPRM
Dr. Jeffrey Kaye included in his comment mention of various recent reports and exposés calling into question the CIA/DoD recourse to Informed Consent waivers in human experimentation, including these:
Specifically, Dr. Kaye noted that these reports and documents called attention to fairly recent—and egregious—Military lapses and failures of protection to human subjects, and a “history of attempts by DoD officials to push back against such restrictions,” as in the Guantanamo CIA torture experimentation programs on prisoners, under guise of testing interrogation techniques; in the 1970s Project Shad subjection of 4000 Navy men to dangerous chemicals, radioactive materials, and bacteria;and other notorious DOD Human Research programs, which took decades to be disclosed, after years of government denials. In Guantanamo, prisoner of war protections under the Geneva Conventions were stripped by the US Government using the 2002 Wolfowitz Directive for prisoners of the “war on terror”, and which led to the rephrasing of experimentation on Guantanamo prisoners as “enhanced interrogation.”
Additionally, Dr. Kaye notes that the NRC report on Emerging Cognitive Neuroscience found that the current system of human protections in military research does not safeguard against intentional wrongdoing, nor against the circumvention of research rules by setting up “convenient alternative frameworks (such as field testing).” Procedures and policies in place for conducting medical experiments on military personnel offer guidance, are formal, even “rigorous,” but are not clear enough to stop abuse from occurring. Ultimately, the report concludes that it is questionable whether such classified research is ethically sound at all, given its basic lack of transparency and public accountability.
Dr. Kaye stresses that these conclusions are particularly germane in light of the used phrasing of field testing, program evaluation, program assessment, and adjustment of technique to mask the extreme programs of experimentation and torture carried out at Guantanamo. The question of what constitutes research and what doesn’t should not be an issue for contention, he suggests.
“The point is that in the case of intelligence or national security agencies, especially those aspects covered by secrecy and classification, or that are “covert,” determinations of what is and what is not research, i.e., what can be covered or monitored by the Common Rule, what the “exceptions” are, is actually nonsensical. Either the coverage is complete and total, or it is not.” Jeffrey Kaye, Ph.D, Public Comment, NPRM
Commenting on the recently exposed CIA torture program, he points out that OHRP referred issues there back to the CIA:
“In the case of the CIA experimental torture or “enhanced interrogation” program, OHRP referred any research misdeeds back to the agency itself, in this case, back to the CIA. Such is their policy, which in this case is shown as grossly inadequate.
The fact remains, as documented in the recent release of the Executive Summary of the Senate Select Committee Intelligence report on the CIA’s torture program, that the plans for the “enhanced interrogation” program were formed in the same division of the CIA that ran the MKULTRA program.
Do we really want less, not more, safeguards on “intelligence surveillance” activities?” Jeffrey Kaye, Ph.D, Public Comment, NPRM
Dr. Kaye also cites a Jan 2015 letter by two United Nations Special Rapporteurs to the US Government on the role of health professionals in the CIA interrogation program and subsequent lack of investigation into allegations there of experimentation, not interrogation, as further support for restricting the CIA and other Intel agencies from conducting classified experimentation without Informed Consent, stating “the secrecy of the intelligence and covert operations world cannot allow any weakening of research or informed consent protections, as the agencies involved are without moral scruple, and have a long and even recent history of covering up misdeeds.”
“We are slipping away from the lessons learned from the Nuremberg trials.”
An attorney, William A. Brant, P.E., J.D., reminded the Committee of the primacy of lessons learned from the Nuremberg trials, and the absolute need for fully Informed Consent in all research involving humans:
“I am reminded of an August 15, 1997, article in the Annals of Internal Medicine (Vol. 127, No. 4) by Edmund D. Pellegrino, M.D. that I believe is applicable to my comments here.
“Nearly 70 years ago now, we learned of the moral depravity of the 20 Nazi physicians who were tried and convicted at Nuremberg for their part in human experiments at Auschwitz. The moral lessons learned seem obvious today and the crime so heinous that it seems silly to revisit now. Surely, those crimes and sheer lack of morality could never happen again.
“However, this is a dangerous conclusion, writes Dr. Pellegrino, and I agree. Moral lessons are quickly and easily forgotten. Medical ethics is more fragile than we think and is on a slippery slope. Moral reasoning based on defective premises tends to recur in new settings. Nazi physicians believed they were doing the right thing when they performed their experiments on humans.
“The first guiding principle of the Nuremberg Code mandated, “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.”
“We are slipping away from the lessons learned from the Nuremberg trials. We are failing to respect the absoluteness of truly informed consent to strengthen regulatory mechanisms regarding research involving humans. Informed consent is the very bedrock of human rights. Truly informed consent is complete disclosure of every aspect and use of any biospecimen taken from a human. Anything less than truly informed consent violates what we learned from Nuremberg and basic human rights and dignity.
The proposed new rules should reflect truly informed consent.”William A. Brant, P.E. J.D., Public Comment, NPRM
Guatemala STD Experiments Suggest the Common Rule Must Be Strengthened Further
Calling to attention the recently-revealed Guatemala STD experiments where soldiers, prisoners, children, and mentally-ill patients were non-consensually experimented on and infected with syphilis and gonorrhea in the ’40s and ’50s in medical research approved by Johns Hopkins University and funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, commenter Robert García, Founding Director and Counsel, The City Project, with the Latino Coalition for a Healthy California and Henry Dahl, asked that the Common Rule be strengthened to prevent future human rights violations.
“[Commenter] submits these public comments to revise the Common Rule by incorporating lessons learned from the US STD experiments in Guatemala in order to modernize, strengthen, and make more effective the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. LCHC serves as the leading voice for Latino health in California .. . Henry Dahl is an attorney with experience in international law and human rights.
The City Project represents the Catholic Archdiocese of Guatemala in the petition before the International Human Rights Commission against the US and Guatemala for crimes against humanity and human rights violations in the STD experiments.” Robert Garcia, Public Comment, NPRM
Two of the five points stressed by Robert Garcia asked explicitly that the Common Rule be strengthened further, not watered down:
“1. The Common Rule must explicitly recognize that non-consensual human medical experiments violate domestic and international laws.
“2. The content of the Common Rule must be strengthened to recognize that voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.”Robert Garcia, Public Comment, NPRM
Michael A. Rodriguez, MD, MPH, Professor and Vice Chair of Research, David Geffen School of Medicine (UCLA), also mentioned the Guatemala experiments and quoted from the Informed Consent requirement of the Nuremberg Code:
“The content of the Common Rule must be strengthened to recognize that voluntary and informed consent of the human subject is absolutely essential….[This means that the person involved] should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. …Informed consent should be culturally and linguistically appropriate as well…Cases of human rights violation and unethical dealings of research conducted both abroad and in US, should include financial and emotional compensation for the subjects involved.” Michael A.Rodriguez, MD, MPH, Public Comment, NPRM
“Lousy with Loopholes”: Even Current Regulations for Classified Research Don’t Protect Informed Consent
Compliance with the extant Common Rule would imply the acquisition and documentation of Informed Consent from all those participating in research. Many observers note however that Intelligence agencies make use of loopholes to evade Consent requirements.
A comment submitted by Lizbet Boroughs for the Association of American Universities, and Association of Public Land Grant Universities noted that their member organizations found the exclusions unclear while observing that existing regulations “already allow department or agency heads to waive the applicability of some or all of the regulatory provisions for specific research activities or classes of research activities so long as OHRP is notified.”
The Victim Stakeholder Summary notes, on this comment, that, as per the current Common Rule, even notification to OHRP is not stringently required for waivers, particularly for classified Intelligence Surveillance activities, where agencies may also be held by classification law from publishing advance notice in the Federal Register or even providing notice to OHRP.
Currently, the Central Intelligence Agency is supposedly required to, by Executive Order 12333, comply with all subparts of 45 CFR part 46, while the Department of Homeland Security, created after issuance of the Common Rule, is also required to apply all subparts of 45 CFR part 46 to its human research activities.
Robin Baker, supporter of The Electronic Frontier Foundation, relays the reality on the ground,quoting partially from their recent article examining protections, Human Research Loopholes: Alive and Well:
“The Common Rule is supposed to affirmatively protect us from the abuses of the future. However, the proposed regulation is lousy with loopholes, including ones that could exempt tracking online behavior and experiments related to intelligence activities.
“This federal policy purportedly binds the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and numerous other agencies, including the CIA and Department of Homeland Security (per Executive Order 12333). But as we’ve seen, these agencies are adept at honing in on small loopholes, so the proposed language needs a serious edit if it is going to provide any real protection.” Robin Baker, Public Comment, NPRM
Electronic Frontier Foundation: Exclusions “Building In a Gaping Breach for DHS and the CIA”
“HHS proposes absolute ethics-review exemptions for “intelligence surveillance activities.” This would exempt actions “conducted to fulfill a department or agency’s legal mandate to ensure the safety and protection of the United States, its people, and its national security interests.” The government is professing to fence DHS and the CIA in through E.O. 12333, but they’re actually building in a gaping breach for them to stroll right back out through.”
In a 10-page comment meticulously examining and disputing various aspects of the proposed changes such as the “burdensome” nature of tracking individual biospecimens over a 10-year period, attorney Lee Tien of the EFFnoted the peculiar fact that the NPRM does not seek public comment on “one of the more problematic exemption-decisions” about whether an activity is “an intelligence surveillance activity” and elaborated on why this was of critical importance.
“This determination should be subjected to a particularly stringent review process because of these agencies’ long histories abusing human subjects through creative interpretation of their mandates.”
“As a preliminary concern, the NPRM claims to be “codify[ing] the current interpretation of the Common Rule.” 80 FR 53950. It is unclear to us what authority supports this claim. This was not apparent from the ANPRM, and is not identified in the NPRM. Second, if HHS believes that this authority justifies the exemption, it should identify the reasoning it found persuasive when deciding to codify the existing interpretation. At present, it is doubtful that this claim is supported by the record.”
Lee Tien also questions the ambiguity in wording regarding “surveillance activities and related analyses” asking for clarification, since “this offers practically no limitation to an intelligence community with a history of expansively interpreting limited exemptions. There should be a discussion, a representative list, or at a minimum a modifier added here to give future courts or administrative law judges some sort of applicable standards to apply if a dispute arises.”
Lee Tien further examines the use of biospecimens permitted for use by Intelligence/Military institutions, noting:
“HIPAA’s national security exception currently permits doctors, hospitals, and any other “covered entity” to disclose individual health information “to authorized federal officials for the conduct of lawful intelligence, counter-intelligence, and other national security activities authorized by the National Security Act” without patient authorization.”
Given that, he notes clarification is in order: “(T)he NPRM should clarify that the exemption only applies to biospecimen analysis if the biospecimen was collected for that particular use, and by a “defense, national security, or homeland security authority solely for authorized intelligence, homeland security, defense, or other national security purposes.” 80 FR 53950. As presently written, the language appears to potentially allow for the “use” of a biospecimen that was “collected” by a different agency, “collected” for a different purpose, or both.
“It would be perverse indeed for the updated Common Rule to quietly facilitate the creation or expansion of a permanent intelligence community biospecimen bank.”
CIRCARE: “Exclusions show the Government declines its mandate to protect research subjects”
Attorney Gerald Schatz, speaking for CIRCARE, Citizens for Responsible Care and Research, and offering detailed human rights law analysis of the NPRM in an attached 82-page document that can be found here, recommended that all proposed exclusions should be stricken.
“Investigators are not disinterested and should not make the decision as to whether their projects do or do not come within the ambit of the Common Rule….
Intelligence and national security have been used to rationalize experiments with dubious surveillance technique research. James Risen, Pay Any Price: Greed, Power, and Endless War (2014) Rachel Levinson-Waldman, What the Government Does with Americans’ Data, Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law (2013).
“And the intelligence and national security rationale has been used for research and experimentation with unlawful interrogation techniques. David J. Hoffman, et al. Report to the Special Committee of the Board of Directors of the American Psychological Association: Independent Review Relating to APA Ethics Guidelines, National Security Interrogations, and Torture (Sidley Austin LLC 2015); Senate Committee on Armed Services, Report: Inquiry into the Treatment of Detainees in U.S. Custody, 110th Cong. 2d sess. (2008), passim; Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Report: Committee Study of the Central Intelligence Agency’s Detention and Interrogation Program, S. Rep. 113-288, 113th Cong., 2d sess. (1914), passim; Steven H. Miles, Oath Betrayed: America’s Torture Doctors (2009) & Doctors Who Torture (2015).”
Citing the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness Project which operated as training while building data banks, he notes:
“In the national security area the line separating operations from research subject to Common Rule scrutiny evidently has not been clear enough…. Where there is a Government-approved research purpose, there should be no categorical exclusions from the Common Rule. It is a failure of respect for persons and is contrary to law to deny the right, among others, to fully informed consent, in circumstances conducive to voluntariness, [and] contravenes the law.”
Responding to NPRM questions on whether proposed exclusions would limit the rights of human subjects or compromise scientific integrity, he notes:
“As a legal matter, rights do not change; they are inherent or recognized in positive law. The human subjects regulations cannot accord or diminish rights; they are supposed to be protective of rights. We point out above…the proposed categorical exclusions disregard rights and eliminate or weaken mandated protections.
“The proposed exclusions show that the Government declines its mandate to protect research subjects and that it defers to some researchers who consider themselves above ethical scrutiny.”
“Children are not a national security risk, they don’t require surveillance.”
Children’s inherent rights to privacy and their vulnerability to data collection, profiling, and surveillance as part of Intelligence agency research was examined in a comment by Cheri Kiesecki:
“Privacy is a fundamental human right, and should especially apply to our most vulnerable population, children. … The proposed regulations in “Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects” would allow tracking of online behavior and experiments related to intelligence activities. Existing loopholes in COPPA [Children’s (under age 13) Online Privacy Protection Act (a Congressionally mandated federal rule)] exempt[s] government entities and nonprofits, allowing these entities to profile and share, even sell children’s data.”
“Institutions and online applications that profile a child, collect personal behavioral, non-cognitive, predictive, pii data and share said data with agencies, vendors, researchers, and institutions outside of the classroom are not transparently communicating this activity to parents. Parents are largely unaware this data collection is happening.”
She suggested removing these loopholes, noting, “Children are not a national security risk, they don’t require surveillance. Children deserve a chance to live their life unfettered by a preconceived digital profile.”
American Psychological Association Approves Intelligence/Justice Exclusions Despite New Ban on APA Participation in National Security Interrogations
The American Psychological Association (APA) (comment excerpted below) pointed to confusion being engendered by new categories of exclusions and suggested that the basic definition of “research with human participants” instead be used to define exclusions. They also underscored the need for proposals in the NPRM to be more fully discussed and vetted by the research community, prior to finalizing the Common Rule.
Astonishingly however, and notably, without discussion of any kind whatsoever, they recommended, in summary, that the Intelligence Surveillance exclusion be retained, as also the Criminal Justice exclusion:
“Although APA is supportive of the proposal to expand the list of types of research activities that do not need to meet the requirements of the Common Rule, we believe that the addition of the new category of “exclusions” alongside the old and new exemptions is confusing. Only those activities that do not meet the definition of “research with human participants” (program improvement, quality assurance/quality improvement, public health surveillance, biographies, etc.) should be explicitly excluded from the requirements of the Common Rule.”
“In summary, our suggestion would be to retain §___.101(b)(1)(i) and (iii)-(vi) as well as §___.101(b)(2)(iii) and §___.101(b)(3) as exclusions.”
(The Intelligence Surveillance exclusion is NPRM at §___.101 (b)(vi); the Criminal Justice exclusion is NPRM at §___.101 (b)(iii))
Their conclusions re-state this opinion:
“We believe that many of the proposed revisions do indeed have the potential to reduce burdens on institutions, IRBs, and investigators, without compromising protections for human participants in research. These include the explicit exclusion of activities deemed not to be research.”
“Many, if not most, of these proposals, however, have yet to be fully developed and vetted with the research community, and as such, APA does not believe that the NPRM can be the penultimate step before a final rule is issued by the agencies that are signatories to the Common Rule.”
Regarding this APA comment, the Victim Stakeholder Summary authored by researcher and activist Norman Rabin provides a crucial contextualizing in light of the recent APA involvement in exposed CIA Torture which sought to shield itself initially as “Enhanced Interrogation”:
“Note: this Comment ought to be considered with an “*” [asterisk], regarding the “Intelligence Surveillance Activities” proposal, becauseAPA was the subject of a widely PublicizedPublic Scandal:
–which reported upon APA (former APA officials’) involvement in Torture-related Prisoner Interrogations, and reported APA maintaining weakened policies for member behavior to satisfy Pentagon preferences; and,
–which reported upon APA organizational upheaval within the APA in response to it.
Therefore, the Public might reasonably expect that the APA would have voiced concern, or at least acknowledged, that U.S. Defense and Intelligence activities not only have a questionable history of non-consensual human experimentation, but even relatively recently, U.S. Defense and Intelligence have shown their capacity to fail to be proactive in applying human subjects protections.
Note: Besides the Public Scandal involving questions of adherence to Ethics, and peripheral or closer involvement in U.S. Government torture–which are sufficient for this ‘asterisk’–part of the Public Scandal did in fact concern the human testing of Interrogation Techniques (as in fact is mentioned in filed Public Comment 0559 (of CIRCARE(excerpted above)).]Norman Rabin, Victim Stakeholder Summary, Non-TI comments
Constitutionally Protected Rights to Privacy, Dissent Challenged by Criminal Justice Exclusion
Commenting on another proposed area of weakening protections, Criminal Justice, where such Common Rule weakening is being sought in the “collection and analysis of data, biospecimens, or records by or for a criminal justice agency for activities authorized by law or court order solely for criminal justice or criminal investigative purposes,” Dr. Jeffrey Kaye questioned the nature of such research, citing the 2012 case of Dr. Susan Brandon’s “research” for the FBI-led High Value Detainee Interrogation Group, where her observations and analyses of would-be assassin Manssor Arbabsiar’s interrogations ended up actually being used in the prosecution against him.
Gerald Schatz of CIRCARE also questioned the nature of data collection protected under this exclusion, mentioning a 2013 Twitter-message study conducted by Indiana University exploring political and geospatial idea dispersion in the Occupy Wall Street movement “down to the individual, identified mobile telephone,” a study funded by DARPA, NSF, and the McDonnell Foundation, where researchers “perhaps assuming that Twitter users had agreed that anyone could use their data and metadata even if identifiable, could do what the U.S. Government itself was not supposed to do.” (Michael D. Conover et al. Geospatial Characteristics of a Social Movement Communication Network, PLOS ONE, http://www.plosone.org/artile/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0055957 (March 6, 2013).)
“Research, development, and testing of technologies and methods relating to law enforcement and penology should not be excluded from the Common Rule when they seek or acquire data or biological material for identifiable individuals and are funded as research.”
He also cited a Senate committee report examining surveillance versus dissent, pointing to inherent problems with data-collection via surveillance which encroach on privacy rights:
“Individual cases and programs of government surveillance which the Committee examined raise questions concerning the inherent conflict between the government’s perceived need to conduct surveillance and the citizens’ constitutionally protected rights of privacy and dissent. It has become clear that if some lose their liberties unjustly, all may lose their liberties. The protections and obligations of law must apply to all.” (Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, Final Report: Foreign and Military Intelligence, Book I, 94th Cong., 2d sess. (1976) at 6-7.)
Referring to both criminal justice and intelligence and national security exclusions, he recommends:
“This proposed law enforcement and national security exclusions should be stricken as too fraught with ethical and legal hazard and with necessity to distinguish between research and operations.”
NPRM Includes Weakened Protections for Prisoners
In his remarks on the weakening of protections being sought also in the case of experimentation on prisoners (Subpart C of the Common Rule), Dr. Jeffrey Kaye notes the horrific abuse of prisoners in the ’60s and ’70s recorded by Allan Hornblum in Acres of Skin: Human Experiments at Holmesburg Prison, stating, “There is no reason to lighten the restrictions against such research, which was the result of decades of abuses,” and calling to mind “the dangers of unchecked power over a vulnerable population, the examples of which ruined untold number of lives.”
He cited these words from Allen Hornblum’s conclusion:
“It couldn’t happen in America” we reassured ourselves about medical practices in Nazi Germany. But intolerable medical practices were practiced on vulnerable populations in America, without the support of the political culture or the despotic leadership that captivated Germany under the Third Reich, without any protest from the AMA, which prides itself on its ability to regulate itself.
History suggests that we are as susceptible to abusing our socially and economically disenfranchised citizens as any other nation. If, as many believe, a democracy is only as strong as the respect accorded its weakest members, we must work to assure that neither these abuses nor the “conspiracy of silence” that makes them possible ever happen again. We must do this not only for the benefit of the powerless, but also for the benefit of society as a whole.”Allen Hornblum, Acres of Skin, Human Experiments at Holmesburg Prison
Responsibility of the OHRP and SACHRP to Americans Claiming Non-Consensual Human Experimentation
To what extent is the Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP) and SACHRP responsible for protecting those claiming to be the current subjects of classified research, under current Intelligence loopholes which waive Informed Consent?
In the hope that OHRP and SACHRP would indeed act to strengthen, not weaken protections for those being used non-consensually today in classified research projects, a small group of people claiming non-consensual subjection to clandestine experimentation came forward to present public comment.
It must be noted here that several in this group, as well as others, testified earlier at the SACHRP Dec 3-4 Meetings in 2015 and 2011, and also at the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues meetings in March and May 2011, video coverage for all of which may be found online (some links in Resources at end). It is important to note that public testimony of non-consensual experimentation has been continually coming forward for many years, yet no action by these Governmental institutions to investigate and terminate these deadly experiments has been forthcoming.
Cait Ryan: “Do Not Turn From Your Responsibility – Deny the Intelligence Agencies Waivers of Informed Consent”
Cait Ryan, Director, US-CACH, Public Comment/SACHRP, May 18, 2016
Cait Ryan, Director of US-CACH, United States Coalition Against Covert Harassment, opened her public comment emphasizing that the Common Rule must not supersede the Constitution nor replace due process, which includes notice of government action, and opportunity for citizens to make a case.
“The NRPM states that the rationale for excluding Defense or National Security-related activities is that their mandated missions are:
Field studies, not research and are not designated to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge, and
Solely conducted to fulfill a department or an agency’s legal mandate.
Under the definition of human subject:
#2. Interventions includes both physical procedures by which data are gathered, and manipulations of the subject or the subject’s environment are performed for research purposes.
My question to you is: How do you define physical procedure and how do you define manipulations? Do they include inflicting physical pain?
#3 Interaction includes communication or interpersonal contact between investigator and subject.
My question is, what do you mean by communication – is it verbal, is it data, wireless contact? Does the investigator, not knowing the subject’s name mean that the individual is NOT a human subject? Or if the individual is accessed remotely, would this too mean the individual is NOT a human subject?
My issue with these definitions and also with how you would define separately “field study”, “field research”, and “human research”. I cite for clarification a current General Dynamics grant* that allows for “field research” with directed energy and high powered pulse weapons. Please note these are remotely activated weapons upon the human body to develop and understand the bio effects associated with non-lethal weapons.
These include directed energy, riot control agents, broadband light, acoustic sounds, and blunt impact. Under the current definition of human subject, the fact that these are applied remotely questionably skirts the definition and no oversight is applied, potentially subjecting human subjects to what can be lethal violent force – which I remind you is unseen.
So, I request that you remedy the human subject definition to account for current technology. I ask that you include “field study”.
In today’s rapidly increasing technology it IS generalizable knowledge and it is foolish to think that there is no crossover into the public sector when military weapons are now being shifted from military to local law enforcement and Homeland Security.” Cait Ryan, Public Comment/SACHRP, May 18, 2016
She also noted that her organization had learned that 62-67 victims of unethical ongoing experimentation had submitted comment, and reminded the OHRP of their responsibility to stand up to the Intelligence Agencies who sought to hide their research from Common Rule scrutiny via exclusions;
“Their comments have given me a greater understanding that it is critical that you act to prioritize protections over research.
I plead with you to do the right thing: follow the lead of the Department of Energy’s legal counsel which recently stated “The Clinton Memo still has legal effect”. Tighten the rules, guarantee Informed Consent. And please, do not turn from your responsibility – deny the Intelligence Agencies waivers of Informed Consent, place field studies under the same oversight as research. Demand transparency.” Cait Ryan, Public Comment/SACHRP, May 18, 2016
Peter Rosenholm: “Don’t you think you should be listening when people die, people commit suicide who were in an experiment?
Peter Rosenholm, Public Comment/SACHRP, May 18, 2016
Peter Rosenholm said he wished to talk about “some of the real crimes that were going on,” and called attention to Seroquel clinical trials in which he said he was an unwitting participant (as clarified later: in Rhode Island, from 2001-2006, something he says he learned about only from his medical records). He mentioned Carl Elliot, asking if the Committee had heard of him–to which he says most around the table nodded. Carl Elliott, MD, Ph.D is a bioethicist who has spoken out against the abuses in psychiatric research in 2003 AstroZeneca/Seroquel clinical trials at the University of Minnesota where a young man then being treated for psychosis, Dan Markingson, committed suicide while signed on to hazardous Seroquel studies, when Elliott and others say he should have been considered mentally incapacitated at the time, and unable to give Informed Consent for participation in the Seroquel trials.
“I hate to say it but I was in the Seroquel experiment and it was never told, it destroyed my health and my life…Carl Elliott is exposing what’s going on in experimentation, and it is ugly. It’s because companies are making billions of dollars…they are setting up an experiment, almost every IRB is being approved–they are making billions, people’s lives are being destroyed.
So in other words people are dying, people are committing suicide, this should be listed. You talked earlier about it. Sometimes people die, should we list it? I think you should. I think there needs to be more transparency.
I spoke to the Bioethics Director, Amy Gutmann, I said if you believe you’re in an experiment which I found out I was later, up to 1400 milligrams of Seroquel, five or six years because I made complaints against a local government agency, they are using experimentation as a hit squad.
So there are those of us dying over it, committing suicide, we get thrown into experimentation.
I notice you don’t want to get into the ugly side, but Carl Elliott exposed it, you know it’s there.
I’d like to ask you quickly: what can you do to stop this? How can you be more transparent? Don’t you think you should be listening when people die, people commit suicide who were in an experiment? Shouldn’t we be able to look up that we are in an experiment? Can anyone give an answer to any of that?” Peter Rosenholm, Public Comment, SACHRP, May 18, 2016
Joan Dawson: “We ask that people in paid positions not safeguard your careers while letting our lives be sacrificed.”
Joan Dawson, Public Comment/SACHRP, May 18, 2016
Joan Dawson opened her comment with an anecdote about her mother a few weeks before she died:
“In December of 2012 my mother had suffered a heart attack and we were in the rehabilitation facility, and it was me, my mother and my sister, and my mother found this very large paper clip on the floor and she reached down, picked it up and went to me and said, do you want this? We said, okay, I put it in my pocket.”
She went on to mention that paper clips kept showing up around her later, after her mother passed, in the oddest places, becoming her mother’s “calling card.”
The unstated reference to Project Paperclip, the post-World War II US Government initiative that fudged Nazi-background data to bring more than 1600 Nazi scientists to work with the US military and intelligence agencies–rescuing them, ironically enough, from the Nuremberg tribunals, and installing them later in such grisly CIA experiments on humans as MK ULTRA and MK DELTA–possibly did not go unnoticed by anyone in the room.
Relevant in this context are words from President Eisenhower’s farewell address, where he admitted a scientist who gave him pause for concern was the celebrated Paperclipper Werner von Braun, and pointed to the dangers of public policy in science being hijacked by an elite:
“In holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.” Cited in James Norwood’s New York Timesreview of Annie Jacobsen’s book, Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America.
Joan Dawson’s powerful and moving testimony included personal experience, a direct address to the SACHRP Committee, and a reading of the names of many of those who have died as a result of the non-consensual experimentation performed on them today:
“I worked for a Federal contractor, I was a whistleblower. I experienced mobbing which is when your co-workers turn against you, psychological abuse, I left. I thought it was over, and it came back to haunt me again, and I left my job in 2013 and recreated my life with six income streams, six months later it fell apart, I experienced mobbing again. One job, a man told me this is what you get when you mess with the police. The next week, everywhere I looked there was a police officer.
“My life has become a nightmare. Part of me wanted to say walking up here, Dead Woman Walking. You probably won’t believe what my life is like. I do believe I’m in COINTELPRO. There was recently a sign-on letter by 60 organizations including one where I served for five years as Secretary and Board Member…We believe it’s a combination of COINTELPRO and testing with military weapons…directed energy weapons, nano-technology, different types of tracking with chips..these are weapons that are like Next Gen weapons which are being researched .. and you can find the research studies when you Google it. So I attest that I am definitely in COINTELPRO and could be used for experimentation.”
Joan Dawson: “We ask that human beings are not sacrificed …for the benefit of the common good, that’s what the Nazis did.”
“We ask that people we talk to in these paid positions not safeguard your careers while letting our lives be sacrificed. We ask that human beings are not sacrificed for this country for the benefit of the common good, that’s what the Nazis did. And they had to sell their messages to professionals and to the public. And that’s being done today. We also know about the experiment with the obedience to authority, where over 61% administered pain to another human being if instructed by authorities. They rationalized their behavior by appealing to the greater good and for the advancement of science.We have enough in our history to teach us what’s right today. And this is not right, what is happening to us.
“We ask that consent be given in all physical, mental behavior studies and not have waivers for heads of Federal agencies. We ask that this be done whether the person, human being, is in a lab or in a remote situation or they are at home or on the street. Because that can be done with technology.
“We ask that consent be given in unclassified and classified research. We ask for help, what do we need, we have the numbers. We know we have the numbers of experimentees, we have the evidence, we have whistleblowers who acknowledge and confirm our allegations. What do we need more?
“We ask that there are term limits on this. We understand National Security. We’re all citizens. We ask there be term limits on this, or a way to opt out. Currently there’s only one way to opt out, and it’s death.
Joan Dawson/Reading the names of the dead from current-day non-consensual experimentation in the United States of America/SACHRP, May 18, 2016
“And these are the people I’m familiar with, not whom I know, but names that I know who have died from being in this.
Kelly Cassler in 2015.
Gail Whittaker, Harlan Girard, in 2015.
Darren Dowd from electronic harassment.
Sean Stin in 2012.
Elvira Anderson, 2012, suicide.
Ray Costkey, in April of 2013.
Sarah Metheny in September of 2014.
Alexandra Foster, 2015, 33 years old, suicide.
John Lang in January of 2016. Predicted he would be killed by the Fresno cops, he died of stab wounds, house set on fire. He was a Targeted Individual as many of us call ourselves.
Ron Gilman, 2016, Voice to Skull, which used to be called Voice of God in the Persian Gulf war. He had two daughters.
Jessica Davis Thompson in February of 2016. Died of suicide. She lived in Washington State, she called herself a Targeted Individual.
Carol S. Peoples, died at the age of 43.
Jacqueline Feely Ross, died in November of 2015.
Benjamin Alan Murphy in the United Kingdom, 57 years old.
Myron May, FSU shooter, Targeted Individual, young man who was an attorney.
Aaron Alexis, Navy Yard shooter, was a Targeted Individual. He was shot, was receiving electronic harassment.
Miriam Carey, who made the illegal u-turn in the White House heard voices that sounded like Obama, that’s Voice to Skull, used to be called Voice of God, they can morph (voices), it’s a technology available.
Debra Gillmaker is the last name.
These are people that we know were targeted and that died. The only opt-out is death. And that’s why I said Dead Woman Walking.
Because suicide … I mean, we need to opt out. You have no idea what this does to our lives.” Joan Dawson, Public Comment, SACHRP, May 18, 2016
Cassandra Lewis: “We know technologies are being developed the public doesn’t know about–somebody needs to look into what’s happening”
Cassandra Lewis, Public Comment/SACHRP, May 19, 2016
Cassandra Lewis, who noted that she testified in New York at the President’s Bioethical Commission meeting in 2011, stated that she started experiencing peculiar electromagnetic signals on her body after a misunderstanding with an attorney during a stint at a law firm in 2005 in Washington DC, Hogan Lovells, which led her to understand she had become “some kind of research subject”. A part of her comment follows:
“Because these things are happening to me, I think that agencies should know about this and look into what I’m saying, there are others here who will probably report the same thing.
“I get involuntary movements of my fingers, my thumbs, my legs. I get vibrations in different parts of my body. I get an intense heating of my skin. I get a freezing, icy coldness, that can be concentrated to different parts of my body…. I can get forced sleep. I can be jolted awake. I have facial muscle manipulations. I have forced sounds – I experience these guttural sounds that would happen in my throat, yet I would hear them in my head, it was really weird.
Cassandra Lewis: “Research being done very covertly with technologies the public doesn’t know about”/SACHRP, May 19
“Someone forwarded to me some literature about a technology developed called Medusa. That is something developed by the Navy…I get a feeling sometimes when I lay down, it feels like some type of energy that’s going through me and it makes me feel weightless. Something happens to me where I will suddenly jerk, and it feels like electricity is going from the top of my head, it goes all through my body.
“So these are the dominant things that have been happening to me. And so I think that when we come to you and we have been termed “Targeted Individuals,” why we are targeted, we really don’t know. However, we know that technologies are being developed that the general public does not know about, and we believe they are being tested secretly on innocent United States citizens. I’m one. And somebody needs to look into what’s happening.”Cassandra Lewis, Public Comment, SACHRP, May 19, 2016
Nola Alexander: “This Committee is the oversight for all Military, Federal, and Corporate research projects.”
Nola Alexander, Public Comment/SACHRP, May 19, 2016
Nola Alexander, from Washington, DC, reminded the SACHRP Committee of the 1977 Hearings on (MKULTRA) Behavior Modification programs on non-consensual subjects, and informed them these had started up again, while the Common Rule had failed to protect “no consent” subjects. Mentioning a DARPA project on the Mind presented at a 2014 conference, she quoted a former Hill and White House official who informed researchers their main job was not doing good science but selling their research idea to Congress and the White House, however bad or good it was:
“In the symposium “America’s Next Frontier: Conquering The Mind” held on September 24, 2014, the focus was on enhancing human intelligence. A panelist at this seminar spoke of a research project conducted by the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency called “Accelerated Learning.”
“While projects like Accelerated Learning may be desired by many in order to compete in today’s education, economic, and social environments, one comment at this seminar was made by a public policy official, who “having worked on the Hill and at the White House doling out money”…alluded that it does not matter if your science is good or bad, old or new, or if falls through the cracks or is blossoming, you need to be charismatic and convince these entities that this is something we have to do.
“I’m here today, to call attention to Behavior Modification Through Thought Process projects that are bad, old (they have been going on for quite sometime), and when we complain, our complaints have fallen through the cracks or ignored by this Committee which is the oversight for all Military, Federal, and Corporate research projects.
“It is estimated that over 500,000 Americans including myself are no-consent human research subjects to unwarranted surveillance, thought identification, biometric physiological signatures used in neurosynaptic chips to cause “Synthetic Telepathy”, “Acoustic Infrasound and Ultrasound” which cause heating of human tissue and sickness, acoustic and optical Psycho Correction” – these terms have been listed in the U.S. Air Force Academy’s Non-lethal Terms and Reference.
“And I would like to say personally as a Christian and believer in Jesus Christ as my Savior that this is Antichrist, and you may laugh and, you know, call it crazy, but it is against my religious beliefs to be a part of or participate in such a research as this.
“So standing here before you, I would like to know what can we do, since we have given our issue to you of being non-consent human research subjects, to get you to take up our complaint and investigate it.” Nola Alexander, Public Comment, SACHRP, May 19, 2016
Karla Smith: “You have Enough Information to say No Waivers Of Informed Consent, PERIOD!”
Karla Smith, part of whose comment is relayed in earlier sections on the Victim Stakeholder Summary and the Clinton Memo, spoke emotionally and powerfully, for both herself, she said, and Norman Rabin, who was not present, and stressed the need for the SACHRP Committee to act to stop all waivers for Informed Consent, given her own experience of non-consensual surgery and implantation, and the need for all people to be secure and free from bodily intrusion and privacy rights violation.
Karla Smith, Public Comment/SACHRP, May 19, 2016/Speaking about human rights violations
“Please note that our stakeholders continue to allege an on-going Human Research/ Experimentation Program, which subjects citizens and others to severe Human and Constitutional Rights violations which affects their daily liberty; the right to be secure in their own person; and freedom from repeated Cruel and Inhumane Treatment. It is imperative that each person’s autonomy, self-determination, human dignity and constitutional rights prevail over scientific advancement and social and military benefit.
“We have a history of non-consensual human experimentation that is well documented. I didn’t know about it until I became a victim. Yet victims’ comments to the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues and other agencies continue to be ignored.
“All Federal regulations should reflect publicly acknowledged Constitutional and human rights. Additionally, the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects should truly be Proactively Protective of Human Subjects.
“Victims have been experiencing this for over 50 years, and on a personal note, I have been tested–over 20 implants were found including neural dust. Neural dust was originally developed by UC Berkeley, and includes a subdural transceiver that’s under the skull. It also includes an external transceiver and CMOS chips overlaid over the cortex.
(Note: Karla Smith offers this correction to her spoken comment: EMF emissions (consistent with implants) were found at 20 sites on my body. I said over 20 because I also found wires in my ears, what appear to be implants in my ears and sinus/nostrils with a cheap endoscope.)
Karla Smith, Public Comment, May 19, 2016/Speaking about scars from non-consensual surgery
“You can see that I have surgery scars. It was non-consensual–and I implore you to just make it illegal, even if you don’t believe it. Even if you ignore the history. Even if you ignore our testimony. You have enough information to say No Waivers Of Informed Consent,period!” Karla Smith, Public Comment, SACHRP, May 18, 2016
SACHRP’s Response to Powerful Public Testimony of Current-Day Non-Consensual Experimentation by DoD/DOJ/Intelligence Agencies and Medical Professionals
Public comment on the first day (from Cait Ryan, Peter Rosenholm, Joan Dawson) was briefly acknowledged and thanked by SACHRP Chair, Dr. Jeffrey Botkin, who is Professor of Medical Ethics and Pediatrics at the University of Utah.
On the second and concluding day, after comment from Cassandra Lewis, Nola Alexander, and Karla Smith, Dr. Botkin expressly stated that SACHRP could not follow up on the “concerns” expressed regarding ongoing non-consensual research and experimentation in the nation:
“The Committee very much appreciates the ongoing testimony of the public on this set of issues. SACHRP traditionally has not been a Committee that is geared to respond to allegations in the community and sort of take up specific cases, so our Committee isn’t well suited to follow up on the concerns that you express. So at a minimum, we are happy to serve as a platform to bring these concerns forward to the research community generally and certainly to OHRP and others.”
While public platforms are certainly needed for the public airing of information on covertly-conducted non-consensual experimentation, there are a few points to be made here.
ONE, SACHRP is the appointed committee of medical professionals working on making changes to the Common Rule, a Federal standard of protection for human subjects in medical or other experiments, both unclassified and classified (the latter as per Executive Order 12333).
Although many analysts scrutinizing Intelligence and Military use of human subjects, historically, have noted that these “covered entities” have traditionally made use of loopholes in the Common Rule to secretly experiment on citizens (MKULTRA, Project Shad, Tuskegee, ’40s radiation experiments), the Common Rule is still the primary Rule they are required to keep to, on paper.
There are no other Federal regulations governing their use of human subjects. There are no other Federal bodies apart from OHRP and SACHRP publicly working to finalize changes to this Common Federal Regulation, even if other “Federal players” are involved. SACHRP is formulated in fact as an Advisory Committee to the Secretary of Health.
That in itself should necessarily involve and include SACHRP, OHRP, and HHS–in responsibility and accountability, for any cases of non-consensual experimentation being reported by the public—which would point to exploitation by secretive agencies and entities, possibly using loopholes in regulation.
To say, “We will help make and oversee the Rule (working with other Federal agencies) to protect human subjects, but if anyone comes along and says they are being used as human subjects in experiments they didn’t sign up for (by other Federal agencies), we’ll respond with silence,” cannot be acceptable.
TWO, openly rendering the Common Rule impotent via exclusions, as per the current NPRM that SACHRP is working on, would imply active steps by SACHRP to approve, permit, and sanction these exclusions—language for which they stated was provided by a variety of “Federal players”.
Allegations of non-consensual neuro-experimentation/Directed-Energy Weapon (DEW) field testing therefore in the community, denoting extant and ongoing secret experimentation (utilizing extant Common Rule loopholes) by these very same entities that are seeking to keep current secret neuro-experimentation/DEW testing and operation secret, and any future human experimentation secret—while completely stripping every American citizen (and indeed, others worldwide, through joint Intelligence Agency agreements worldwide) of the basic, Nuremberg-protection of Informed Consent in all present and future-case scenarios–should most certainly be an issue of concern to this Committee which is currently seeking or agreeing to set up the very body of regulations that will ultimately further protect Intelligence/National Security/DOD agencies and DOJ from public scrutiny.
In other words, the American public as a whole is served ill by an evading of responsibility at the level of SACHRP and OHRP, and such a “passing of the buck,” leaving no-one responsible, leaves the field wide open for abuse of human subjects, marking perhaps exactly what the Intel/military agencies and the DOJ want: high protection of Intelligence agencies/Military/Justice and private interests who seek carte blanche to continue engaging in extremely damaging, pain-inducing, life-destroying classified research and deadly new weapons testing and operation on Americans without their consent.
It is not acceptable therefore—and the public should point this out—that the actual arbiters and makers of change, code, regulation, and policy, i.e., inclusive of Congress, aided by SACHRP and OHRP (or whatever other Commission works on the NPRM for the Common Rule or any new Human Subject Protection Code as hinted at by the new June 29-released National Academies report), or the public face thereof—if that is alone what they are–can eschew responsibility in the issue of addressing allegations of non-consensual experimentation in the community.
As public commenters pointed out, such allegations point inevitably to undisclosed or classified activities and “covered entities”.
It should stand to reason that it is precisely the regulatory body whether HHS/SACHRP/OHRP which seeks to allow classified activities–under the guise of “activities,” not research–the use of unconsenting humans covertly as subjects for any kind of experimentation or investigation, that is indeed responsible and should indeed be held accountable when humans step forward to describe covert experiments being performed non-consensually on their bodies.
Particularly since they are the ones seeking or agreeing to exonerate the “covered entities” of any responsibility themselves.
Questions of Accountability: These are no doubt issues other analysts can contribute more powerfully to. The question however that is being raised here must not be lost sight of: When people in civil society are preyed upon, experimented upon, secretly, by “covered entities,” who do they complain to, in our society? Who is the public body that will take and investigate allegations? (As commenters note, the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, supposedly set up to find out if research abuses were occurring today, chose to step away from responsibility–a very troubling issue in itself, which must be examined separately. If SACHRP steps away too, who is left?) What is the procedure for redress? Where is the Public Health attention to this issue? Particularly today, when directed-energy weapons are being field-tested—in Defense contracts—and are also operated “legally” by the Department of Justice as “non-lethal” surveillance technologies, and when multiple, wireless, and remote radiation and neuro-technologies are being developed?
What must also be doubly, triply, and continually underlined is: The allegations currently being brought forward are in fact allegations of torture, no less horrifying than the CIA’s torture of “Enhanced Interrogation” at Guantanamo. Shouldn’t our Public Health guardians be doubly, triply, and continually concerned then, about such allegations? Shouldn’t a mechanism exist in our society, to prevent and to stop such an overwhelming violation of basic human rights?
Intensive Concern about Informed Consent in Written Comments from Stated Victims of Ongoing Covert Non-Consensual Experimentation
A small cross-section from notes is presented here, of excerpted public comments from people describing themselves as victims or as related to victims of non-consensual experimentation, including possible victims, pointing to high concern among this group regarding the proposed exclusions for Intelligence Surveillance and Criminal Justice, and adding heft to the comments presented by activists at the meeting. The document linked here, Victim Stakeholder Summary Featuring Victim or TI Comments, offers a more comprehensive view, with notes from all victim comments, and comment numbers, for ease of look-up on Regulations.gov. For complete comments, please look online there, at Regulations.gov.
Also of note: These comments were not alluded to in the Executive Summary presented at the SACHRP meeting, but very clearly, in this day of increasing wireless/remote-control technologies, the fact that a cross-section of citizens would step forward to describe covert remote experimentation with measurable pulses of radiation on their persons should be infinite cause for alarm in any educated civil society.
As such, the unique recommendations these individuals make to change the language of the regulation—coming as it does from outside the “research community” of scientists and strategists writing this language, and representing the larger public most likely to be affected by this language—should be considered critically important.
Phyllis Cherubini(spouse of victim):
“Under Section 2.1 (Explicit Exclusion of Six Categories of Research Deemed Not Research), three items are troubling. These items relate to Criminal Justice Activities, Public Health Surveillance, and Intelligence Surveillance.
First of all, wording of Section 2.1 seems contradictory: research that is not deemed research. In reality, just because the knowledge gained from research from an entity like DARPA is classified, it is still research.
Second, the criminal justice system, the intelligence community (including the Department of Defense), and the public health community have a verifiable history of nonconsensual research:
To suggest that these groups are not currently involved in research that could endanger the lives of unsuspecting human subjects begs the question.
We know, for example, that the CIA is currently involved in research on humans in the United States from a November 15, 2011, letter sent by V. Sue Bromley, Associate Deputy Director of the CIA, to Amy Gutman, Chair of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (reported in their Moral Science Report). (And covered above.)
Like other exempt organizations under the surveillance umbrella, this group should be held accountable. Disregard for human subject input concerning participation in a research project is criminal, not beneficent or just.” Phyllis Cherubini, Public Comment, NPRM
“The sixth category of excluded activities that will not be considered research involves surveys, interviews, surveillance activities and related analysis…” It seems as though the Bioethics Team is being asked to not call it research, thereby exempting persons from the Rule of Law as it exists today. I would like to put my two cents worth in and disagree and say that as I have no attorney, don’t have much time to read through all of the language, that justice and ethics are simple, and that those who have the power to inject more language into laws are only trying to muddy things.
May I please end this plea by saying that the attitude of blind pursuit: the worship of curiosity and building new weapons damn the consequences must end. All of Earth’s inhabitants may suffer as a result of mankind’s inventions.” Linda Kmiotek, Public Comment, NPRM
“We need to broaden the definition of research to mean an investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation. We need to broaden the definition of research subject to regulation to include all research. State and local entities should comply with the Common Rule particularly when public benefit or service programs involve research on human beings.
All federal and non-federal entities should be mandated to comply explicitly with the Common Rule.
I recommend dropping the term “both physical” from the definition of Intervention to reflect remote intervention.
The testing, use and abuse and manipulation of directed energy weapons against the people is callously destroying productive lives.
Why would they want to lower standards on using humans as research subjects? Need loopholes for Brain Initiative, Precision Medicine Initiative? – these programs will be using human subjects for testing. Objects – they are using human subjects for testing now.” Barbara Guillette, Public Comment, NPRM
In summary, your proposal ~ if it would become a final rule would cause the HHS to define persons as non-human, or to not recognize individuals as human persons with rights, when they are being subjected to “Intelligence Surveillance Activities” as defined by the proposed rule.
Shut down this proposal immediately. There should be no attempt to exclude people from having the protections extended by the Constitution or those which are commonly understood human rights. Anonymous Anonymous, Public Comment, NPRM
Steven White, Public Comment, NPRM: “a picture of me in stilwater, OK 1969 summer camp”
Steven White, who notes that he has been a victim for over 45 years, attached the photograph here, and states that he is the famous MK ULTRA boy (from this widely-known photograph, with sign “Strain All Urine”, notated “Unidentified white female between the ages of 8 and 10 yrs old.”). Directing readers to Marshall Thomas’ book, Monarch: The New Phoenix Program, he details a horrific experience of abuse along with other children, describing how people running the Phoenix program in Oklahoma went on to occupy positions of authority in Texas. He also says he was instrumental–as a child non-consensually exploited in experimentation–in the development of the M.I.N.D (Magnetic Integrated Neuron Duplicator) computer, which he says was “in use at prisons across the country (and is being used) still today”, and which was also featured in a lawsuit by San Quentin prisoner John Ginter (about his electromagnetic mind targeting in 1967), and gave Cheryl Welsh the name Mindjustice.org for her website:
“The FOIA picture is wrongly listed as taken in 1961 when it was taken summer of 1969 in Stillwater, Oklahoma, in the children’s away-from-parents summer camp that was 1 + weeks long AGAIN. We were kidnapped, gassed, all of us were 5 years of age or under and we were raped every day in the semi truck trailers this picture was taken in….That is me and I am a BOY like I told the man taking the picture.
…(W)e are denied the right to live, freedom, justice and the American way, as well as a family.
…I also built the M.I.N.D. computer 1963-1968 in Tulsa Okla at a hospital lab I was left at for months at a time as a newborn to 5 year old…You must stop all testing on all humans including those in jail.” Steven White, Public Comment, NPRM
“Over fifty years after Project MKULTRA officially ended and 40 years after the Church Committee reported that the CIA and DOD conducted experiments on unwitting human beings, many US citizens and others are continuing to report they are victims of classified research including weapons testing. Many testified before the Bioethics Commission in 2011.
“…I’ve been a victim of electronic weapons for over 2 years. I have heard hundreds of other victims stories that are very similar to mine. I’m close to becoming crippled from being repeatedly attacked with these weapons. Cancer may be on it’s way or maybe I have it now from the constant radiation. I have spent over $8,000 on doctors & shielding. I have proof from doctors & licensed private detectives of these frequencies from weapons used on me.
Please help us end this slow, silent mass murder & get the weapons out of the hands of criminals.” Diane Shomaker, Public Comment, NPRM
“The United States is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and HAS ASSURED THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY THAT NON-CONSENSUAL RESEARCH IS BARRED BY THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AS WELL AS BY THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS. This is an opportunity to increase the protections for human subjects and enforce explicit existing laws governing human research under the ICCPR and the US Constitution. That is, absolute informed consent for all human experimentation and research, including and especially that which is deemed classified.” Bella D, Public Comment, NPRM
“I see this FR as an irony, as the Defense Department is seeking yet more control in extending what they can and cannot do in their involvement of human experimentation. This FR simply gives them greater legal means to justify non-consensual human experimentation, and considering the severe circumstances of thousands like myself, this current experiment includes torture.
I ask to look into the real purpose of this FR revision, to look at past human experimentation programs conducted by the DOD/CIA, and question why would this FR exclude human research protections based on defense surveillance activities…”
Exclusion (is being) used as a legal means to justify non-consensual human experimentation.” Eduardo Colon, Public Comment, NPRM
“Priorities should be made to establish parity in education, housing, food, environment, job creation for all Americans so that people will not have barriers to self actualization. As major disparities do exist all over this country, misplaced anger and NAZI agendas are flourishing like wild flowers; as a result deals are being made with the US intelligence and military to apply covert tools of human experimentation on self-actualized women of color, such as myself.” Jaami Ali, Public Comment, NPRM
“In short, the use of mood, thought, and behavior altering devices on nonconsenting human beings is slavery, a violation of the most basic human right and the 14th Amendment. There are multiple examples where odd behavior of people who made the news may have been subjected to this or other methods more closely related to the old MKULTRA, MKOFTEN, DORMOUSE and other drug-related programs conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency during the Cold War.”
“Not only has the US Government failed to rein in the worst of human experimentation, but the methods and means that were once in the experimental phase have been used actively to curb rights in violation of several statutes including most notably Conspiracy Against Rights where, for example, directed energy weapons have been used for political purposes.
“See Donald Friedman’s FOIA. Mood, thought and behavior altering devices on non-consenting humans beings is a violation of 14th amendment. In other words, the use of these means and methods are themselves a National Security threat.
“Stating that the purposes are not for experimentation does not make the actions of agencies and private contractors any less experimental. We need to open the books on these practices AGAIN.” Christopher Knall, Public Comment, NPRM
Debra Poulsen stated that she spoke at the 2011 Bioethics Commission meeting in Washington, DC, yet was ignored:
But I don’t know what saddens me most: That there are still people doing unethical research in our Country, or that there are still U.S. citizens who will participate in this disgusting program against their fellow man.
Please do something at this point for all persons in unethical, unwilling experimentation programs. We are out there. We are speaking out. We are now asking again – please hear us. Debra Poulsen, Public Comment, NPRM
Margaret Zawodniak, in a 10-page comment with links and citations which can be found here, made reference to the recently-exposed collusion of the APA with CIA/DOD, and discussed, along with others (in a common comment), the findings of the Church Committee, regarding the historic collusion of the APA and many universities in MK ULTRA projects:
“Recently, the American Psychological Association (APA) was found to have colluded with the CIA and the DOD to weaken the association’s ethical guidelines and allow psychologists to participate in the government’s “enhanced” interrogation programs post-911. The APA also had Top Secret clearance during Project MKULTRA, which was brought to public attention in 1975 by the Church Committee.
“Past abuses of unethical and non-consensual experimentation by U.S. military and intelligence agencies include behavior control Projects CHATTER, BLUEBIRD, ARTICHOKE, MKULTRA, MKSEARCH, MKNAOMI and others. They were often interwoven with radiation experiments and research on chemical and biological weapons. U.S. defense and intelligence agencies funded the research with a broad network of academic institutions such as Stanford, Cornell, Princeton, and John Hopkins; pharmaceutical companies such as Eli Lily; medical schools and hospitals; the American Psychological Association; the National Institutes of Health, the Veterans Administration Center, the U.S. Public Health Service and others.”
Reporting Church Committee findings, as well as the “Clinton Memo,” she recommended, for the Intelligence Surveillance exclusion:
“…(Since) The ANPRM did not propose or discuss this exclusion …I recommend extending the comment period for this exclusion and implementing an Interim Final Rule which requires informed consent with no waiver or exceptions possible for all current and future classified human research, and Rulemaking.”
Regarding the Criminal Justice exclusion, she wrote:
“The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is the research, development, and evaluation agency of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). In 2011, the November Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Program (JNLWP) Newsletter included a statement from a senior Scientist at the Directed Energy Research Programs National Institute of Justice, that for more than 10 years, the NIJ and the JNLWP have shared research and expertise in developing and evaluating new less-lethal technology.
The worldwide nonlethal weapons market is expected to double by 2020 from 2013, according to a 2014 report by Dan Inbar, chairman and chief technology officer of Homeland Security Research Corp. He said the U.S. market is expected to follow that trend, increasing from $500 million in 2013 to about $930 million in 2020.
Because the DOJ is involved in the Non-Lethal Weapons Program; and because they have engaged in non-lethal weapons research; and because the non-lethal weapons market is expected to double from 2013 to 2020; and because many are reporting they are victims of classified research including weapons testing, criminal justice activities should be subjected to oversight, particularly classified research.”
The Common Rule should be written in such a manner that explicit exclusions are not necessary and should be avoided, particularly surveillance and criminal justice activities.” Margaret Zawodniak, Public Comment, NPRM
She also noted, regarding Precision Medicine:
“DNA and blood can act as antennas because both are based on crystalline forms. If President Obama’s Precision Initiative uses a person’s DNA or blood to guide Directed Energy toward them, they will be using this technology for torture and killing instead of for anyone’s benefit. Secret technology is already being used against Americans. See CitizensAHT.org. People are being tortured and killed with electromagnetic weapons of all kinds. You have the power to protect as well as torture and kill. DO YOUR DUTY TO PROTECT HUMANS!” Margaret Zawodniak, Public Comment, NPRM
In an additional comment, she included a screenshot from Facebook of Dr. Hall’s testimony to the Bioethics Commission in Washington DC March 2011 (included below). (Some of her references and links are reproduced in the Related links section at end.)
Dr. Hall’s Testimony/Presidential Bioethics Commission, March 2011
“Many Americans are being hit with destructive frequencies that are causing diseases. Please investigate Directed Energy Weapons and what they are able to do to humans and animals. You need to help protect the citizens of this country. Radiation has been closely linked with cancer and we need protection.” Linda Costanzo, Public Comment, NPRM
Wayne DeBlaker, Sr.:
“The FBI are using the laws and rules of classified research to justify their treatment of suspects during investigations. The FBI Behavioral Sciences website states the FBI conducts research on criminals to learn about crime and its motives and environments.” Wayne DeBlaker, Sr., Public Comment, NPRM
“DO NOT lower standards on using humans as research subjects. Obama’s Brain Initiative, Precision Medicine Initiative – will require loopholes in human research rules – will be using human subjects. DNA as a Fractal Antenna – if Precision Initiative uses a person’s DNA or blood to guide Directed Energy toward them, they will be using this technology for torture and killing instead of for anyone’s benefit. I oppose relaxing of the rules; I would like to see rules strengthened for protection to human subjects and protection against crimes against humanity.” Roger German, Public Comment, NPRM
“Will they own our bodies, DNA, too?
Re. Rebecca Skloot: Your Cells. Their Research. Your Permission? – DNA: I think, there are very important points that aren’t addressed either by the NY Times or this article. In fact, there is an underlying metaphor in that NY Times article about our cellphones doubling as our surveillance bracelets we even pay for, that is not being well exploited.
As we all know well, anything that the MIC (military industrial complex), politicians and police can mess with, they will ultimately use to abuse people. As part of the so-called patriot act, the U.S. government has access to all our medical records. Now, how exactly do our medical records relate to our individual civil and moral convictions?
Medical professionals such as APA members offer their scientific expertise to CIA / FBI and are engaging in torturing innocent people even though torture is illegal.
One’s individual’s right to bodily integrity is already a human right. Nowadays, we live under 24×7 surveillance, will they also own our bodies, DNA?
At the very least, consent will raise those issues to people’s consciousness.” Ricardo Lopez, Public Comment, NPRM
Karen Archer, who notes that she is the moderator of approximately 4,000-5,000 people reporting enough similar symptoms, and who have enough supporting documentation to be convincing that they are non-consensual human experimentees:
“(The experimentation is) effected with such energies as radar, microwave fields; (evidence/symptoms include) laser-like/other burns, bruises, surgical looking incision sites, blunt force trauma leaving bruises and broken capillaries and tissues, loss of control of different parts of their bodies, and some people have voices in their heads while others have a non-stop tinnitis.
This group has been in existence for ten years now and has grown exponentially since I found it in 2013 when I started experiencing unexplainable burns on my face—the group is an average, sane, non-violent, random sampling of population.
This is senseless torture. Please put safeguards in place to prevent the further spread of this horrific situation and to protect our children and grandchildren who could also someday be affected by these apparently covert or hijacked technologies.” Karen Archer, Public Comment, NPRM
Michael Yazdian who notes he is a Certified Public Accountant, attached a letter from Representative Jim Guest about electronic torture (imaged below), and stated he has an online petition site with over 2,700 signatures:”Ban Electronic Warfare on Civilians”, where he has compiled lists of websites reporting non-consensual experimentation, Directed-Energy Weapons, and electronic torture, and where he writes:
“These unconscionable travesties are the ultimate crimes against humanity and we are all at risk. Please address the outcries of all survivors in ending all forms of electronic genocide and menticide. We are pleading for your help to be unleashed from these atrocious Psychotronic shackles. Please do not allow secrecy to enslave civility.” Michael Yazdian, Ban Electronic Warfare on Civilians
Norman Rabin, who submitted several supporting documents, including text of questions submitted at an earlier Dec 3-4, 2016 meeting (included below), and a compilation of public comments related to Intelligence Surveillance activities submitted to the ANRPM in 2011, mentioned, among other suggestions, the need for more public oversight of classified research:
“Contact office – for all classified human research, there shall exist an agency contact office. Even though informed consent under the Common Rule requires that the Human Subject be provided with contact information (for questions, or to report injury, or to withdraw from the research), human subjects of classified research should be afforded this extra safeguard, in the event that a person is subjected to classified human research without being provided with such information. All classified human research shall be registered at 1 or more offices from which the contact office shall be fully empowered to obtain at least as much contact information as is required by informed consent under the Common Rule.
Permanent records shall be kept for all classified human research. All records would be fully preserved until the human subject or legal survivor thereof is satisfied that justice has been obtained. Thereafter, detailed summary records of the human research shall be maintained for historical review, and governmental review, and for other Public purposes.”
4 Questions-for the SACHRP Meeting of December 3-4, 2015/Norman Rabin
Please excuse my having as many as 4 Specific Questions here, but the NPRM-subpart proposing to Exempt unspecified Intelligence Surveillance Activities seems to have been launched upon the Public with no prior mention or discussion of it whatsoever. Therefore, some specific answers from the Government are called for:
Question 1 of 4)
What was the motivation for the NPRM-subpart, which proposes to Exempt unspecified Intelligence Surveillance activities from the federal policy for Protection for Human Subjects? There were both: no Public Comments requesting such an Exemption in the Preliminary Rulemaking in 2011; and, there was no Public Discussion – enlighten us if I missed something – there was no Public Discussion of an Intelligence Surveillance Activities exemption at any of the SACHRP meetings since the 2011 Preliminary Rulemaking?
Where was there any prior Public Discussion of this? What’s the specific motivation for it being proposed?
Question 2 of 4)
Why is the Proposed Exemption so broad? [When spoken, I added: “It could have been specific and limited, but its not.”] It seems crafted to allow U.S. Intelligence to perform Non-Consensual Human Experimentation related to research into new Surveillance Technologies and/or methods? Human Research is research. And, purposeful U.S. Intelligence Surveillance activities within the U.S. are related to serious law enforcement purposes (including Counter Intelligence activities). By definition, Human Research is conducted for Human Research purposes.
Isn’t it obvious that the proposed exemption looks like U.S. Government approval of Non-Consensual Human Experimentation, for Research which studies or which develop Intelligence Surveillance Technologies and/or methods?
Question 3 of 4)
There’s already a known loophole in the federal Policy, so why is this exemption needed? As surely as President Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, and as surely as the ACHRE [Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments] had many Legal Experts on their Committee and on their Staff, and as surely as they strongly Recommended that a known Existing Loophole allowing Non-Consensual Classified Human Experimentation be closed – remember the March 1997 Policy Change attempt by President Clinton, entitled: “Strengthened Protections for Human Subjects of Classified Research”. As surely as those facts, there is a known loophole which to this day still allows and encourages Non-Consensual Classified Human Experimentation.
So, my third question is: Why is the proposed Exemption needed if there’s already a Known Loophole? Currently, an Agency or Department head must approve a partial waiver or a total waiver of the Policy for Protection of Human Subjects. And, for Classified Human Research in particular, the Notice of Waiver is not required to be disclosed to the Public, such as in the Federal Register, because that would be an unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
So why is the proposed Exemption needed? The existing Loophole already allows them to waive the Policy, if they are able to obtain a waiver from the Department or Agency head.
Why does the NPRM-subpart want to take away the accountability and responsibility of the Agency or Department head, and of the authors of the Application for Waiver, and replace it with an Exemption, and license [encouragement], to disregard the Policy for Protection of Human Subjects, and the Ethics related to it?
Question 4 of 4)
Why did the Rulemaking authors ignore the 15 – 20 Public Comments to the ANPRM, Preliminary Rulemaking, in 2011, which exhibited 50’s [“fifties], or a few hundred, named alleged victims of Ongoing Non-Consensual Surveillance Technology related Human Experimentation?
And, Why did the Rulemaking authors ignore President Clinton’s prior Policy Change attempt, which sought to properly regulate all Classified Human Research, which includes ‘Intelligence Surveillance Related Classified Research’? Norman Rabin, Public Comment, NPRM
Julie Ponder who notes that she is a parolee, states that she is a 15-year victim abused with electronic surveillance by the Department of Corrections and State Intelligence in both Colorado and California:
“I am opposed to passing proposed Common Rule; (it would) make human torture legal.
I am against non-consensual experimentation – informed consent should be required.
I am against human surveillance with psychotronic weapons for experimental purposes; (it inflicts) physical torture, mind control, mind reading, v2k, burn, rape etc – remotely.
It is my understanding that the invention and original uses of these electronic surveillance technologies were for military purposes and national security against terrorism. Now it is being abused in the USA on mental health patients, prisoners being incarcerated, whistle blowers, high profile criminal cases, and your average citizen.
It is being used by the Department of Corrections, State Intelligence, the military, NSA, CIA, and more. It is out of control.
These agencies are abusing each other with (these) technologies, abusing USA citizens, and people in other countries. The legislature should be making laws outlawing the use of surveillance technologies and human experimentation, not making conditions for its use. This is my comment.” Julie Ponder, Public Comment, NPRM
“Mass shooters Aaron Alexis and Myron May are victims of Directed Energy attacks. Credible sources are exposing Direct Energy Non-consensual experimentation.” Tyrone Dew, Public Comment, NPRM
Melanie Garton included an excerpt sourced from https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule156 and stated that the (non-consensual human experimentation she has experienced) were war crimes, violations of humanitarian law. She experiences spying, gang stalking –it leaves her incapacitated.
“(This is) inhumane and psychological murder and torture of innocent people.”Melanie Garton, Public Comment, NPRM
Todd Giffen who identified himself as a 8-year victim, included several attachments and links (some included in Resources at end), inclusive of letter text from Dr. Duncan and letter text from Dr. Duncan to Dr. Farber, as well as letters of support, evaluations, and Dr. Duncan’s No-Touch Torture report:
“Government, corporations, private, public entities, law enforcement, hospitals and college universities, military and foreign countries should be barred from touching humans or animals for any purpose.
I myself have had satellite/over horizon radar interferometry/electronic warfare used to irradiate and blast my body to a pulp/beam audio and images into my brain now for 8 years and there are thousands of complainants.
This is a violation of Kyllo v United States and the 4th amendment. In Eugene, Oregon, the Navy was even publicly exposed as irradiating citizens.” Todd Giffen, Public Comment, NPRM
(Please note, this is only a representative sampling. There are many other necessary, thought-provoking, and incisive comments from people claiming subjection to non-consensual experimentation that the public should read: please visit the links above for the Summary of Victim Comments.)
Informed Consent in Classified Research: Special Mention of the Clinton Memo
Of special relevance: Several commenters mentioned the 1997 Clinton Administrative Order categorically disallowing waivers of Informed Consent in classified research. Linda Kmiotek, in a written comment, identifying herself as a victim of undisclosed, possibly Classified Research experimentation, reminded the Committee of previous Federal attempts to strengthen human subject protections in classified research:
“In October 1995, the Final Report of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments recommended “The adoption of Federal Policy requiring the informed consent of all human subjects of classified research and the requirement not be subject to exemption or waiver. Whereby in March 27, 1997, President Clinton issued an Administrative Order, Strengthened Protections for Human Subjects of Classified Research” [Federal Register, May 13, 1997, pp.26367-26372] For 18 years since that attempted rule making, an NPRM supposedly was never completed. Without hesitation, this Federal Policy should be implemented. We need more protections not less.” Linda Kmiotek, Public Comment, NPRM
Karla Smith, in her joint public comment for herself and Norman Rabin at SACHRP noted the Department of Energy’s recent intent to keep to the requirements for Informed Consent in the Clinton Memo, where legal counsel at the DOE stated the Memo still had legal effect:
“A recent legal opinion in 2015, obtained by the legal counsel of the U.S. Department of Energy, stated that the 1997 Clinton Memo still had legal effect. Earlier this year the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced its intent to adopt such a regulation with minor adjustments…
Karla Smith/Public Comment, NPRM, May 19/Presenting DOE’s compliance with the Clinton Memo
“On January 21, 2016 the DOE approved Notice 443.1 which states that supplemental requirements and responsibilities for classified human subjects research (HSR) are necessary to ensure compliance with Presidential Memorandum, Strengthened Protections for Human Subjects of Classified Research, dated March 27, 1997, commonly referred to as the “Clinton Memo,” which the DOE and NNSA Offices of General Counsel determined is in effect and applicable to DOE.
“Requirement 4.a.3 states “No waiver of informed consent will be granted.
“It is our hope that OHRP and HHS will take the initiative for other government agencies which comply with the Common Rule and follow the Department of Energy’s lead, and find that supplemental requirements and protections and responsibilities for classified human subjects research are necessary to ensure compliance with the Clinton Memo, and to fulfill the legal requirements and spirit of federal rulemaking.”
In Conclusion: The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. (Nuremberg Code)
Rebecca Skloot, in her December 2015 op-ed in the New York Times on the issue of consent in the case of remaindered biospecimens, an issue that was indeed discussed by SACHRP–in contrast to the Intelligence Surveillance exclusions, which was not—quoted from an optimistic researcher possibly dizzy from Federal funding, who sought to call human subjects “participants in research,” which appears to be a fashionable term today in the research community, and pointed out that Consent is the only way any human can be said to “participate” in research:
Alexandra Franco, JD: “Researchers are not entitled to conduct research; research is a privilege.”
This comment by Alexandra Franco, J.D. (2015, Institute for Science, Law and Technology [of] the Illinois Institute of Technology’s Chicago-Kent College of Law), draws our attention once more to the Nuremberg Code, and questions the very nature of research that uses human subjects.
“The rule of informed consent, its underlying principle of respecting people’s autonomous decision-making power and right to refuse to participate in research come from the troubled past of human subject experimentation of which the Nazi experiments are one of its most harrowing episodes.
“In fact, the Common Rule derives its principles from the Nuremberg Code, which resulted from the Nuremberg Trials. The Nuremberg Code states from the get-go: “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.”
“It is not hard to understand why it would be; the Nazi experiments were forcibly performed on subjects who did not have any ability to escape the atrocities that were being done to them in the name of research.
“The Nuremberg Trials that followed the end of the Nazi Holocaust set in writing what the essential elements of ethical research should be to prevent such atrocities from happening again.
“… While the Common Rule is denounced as “cumbersome and outdated” in light of the changes in research technology, we must take into consideration that the same flaws in human nature which prompted the creation of the Nuremberg Code remain unchanged.
“Therefore, the public’s desire for control over their own body as well as the data and samples deriving therefrom, should be the departing point of any changes to the Common Rule.
“People should be able to give full informed consent before researchers can use their data or biological samples for research purposes.
“Researchers are not entitled to conduct research; research is a privilege which the medical and scientific community enjoys as a result of people’s desire to willingly, intentionally and knowingly, give a little part of themselves for the betterment of mankind.” Alexandra Franco, J.D., Public Comment, NPRM
Anonymous Anonymous: “Nothing to do with National Security but a lot to do with Torture—and Torture is Unconstitutional”
To close, this comment by Anonymous Anonymous reminds us why the United States of America, which often decries the records of other countries in their violations of human rights, should care about Informed Consent, and why the Common Rule should not exclude Intelligence or military agencies or the DOJ from requiring Informed Consent:
“The Common Rule has to be based on the Constitution which is the blueprint of our democracy.
“No government agency or department should have the right to waive applicability of all or part of the Common Rule (including Informed Consent). The arbitrary use of such technologies has nothing to do with national security but a lot to do with torture, and torture is unconstitutional.
“It is necessary to send a strong message that our Constitution and human rights matter in America. Otherwise America is no better than China and other countries that America criticizes for not enforcing human rights.” Anonymous Anonymous, Public Comment, NPRM
Classified Research Continually Funded Although Public Continually Reports Inhumane Experimentation
We are experiencing a silent crisis of the Constitution and our basic human rights in the US today.
Karla Smith, Public Comment, May 19, 2016/Speaking about subdural neuro-implants
Karla Smith notes in a separate comment,”Congress provides billions of dollars in funding to intelligence and defense entities which fund classified research.”
When people are coming forward to report barbaric experimentation on their bodies while such “covered” research is being funded, it is time to openly challenge all aspects of such funding and research, hold the “covered entities” fully accountable, and reinstate basic protections for all citizens by fully requiring Informed Consent in all research, by all agencies and organizations, for whatever purpose, and reinstate the lost protections of the Nuremberg Code in our midst.
That is the message these public comments overwhelmingly convey.
Please take the time to watch the video coverage of the powerful and historic testimony given at SACHRP, and to read further all comments about non-consensual experimentation posted. Our future as a nation with a sense of decency, humanity, and moral principles relies ultimately on our own individual humanity, and how we each choose to respond to the devastating testimony of modern-day non-consensual human experimentation contained herein.
NIH/Video of SACHRPMay 18 Meeting/Public Comments Towards End, start 6:21:15
NIH/Video of SACHRP May 19 Meeting/Public Comments Towards End, start 2:59:29
Dec 3 and Dec 4, 2015 SACHRP Meetings. Public Comments Toward End.
Church Committee Report Book I: Foreign and Military Intelligence
Church Committee Report Book II: Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans
Commission on CIA Activities Within the United States, Report to the President (Rockefeller Commission Report), (Washington, U.S. GPO, June 1975). Ford Library Museum.
[Also: Rockefeller Commission Report, with separate pdfs of Chapters and Summaries, at the AARC.]
Gerald Ford White House Altered Rockefeller Commission Report in 1975; Removed Section on CIA Assassination Plots/White House Aide Dick Cheney Spearheaded Editing of Report to Dampen Impact/New Documents Cast Further Doubt on Commission’s Investigation, Independence. National Security Archive, February 29, 2016.
Dainius Puras and Juan E. Méndez, Letter to the U.S. Government, January 15, 2015, “Mandates of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health and the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
Ramola D is a writer and independent journalist with a background in science and literature researching issues in science, technology, and ethics relevant to our times, including issues related to Intelligence, Surveillance, Security, and Defense. She runs the solutions journalism site at The Everyday Concerned Citizen, and edits the online literary quarterly, Delphi Quarterly. Her literary journalism, fiction, and poetry have been published widely, more on this at her website. Please follow her online at @EccEveryday, or on Facebook.
This article may be reproduced in full with attribution and linkback. Please share widely.
Re-posted, with thanks, from Linda Bressendorf’s petition update at Change.org, please visit there to sign and to send your own letter to the UN, as requested, if you can understand that humanity as a whole is facing a tremendous threat today, from covert and deadly neurotechnology weapons which are being deployed currently against people worldwide–including in the United States of America–as covert surveillance methods and covert, non-consensual military/Intelligence neuro-experimentation.
Included below her letter are natural healing remedies she is passing on, for all those who are being wrongfully targeted and inhumanely subjected to barbaric surveillance with covert directed-energy and covert, non-consensual neuro-weapon experimentation–an incredible travesty of justice and total failure of civil behavior taking place silently in our midst today, while the world watches, and does nothing–a situation that has to change, if humans wish to lay claim to their humanity.
Latest Appeal to the United Nations
Jul 2, 2016 — May God have mercy on the lost souls in charge of operations at the United Nations; an organization created in part to preserve the human rights of every person on this planet.
However, the UN has yet to assist a singled-out part of the population around the world. Day in and day out, these citizens are tortured and tormented beyond human comprehension. These innocent persons are relentlessly hunted down in what is a systematic, highly orchestrated, military-type operation which ends with them being eliminated from the face of the earth or completely isolated from the rest of society.
The only thing these individuals are guilty of is living their lives the way they see fit. In other words, they’re guilty of simply breathing air. These assaults/attacks are ruthlessly carried out using high energy weapons that directly target the human mind and body; penetrating human tissue and affecting the very molecular structure of the person.
The saddest and most disturbing part of this whole ordeal is that anyone placed in a position that can help us, has continuously refused our pleas.
The United Nations has received probably thousands of complaints over the years and still refuses to take a stand. They cowardly hide behind the ridiculous notion that these complainants are suffering from mental illness.
Members of the United Nations are in positions which call for them to have common sense, extensive knowledge, and possess logical thinking. How could they come to such an absurd assumption, and for such a long period of time? I have never heard of the United Nations lifting so much as a finger to help a targeted individual. Something’s rotten in the state of Denmark, and it stinks to high heaven.
During some of my time as a Targeted Individual, even while under severe attack; I managed to do research of my own. I don’t proclaim to have all the answers, but what I have learned has awakened me to ugly truths I never imagined or wanted to believe existed. I am now a much more enlightened individual, aware of the world we live in.
There is a secret global hierarchy that’s in existence. The select few at the top of this hierarchy retain power and control of the world and most of the people in it. The ones at the bottom are the rest of the population, the average citizens, who are kept in line (easily led or coerced by the ones at the top).
Those at the top consist of: The Mega Rich and Powerful known as (The Power Elite), Parts of the World Governments and Military, Large Corporations and Secret Societies. Professionals such as Psychiatrists, Medical Doctors, Scientists, Engineers, Physicists, Biologists, Philosophers, Computer Programmers, and Politicians are bought and paid for by The Power Elite.
Those at the top, who I’ll now refer to as-“The Powers That Be,” control and run the Media, deciding what stories will or will not be disclosed to the public. They control and run the Banking and Financial Institutions and many of the World’s Largest Corporations. These “Powers That Be,” operate in the dark, shielded behind an iron curtain, and away from the prying eyes of the public. They appear to be untouchable, but it’s all just an illusion that can vanish at any time.
The “Powers That Be,” is a decade’s long establishment that may be responsible for most of the world’s deadliest and disastrous tragedies. They are a menace to humanity, and the world would be a much better and safer place if they weren’t in existence.
Most targeted individuals, not all, are lacking financial resources, may be taking mind-altering drugs (Legal or Illegal) or are persons with chronic illness, which leaves their bodies and minds compromised in some way. Also, most targeted individuals appear to be-Independent Thinkers, Non-Conformists, and Individualists (unique in their thinking compared to the rest of the population).
What I didn’t know before my research is that there is an even more complex and diabolical reason we are hunted like animals, in danger of extinction. And that reason lies within our DNA structure.
At some point in time, “The Powers That Be,” came upon knowledge that some human beings possess qualities not inherent in the rest of the population. These qualities are known as: “High States of Consciousness.”
The same people with these High States of Consciousness carry within them an evolutionary-12 Strand DNA; which also stands apart from the rest of the population. They are Multi-Dimensional persons capable of deep Spiritual Awakening. This is what it all comes down to. This is the very reason people around the world are being maligned in such a cruel and brutal way. The people possessing these qualities are- (the Targeted Individuals of the World).
“The Powers That Be,” are shaking in their boots; in fear of losing power and control over the masses, and are willing to sink to the darkest depths of depravity to keep this from happening. They are afraid that those of us with these Higher States of Consciousness will somehow have an effect on the rest of the population.
They are afraid we will bring enlightenment and awareness to the masses, causing them to wake-up and see the truth for what it is. This could possibly cause a revolution and the toppling of their kingdom.
Ironically, experiments are currently on the way in an all-out effort to produce Supercomputers that have the same qualities I’ve been discussing. They are being referred to as- Spiritual Machines.
These Supercomputers will be enabled with High States of Consciousness, and possess a Human Soul/Spirit. They will be Multi-Dimensional, and they promise immortality to persons learning to shift their consciousness from one dimension to another. They are slated for release in the year “2045.”
There lies a possibility out there that a separate group exists carrying out non-consensual experiments on Targeted Individuals for research related to these so called: “Spiritual Machines.” What better way to learn and duplicate these unique qualities than to extensively examine the source?
I am awakened to the fact that certain members of The United Nations have chosen to align themselves with “The Powers That Be.” It is downright disgusting to think that these devils freely walk the halls of the UN.
There is a room located on UN premises, where a mysterious painting hangs. Some have pointed out that some of the symbols in the painting resemble symbols commonly used by “The Powers That Be.” These power-driven control freaks are sure that their plan for world domination will be a successful one. They are delusional, believing their own hype. They are playing God, destroying lives at will.
God exists as the highest form of energy in the Universe. He created the world for all to inhabit, not just a select few. The world is not now, or will ever be for sale.
FYI United Nations: Are you aware of the Treaty Of 1967? This treaty required that states parties not place in orbit around the earth, any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of Weapons of Mass Destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner. This is what constitutes: “Satellite-Harassment.”
The Strategic Defense Initiative, established under President Reagan, required that this treaty be modified. Satellite Harassment is the means by which many Targeted Individuals are being mercilessly tortured and tormented. I am clueless as to exactly what changes were made to the treaty, but there’s obviously a loophole somewhere in it which may allow for this type of harassment. The “Treaty of 1967” needs to be closely examined and modified once more to allow for closure of this loophole.
Are you also aware that “Directed-Energy Weapons,” which target the Central Nervous System, and cause Neurophysiological Disorders may violate certain Conventional Weapons Convention of 1980? Weapons that go beyond non-lethal intentions, and cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering may also violate the Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1977.
I shall take it upon myself to say that parts of the United Nations are very well aware of the above measures being put in place. Yet they act stupefied when they receive numerous complaints on the matter. They cry-mental illness, just as much as the little boy that cried wolf. Persons in the UN having knowledge of this inhumanity are also very much aware that targeted individuals are not suffering from mental illness. Someone’s obviously being paid a hefty price to look the other way, and has been for years.
It’s unfortunate that money and power are what’s most important in this world. As a little girl, my mum would occasionally say this to me: “The love of money is at the root of all -Evil.” At the time, I couldn’t possibly comprehend what she was saying. I have never been more aware of this saying than I am at this time in my life. It’s as though she had foresight of the beast that awaited me in my future. One so ferocious and hungry, it would try everything in its power to devour my soul, my very being.
The “Powers That Be” and anyone that aligns him or herself with this vapid bunch are in for a rude awakening when the rest of the world learns the absolute truth. I’ll close this letter the same as I started- “May God have Mercy on Our Souls.”
Sincerely, Linda Bressendorff- Christopher
Jul 11, 2016 — To those Targeted Individuals who are relentlessly tortured via–Voice to Skull, Remote Neural Monitoring (Satellite Terrorism), and those whose minds and bodies are under attack from Directed-Energy Weapons.
We are assaulted daily by dark and destructive energies meant to keep us in a constant state of fear, anger, sadness, despair, hopelessness.
Do not give in to these negative emotions. Instead, surround yourself with positive energies, and (as hard as it may be) try to remain positive. Listed below are possible remedies which focus on eliminating dark and destructive energies from our environment. They are worth giving a try……
*Grounding and Earthing-connects us to the healing properties of the earth. Walking barefoot on the earth’s natural soil and eating foods that grow in the earth’s soil are other ways to stay connected to the earth. https://www.earthing.com/ http://www.groundology.co.uk/
Re-posting this April post from Abreu Report, with many thanks for this coverage, a very revealing post about the development of psychotronic (remote radiation/directed-energy) weapons in the Dominican Republic, about INFOTEP, the directed-energy weapons directorate there, and disturbing whistleblowing information from an insider in the industry.
Tourists traveling there may wish to take note:“Today, thousands of INFOTEP-trained agents are deployed throughout the Caribbean, primarily working in tourist resorts, where much like an intelligence agency hacking cell phones, the brain of foreign targets is treated as nothing more than a technical objective to be completed.”
More that is quite unsettling about the ease with which portable microwave mind-control weapons can be used on a populace below.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
“My Brain was Cooking,” Says Victim of Psychotronic Weapon
The evil of the Dominican government knows no bounds, and sources make it clear to us why the country’s economy has been growing at 7% per year, like clockwork, despite the global recession and other financial calamities which have struck the Caribbean region: the Dominican government has turned the art of voodoo, of mental manipulation, into a precise, technical science.
Father of psychotronic weapons?
INFOTEPINFOTEP, the Dominican directed energy directorate responsible for secretly beefing up the country’s psychotronic weapons arsenal, was founded by Osvaldo Diaz, a man so dangerous that he served as partial inspiration for the character of mad scientist Miles Dyson in the 1991 science-fiction flick, the Terminator 2.
Unlike the fictional character in the Terminator, however, Osvaldo Diaz’ Skynet has actually come to rule civilization, albeit stealthily.
Today, thousands of INFOTEP-trained agents are deployed throughout the Caribbean, primarily working in tourist resorts, where much like an intelligence agency hacking cell phones, the brain of foreign targets is treated as nothing more than a technical objective to be completed.
A former INFOTEP employee speaking anonymously to Abreu Report says she was the victim of her own weapons.
“We often experimented on ourselves, there really were no ethical boundaries,” the former government employee said. “The President was afraid of us, we literally wrote our own checks.”
Ms. Bisono [not real name] says she eventually left INFOTEP because she felt she herself was being affected by the weapons developed around her.
“I wasn’t the only one in the office who felt like her brain was cooking. I can’t even go into detail about the weapons we had in the office. Before the PHaSr was the size of a rifle, we could place a device with similar capabilities in the trunk of a car, with the tail-lights emitting a laser that led the victim to commit suicide,” she explained.
“I know of at least 10 people who committed suicide after our van got parked outside of their house, but we don’t need a vehicle that big today.”
“The government has heavily invested in drones, and a psychotronic device can be mounted thereon. We tested it in Haiti and even had success in leading a general to commit suicide there. It was after that death that I decided to call it quits. It was one thing to target people who had actually threatened the stability of the Republic, but I couldn’t be part of that, of killing a fellow Catholic general who wasn’t our enemy.”
When asked how many deaths she could confirm were carried out by INFOTEP, Ms. Bisono responded: “At least two dozen, mostly politicians and journalists who represented a threat to the government of Balaguer. Since Balaguer we are less active, but it was Doctor Balaguer who instigated most of the attacks, he was absolutely obsessed, to him voodoo was a dangerous science which needed to be cracked and weaponized. The man was obsessed.”
When asked to go into detail about the government’s microwave system, Ms. Bisono declined, saying it was “above her paygrade.”
“I can say this, the country’s goal of getting more tourists than citizens will be met, people don’t know how they’re being targeted with these microwave weapons, they activate the addiction parts of the brain.”
Re-posting James Twyman’s email today, announcing a vigil and meditation at 8 pm, July 13th, next Wed, East Coast US time, please join, tell your friends. There are terrible things going on in the world, and much is hidden from us. The spectre of false flags and violence by design (of certain nefarious parties keen to keep us all in a state of chaos and tension and fear) always raises its ugly head, and no doubt we will hear more soon on Dallas, and all the group action behind it (Free Thought Project has an exclusive on the group claiming responsibility.) Violence is never the answer to violence and all our most spiritual leaders knew this. Violence is being inflicted on many of us in many ways, covert and overt.
We in our numbers have the opportunity though to turn things around, to return our world to a more peace-centered and harmonizing vibration; new science today helps us understand that each of us, with our most peace-centered selves (which may well not be our everyday working and living selves) can make a difference in the direction our reality takes. Whatever your thoughts on our current reality, please set aside a few moments on this date to join in this vigil and meditate for an end to this assault, an end to these experiments and constructed-chaos events, an end to violence on all sides. All our lives matter. Sending our calming and deep-centered heart energies out into this universe and particularly to the families, the many families, affected by this recent spate of violence across the US will surely make a difference, let us believe it.
Let’s Start Now!
Synchronized Prayer Vigil for Victims of
Police Shootings in US
Join hundreds of thousands of people focusing
prayers of healing and peace on the violence
by and against US police officers.
Earlier today I sent you an email announcing a year of World Synchronized Meditations starting next month in Hiroshima. But now, very suddenly, everything has changed. Like everyone in the US and around the world, I’m deeply shocked and saddened by the wave of police shootings against black citizens. In the last two days two men were shot and killed – Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and Philando Castile in Minneapolis, Minnesota. And now tonight, four police officers were ambushed and killed during a protest in Dallas, Texas.
On Wednesday, July 13th at 8PM Eastern US time, thousands of people will join in a synchronized meditation to bring an end to this violence.
Please help us spread the word. Send this email to everyone you know. I am traveling to Minneapolis on Saturday to prepare for this vigil, but we need your support. I will send out more information in a few days with complete information. If you received this information from a friend please go to www.WorldPeacePulse.com and register so we can keep you informed on this and every peace vigil over the next 12 months.
I knew I would be traveling to countries and places experiencing great violence for these meditations, but I didn’t think it would be Minneapolis. Even if you don’t live in the US, please join us in healing the deep wounds that have ignited these tragedies.
Stay tuned for more information on how you can participate.
Phil Hudok at Hudok.info reports the following unsettling news about Thomas Deegan, whose quest for parole was recently posted here. Please continue to maintain contact with Thomas through letters, and continue to let the prison and court system know he has supporters. As many may know, Thomas Deegan is essentially a political prisoner who is being held by the West Virginia government on wrongful charges–please run a search on his name here to find previous posts. It’s truly astonishing that he is being confined in solitary, and it does throw light on how the corporate system seeks to treat those it has deemed a threat, even as it draws attention to the horrific practice of solitary confinement.
Solitary confinement is increasingly being understood to be profoundly inhumane, and a violation of international law; prolonged solitary confinement has been recognized by the UN as a form of torture.
There is a growing nationwide movement to end solitary confinement.
Some excerpts from relevant articles below, please click on title links for the full article.
Last August, the Center for Constitutional Rights posted an article pointing to New York Times coverage of their long-term research into solitary confinement, and their work to help prisoners in California challenge the cruelties of solitary confinement:
“Today’s New York Times science section features a front-page piece about the research that CCR commissioned and compiled for our ground-breaking challenge to long-term solitary confinement. “Solitary Confinement: Punished for Life” introduces to the public the 10 expert reports we submitted to the court in Ashker v. Brown, the class-action lawsuit on behalf of prisoners in solitary in California’s Pelican Bay prison. Together, this research presents an unprecedented 360-degree look at the science behind how and why solitary confinement causes irreversible physical and mental harm.
According to the expert reports, prisoners subjected to prolonged solitary experience a form of “social death” that is not cured upon release, but rather lingers as a “post-SHU syndrome” characterized by social withdrawal, isolation, and anxiety. One researcher said it was “shocking, frankly” that some prisoners endure decades of isolation. The Science Times piece is accompanied by a moving video of our clients.”
It was on June 26, 1987 that the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) entered into force. This international human rights treaty makes clear that there can never be a justification for torture—ever—and that it is the responsibility of every state to prevent it from happening, and punish it when it does. Yet it is a cruel reality that torture continues with impunity all over the globe, often at the hands of those at the highest levels of governments – including our own….
Challenging the torture of solitary confinement in U.S. prisons
CCR client George Ruiz is 72 years old. For 30 years, he spent every day alone — locked in a cramped, windowless cell inside the Security Housing Unit (SHU), first at California’s Pelican Bay State Prison, then at Tehachapi prison. He was only allowed out for one hour a day to exercise in another concrete cell. Ruiz was not in the SHU for breaking any prison rules, but because prison officials claimed he was “affiliated” with a prison gang.
As the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has made clear, prolonged solitary confinement is a form of torture, prohibited under international law. On September 1, 2015, in a landmark settlement in our lawsuit, Ashker v. Governor of California, CCR ended indeterminate solitary confinement in California, dramatically reducing the number of people in isolation, including Mr. Ruiz.
Prisoners’ human rights may be a novel concept to some, but it is a vital issue of concern gaining visibility today, that people being incarcerated do not suffer a blanket loss of their basic human rights. The prisoners in California who endured decades of solitary and worked together with CCR to challenge and end indeterminate solitary issued this statement, thanking those outside who did not forget them:
This settlement represents a monumental victory for prisoners and an important step toward our goal of ending solitary confinement in California, and across the country. California’s agreement to abandon indeterminate SHU confinement based on gang affiliation demonstrates the power of unity and collective action. This victory was achieved by the efforts of people in prison, their families and loved ones, lawyers, and outside supporters. Our movement rests on a foundation of unity: our Agreement to End Hostilities. It is our hope that this groundbreaking agreement to end the violence between the various ethnic groups in California prisons will inspire not only state prisoners, but also jail detainees, county prisoners and our communities on the street, to oppose ethnic and racial violence. From this foundation, the prisoners’ human rights movement is awakening the conscience of the nation to recognize that we are fellow human beings. As the recent statements of President Obama and of Justice Kennedy illustrate, the nation is turning against solitary confinement. We celebrate this victory while, at the same time, we recognize that achieving our goal of fundamentally transforming the criminal justice system and stopping the practice of warehousing people in prison will be a protracted struggle. We are fully committed to that effort, and invite you to join us.
In the United States today, at least 80,000 prisoners are in some form of isolated confinement, including some 25,000 in supermax prisons.
Solitary confinement goes by many names, including administrative segregation, disciplinary confinement, security housing, and restricted housing, but it normally consists of 22- to 24-hour lockdown in a small cell. Terms in solitary confinement often extend to months, years, or decades. Solitary confinement has been found to cause serious psychological damage. Studies have also shown that it increases recidivism and fails to reduce prison violence.
Solitary confinement is also expensive, in large part because of added staffing costs. One study estimated that the average per cell cost of housing an inmate in a supermax prison is $75,000, as opposed to $25,000 for an inmate in the general population.
From The Daily Beast, news of a new documentary, titled, “Solitary”:
A new documentary goes inside a supermax prison to discover what it’s like being in solitary confinement—a practice experts now describe as unnecessary and prisoners say is torture. Watch an exclusive clip here.
Here’s what it’s like to be in solitary confinement in a supermax prison—you are locked into your 8- by-10-foot cell for 23 hours per day, where the lights are on all the time. There are no windows in your cell to let in sunlight. Your only view is the window in the cell door that looks out onto a sterile cellblock.
When you are allowed out for one hour of recreation per day, you must first be strip-searched. Then you are shackled hand and foot and taken by two guards to a small wire cage that is your “exercise” yard. You are not allowed to talk to the guards, or to the other prisoners who may be exercising in the cages next to you. You are then shackled again, and led back to your cell. All meals are served to you through a slot in your cell door. If you’re very lucky, you will be allowed outside twice a week where, shackled to a table in the middle of the cellblock, you will perform menial labor, like wrapping packets of sporks and salt in napkins that will be placed in the prisoners’ meal trays.
Imagine living like this year after year after year.
“I don’t think solitary as it currently exists, the lack of any human contact of any sort, is necessary in any case,” says Kristin Jacobson, whose film Solitary, shot at the Red Onion State Prison in Wise County, Va., debuts this week at New York’s Tribeca Film Festival and will be broadcast later this year on HBO. “This is the United States. We have a Constitution, we condemn the abuse of human rights elsewhere, and just because you’ve committed a crime you have not given up your rights as a human being.”
Solitary confinement has, in fact, been part of American penology since at least 1829, when Philadelphia’s Eastern State Penitentiary housed prisoners in isolation, hoping that the silence would encourage them to think about their foul deeds and become truly penitent (thus the term “penitentiary”).
But the practice really took off in the 1980s, when harsh drug laws, gang activity and mandatory sentencing saw the prison population increase dramatically. “Solitary grew rapidly just about everywhere; it tracks with the growth in the prison population, and prison overcrowding,” says Jean Casella of Solitary Watch, a Web-based organization providing research and news about solitary confinement in the U.S.
From another political prisoner, heroic whistleblower Chelsea Manning, who revealed many sordid truths about the Iraq War, and was kept in solitary confinement for 9 months, in her May op-ed at The Guardian:
Shortly after arriving at a makeshift military jail, at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, in May 2010, I was placed into the black hole of solitary confinement for the first time. Within two weeks, I was contemplating suicide.
After a month on suicide watch, I was transferred back to US, to a tiny 6 x 8ft (roughly 2 x 2.5 meter) cell in a place that will haunt me for the rest of my life: the US Marine Corps Brig in Quantico, Virginia. I was held there for roughly nine months as a “prevention of injury” prisoner, a designation the Marine Corps and the Navy used to place me in highly restrictive solitary conditions without a psychiatrist’s approval.
For 17 hours a day, I sat directly in front of at least two Marine Corps guards seated behind a one-way mirror. I was not allowed to lay down. I was not allowed to lean my back against the cell wall. I was not allowed to exercise. Sometimes, to keep from going crazy, I would stand up, walk around, or dance, as “dancing” was not considered exercise by the Marine Corps.
Chelsea Manning is in the news this week for hospitalization that was initially reported as a suicide attempt by a CNN reporter and then retracted. She is currently back in military jail at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where she is serving a shocking 35-year sentence. She, like Thomas Deegan, compel us to look at what is going on in our midst today with the prison system. Incarceration in American prisons, which is already off the charts, spiked with the inhumanities of solitary confinement, is perhaps something all those of us who are outside prison walls need to become a lot more aware about and speak out about, in this peculiar time period we are living through of heightened oppression on all sides.
(Updated/Full post July 6) Re-posted, with thanks, from BenjaminFulford.net. This is positive news, featuring the White Dragon Society, and it points to imminent change on the world stage, so I post with hope. Just the first part is released currently; I will update as soon as the full report is released publicly later this week. Anyone wishing to support this work may subscribe to see the full report on Ben’s site. Also posted below is the Youtube video Ben has posted, again, a very hopeful message for change. Let’s keep holding that positive energy as we continue to work for change.
Posted July 5, 2016 at Benjaminfulford.net
The end of Khazarian mafia tyranny on the planet earth is getting very close indeed. The Rothschilds and other top Khazarian Mafiosi families like the Borgia, the Medici, the Del Banco (Warburg) the Rockefellers (including the Clintons) the Bushes (Pecce) have been given until July 10th to reach a peace agreement with the people of the planet. After that a bounty of $100 million each, payable in gold, will be handed over to anybody who can arrest, and if they resist arrest, kill, members of these genocidal families.
We are hearing there is vicious infighting and arguing going on within the “family,” about what to do about this situation. As this newsletter was about to go online, we were contacted by one faction of the Rothschilds and a meeting with a White Dragon Society representative is now being arranged for this week. The meeting will discuss how to create a financial system that is good for both humanity and nature. It will also discuss creating a new meritocratic, democratic and transparent system for planning the future of our species and this planet.
To remind these families of what is at stake here is a message sent to them by a senior Pentagon official:
“I have been told from multiple sources that there is a multitude of people, (men and women) who are waiting for the RKM (Rothchilds/Bauers) to not cooperate, these people are eager to end the lives of the RKM criminals at every level. You may want to let the representative know, that this is for real and they cannot run or hide, their time is up. It is time to fold or they will all die, including their families, to the furthest distant cousins; effectively ending the evil bloodlines who have bedeviled mankind for so long. Again good luck with the negotiations. If they renege there will be consequences, major ones. That being said, have a great day.”
In the past week, the Chinese government has also contacted the leaders of other Asian countries as well as the heads of the G20 group of nations to inform them that they expect a deal to be reached between the White Dragon Society and the Rothschild family group. The Chinese are too polite to make threats but this is a statement issued by the Chinese Freemasons:
“We will cooperate with any religion, any society, any faction, any political party or any country that agrees with the principles of co-existence and co-prosperity and world peace. However, we will cut off relations with anyone who fails to agree on the goal of world peace.”
Yet another group, claiming to represent a coalition of 172 sovereign nations, also threw in its support last week for a new, inclusive financial system.
Pentagon sources are saying that German Chancellor Angela Merkel (a member of the Saxe Gotha Rothschild family) already reached a deal with the Chinese when she visited China on June 13th.
According to that deal Merkel promised to resign after Greece exits the EU and, in exchange, the Chinese agreed to rescue Deutschebank. Deutschebank would not otherwise survive a Greek exit from the EU (71% of Greeks are against the EU and only 27% support it) because it would mean a default on Greek debt which has been used by Deutschebank (and others) to create derivative mountains. These mountains would collapse once the sand of Greek debt they are built on is removed.
The other EU country where a crisis is quickly coming to a head is Italy. There Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi promised a 150 billion Euro government bail-out for Italian banks only to be publicly scolded by the Germans who said no to such a deal because they would end up paying for it. The Italians then told the Germans it was up to the Italians to decide. This degenerated into a public spat that is likely to end up with Italy reverting to the Lira and Renzi resigning, CIA sources in Europe say.
Then of course President Francois Hollande will also be forced to resign as when Italy leaves, France will also be forced by financial reality to leave the Euro and revert to Francs.
Also, Austria’s highest court ruled last week that the recent Presidential election held there was marred by fraud and needed to be held again. This is almost certain to result in the election of “far right” (i.e. anti EU totalitarianism) Freedom Party presidential candidate Norbert Hofer.
The pro-EU factions have tried to stop this disintegration by proposing an even tighter, more centrally controlled EU. They are even proposing expanding the EU into the Middle East and Africa.
Of course, given their unpleasant colonial history, you can be pretty safe in betting the peoples of Africa and the Middle East will say “thanks but no thanks.” Clearly the EU project envisioned as evolving into a Soviet Union style world government is doomed.
In this situation EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, who is apparently daily getting drunker, told the EU Parliament he had discussions with leaders of “other planets” about the situation in the EU. You can be sure the exo-politics and galactic folk had a field day with this.
In the United States as well, the Khazarian mafia is in deep trouble. The widespread uproar over Hillary and Bill Clinton’s activities is the clearest sign of this. As has been widely publicized in multiple media platforms, Bill Clinton basically barged into an airplane where US Attorney General Loretta Lynch was and had a 20 minute private talk with her. Needless to say, with his wife the subject of a criminal investigation, this meeting was widely lambasted as blatant interference in the legal system. The assumption most people are making is that Clinton threatened Lynch on behalf of Hillary.
In any case, Lynch later issued a public statement saying she would go along with what FBI career officials decide. These career officials have long made it known that if Hillary was anybody else, she would have gone to jail a long time ago. CIA sources in Washington DC say the most likely scenario now is for Hillary to be found guilty and then be pardoned by President Obama.
However, neither Hillary nor any other members of her mafia are going to be allowed to run the US again.
Multiple lawsuits about stolen elections are also making it very clear the American people are now in open revolt against brazen election stealing by the Khazarian mafia.
Pentagon sources are now saying this is part of an open, wholesale revolution going on against the tyranny of the Federal Reserve Board. One source says “Brexit inspires Texodus and Califexit” and then other states will also bail out. There will also be “Amexit from Nato, the UN and globalist free trade agreements like Nafta, TPP and TTIP,” the Pentagon source predicts.
There has also been a complete turnaround in the Middle East. As we reported last week, Egypt and Israel are now applying to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a group that their supposed long term arch-enemy Iran is joining.
Now Turkey has suddenly made a 180 degree turn and is now re-establishing friendly relations with Russia, Israel and soon even Egypt. It looks like peace is finally about to come to that long tormented region.
The faction of the Khazarian mafia that still stubbornly wants to start World War 3 and trigger “Armageddon,” has not completely given up though.
On that front, there was some action in Moscow last week of the sort that would make for a great spy movie. Sources in the FSB as well as reports in news outlets like the Washington Post and the official Russian Tass news agency all agree there was some sort of shooting incident near the US embassy in Moscow last week. They also agree that a seriously injured US “diplomat” was flown out for emergency treatment.
The Russians also immediately made a public offer to provide exact transponder coordinates to neighbouring countries for all their planes flying in the open airspace over the Baltic Sea. Clearly this was aimed at preventing any misinterpretation of Russian actions in the region.
Given the past behavior of the Khazarian religious fanatics who want to trigger “end times,” it is a good guess that yet another attempt to start a nuclear war was stopped.
What these religious fanatics need to get into their heads is that the world is not about to end, the world is about to begin or be reborn into the paradise it was always meant to be.
On that front, hopefully we will have some good news to report next week if negotiations with the Rothschild representatives go well. If not, the battle will continue until the world’s people are victorious. Planetary liberation is coming soon.
by Ramola D/The Everyday Concerned Citizen/Posted July 1, 2016
Activists representing a Canadian organization of victims of current-day covert-assault mind-control and psychotronic weapon technology were present at Rohinie Bisesar’s June 27 court appearance in Toronto, a date set apparently after she was deemed mentally fit for trial.
Rohinie Bisesar is the financial services analyst who is accused in the stabbing death last December of 28-year-old Rosemary Junor, and has been held alternately at Vanier Jail for Women and in between briefly at a mental hospital.
Previous statements and accounts of her experience have suggested to many reporting non-consensual neuro-experimentation today that Ms. Bisesar may also have experienced mind control experimentation via remotely-applied neurotechnologies, a possibility covered here earlier.
Ms. Bisesar has spoken in court earlier of her personality being altered and of “something foreign” being put in her mind as she sought to explain how she, “a good person, the most good,” could have engaged in an act of violence against another.
Activists Deliberately Prevented From Seeing Rohinie Bisesar at Vanier Jail Earlier
Earlier efforts by anti-mind-control activists Joshua Byer and Galina Kurdina to see Rohinie at Vanier Jail were apparently deliberately foiled by the court and prison system, who permanently banned Joshua Byer from visiting her, and prevented Ms. Kurdina and a second activist, Hennick Solomon, from seeing her, by suddenly changing the rules surrounding visits to permit only those who know her personally.
Visits to prison inmates in the Canadian system can usually be made openly by any member of the public, by prior appointment. This new rule would also effectively prevent reporters from visiting with Rohinie at the jail anymore, which presents a distressing picture of the complete failure of democracy, protections for citizens, and basic human rights in Canada. Rather blatantly, it seems, unbiased media coverage of her plight, her testimonial, and her allegations of external mind control are being deliberately controlled and curtailed.
Further information on this jail visit by activists was covered here earlier in a report describing the specifics of mind control experimentation these activists seek to highlight, which bears uncanny resemblance to the symptoms Rohinie Bisesar has reported publicly in court, and in response to which her previous lawyer, Calvin Barry, unwilling to explore the spectre of neuro-experimentation, sought to dismiss her testimony as delusional.
Rohinie Bisesar’s June 27 Court Appearance
The June 27 court appearance, scheduled for 9:00 am, was delayed for three hours, until 12 noon.
Both actvists who were present at court describe Rohinie Bisesar–photographs and video of whom at court appear to be still prohibited by a system making every effort to control the narrative surrounding this articulate and personable MBA–as a small-made woman who appeared well-spoken and educated, “despite being handcuffed and escorted by a much larger officer.”
They report that Rohinie Bisesar asked to address the court and was initially encouraged by the judge to discuss her case with her lawyer, not the court, but was eventually granted permission. Her soft-spokenness and use of the respectful address of “Your Worship” to the judge seemed to denote a person trying to co-operate with the Canadian legal system as much as possible.
She was allowed a short speech, where she talked about terrorism and the need for a federal investigation. The Toronto Sun reports the following about her speech:
“I know something has happened to myself and my former common-law … something we’re exposed to while we were both in investment banking,” said Bisesar, who was deemed mentally fit for trial last month.
“This is an important issue that should be investigated by federal (authorities),” said Bisesar. “I know this matter has to be dealt with as soon as possible.”
The New MKULTRA: Forced Speech/Actions Denote Mind Cloning, Mind Hiving, & Bio-Robotizing
The experiences Ms. Bisesar has described previously of hearing a specific voice piped into her head, and of feeling as if someone had taken over her personality or being and was forcing her toward certain words, emotions, or actions, are similar to what many victims of non-consensual neuro-experimentation who have reported forced speech, forced action, and brain entrainment have described, in books as well as accounts online.
A scientist who has worked on these 21st-century technologies for the Military and the CIA, Dr. Robert Duncan, has described them as mind-cloning and mind-hiving, where an individual’s brainwaves and patterns are replaced or entrained with externally-induced brainwaves and patterns, via remote stimulation and electronic brain link interfaces.
The Matrix Deciphered/Robert Duncan. Screenshot from Island Republic of Dan
These technologies were covered earlier here, in articles examining this case (links below). The Matrix Deciphered, available online, describes the kind of military neuro-experimentation that is currently being done.
Activists aware of the pervasive nature of covert experimentation being carried out by factions of the Military and Intelligence agencies on randomly targeted individuals have sought to reach out to both Rohinie Bisesar and her family, both to inform them and in hopes that such neuro-experimentation could finally be openly addressed in the court system.
Colluding Media? Toronto Reporters Refuse to Cover Activism and Information on Neuro-Experimentation
It is vital to note here that continued efforts being made by activists striving to inform reporters about current-day neuro-experimentation are being openly, continuously, and deliberately ignored by media, who are failing therefore in their prime journalistic directive of keeping the public informed.
Galina Kurdina reports that her attempts to inform a Toronto Sun reporter during a break in court proceedings appeared to ignite initial interest as she relayed that she represented a 61-member-strong organization exposing mind control weapons, but that further mention of symptoms of neuro-experimentation led to him excusing himself quickly from the conversation.
Joshua Byer noted that conversations with two reporters they met at court were not covered in the latter’s printed reports. These Toronto reporters, in fact, are obviously not reporting the whole story.
“Both of the reporters who have covered our case have chosen to ignore our presence there…The media has an obligation to the public to accurately portray both sides of any story. By refusing to at least mention the community that surrounds Rohinie, they are failing to fulfill their commitment to the public.”
Have these reporters been instructed—by editors, and by their newspaper’s Government/CIA handlers– to ignore all mind-control activism, activists, and information on covert (Government/CIA) neuro-experimentation? Is media being controlled before the very eyes of these activists? Shamefully for Toronto—and the world, by extension–it would appear so.
Rohinie Bisesar’s Defense is Being Compromised
Ms. Bisesar’s new court-assigned lawyer, David Connally, also did not seem interested in learning more.
“After the proceedings, we waited outside of the courtroom with two reporters to see David Connally. He answered some questions for them, and stated that he did not know where Rohinie was coming from (jail or hospital ). We informed him that we were being barred from seeing his client and he told us that was “your problem”. We tried to get him to look over some documents regarding the case, but he said “absolutely not”. He then ran off before we could press the issue.”
The larger, deeper tragedy here must not go unnoticed. Joshua Byer notes that Rohinie Bisesar herself is being ill-served by this lawyer, whose interest in mounting a cursory defense for his client does not apparently extend to drilling deep to unearth all the facts of her case.
Prevailing court system efforts have sought to paint Rohinie Bisesar as delusional, with her previous attorney advising mental health assessments, and a court-ordered interlude at a mental hospital, despite Rohinie herself rejecting any claims of mental instability. By this means, all mention of Government/CIA Neuro-Experimentation and possible investment banking interests in such repressive neuro-experimentation, is being suppressed.
In noting the failure of the system to properly assist Rohinie Bisesar, Joshua Byer underlines a poignant fact:
“They have effectively cut her off from the group of people living in this world who can understand what she is going through and want to help her. We can provide her with a great deal of insight if given the opportunity, we are also prepared to sacrifice our limited resources to assist where required. By not allowing us to see her, they are making it impossible for her to mount an effective defense. Her lawyer has shown a disregard for his client’s well-being and a lack of interest in obtaining a meaningful defense. This constitutes gross negligence…
“I think society can expect more from the lawyer, the jail, and the media. All are in the way of an effective and accurate trial for Rohinie. We must therefore assume that no one wants there to be a trial.”
Colluding Court and Psychiatrists Assist in Keeping Neuro-Experimentation Concealed
Image: Brochure/Joshua Byer
Although awareness of covert neuro-experimentation and remote-influencing microwave weaponry has been growing rapidly online today, the refusal of the government-run court system and corporate media to acknowledge its existence has led to a stagnant and politicized reliance on the words of old-school psychiatrists who still relay “voices in head” as sign of schizophrenia rather than evidence of patented “Voice to Skull” technologies using microwaves, a misjudgment that might be corrected if psychiatrists advising courts today were required to consult neuroscientists, patents, and mind-control activists.
Microwave hearing effects and Voice to Skull/Voice of God technologies are neither fantasies nor the stuff of delusions today. They are military-grade, patented technologies which absolutely exist.
No psychiatrist who has access to the Internet can claim ignorance either of claims of covert, ongoing neuro-experimentation being made across the world by thousands reporting remote access of their bodies and brains.
These claims have been backed up by evidence, as many reports and lawsuits show. They have also been backed up by scientists who have helped develop these military neuro-technologies.
Image: Brochure/Joshua Byer
Human brains are no longer sacrosanct. Human brains—as also animal brains—can today be accessed and influenced from the outside. Voices can be piped into heads. Images can be piped into heads. Thoughts can be piped into heads. Emotions can be piped into heads. Actions can be forced. Bodies can be taken over, via the brain. Neuroscientists could testify today that all this is possible, even as they strive to catch up with Military Neuroscience, which, as victims of non-consensual neuro-experimentation will testify, has already transformed possibility into reality.
Image: Brochure/Joshua Byer
Regardless, psychiatrists working for the court system are both encouraged in their old-school authoritarian roles as ultimate arbiters of all things brain-related, and freely and with impunity hand out misdiagnoses of “schizophrenia/schizoid disorder/paranoid disorder,” completely ignoring the advances of modern neurotechnology.
Activism Continues, With Dedication
In the face of “official” concealment of neuro-experimentation, Mind-Control Activists are truly ringing the alarm bell for all of humanity, that neuro-experimentation is taking place.
Both activists are currently aiming to make contact with a public interest lawyer, so that they can fight their ban from the Vanier Center and make contact with Rohinie, whose next court date has been set for August 8.
Despite obvious efforts to ignore their presence or the information they present on rampant neuro-experimentation being conducted in Canada, USA, and many parts of the world today by Military and Intelligence agencies investing in electronic warfare and neuroweaponry, they report that, after the court appearance, they were able to hand out several hundred brochures (partially imaged above) outside the courthouse.
Thanks to such determined and dedicated activism, perhaps this is one more case where the people of the world will first become fully informed on the horrors of covert military/Intelligence neuro-experimentation before courts, attorneys, corporate media, and psychiatrists will be compelled to concede, and correct their understandings and approach to anyone reporting forced action, foreign ideations, or voices in their head, while being charged for what may well be CIA-run “sleeper-assassin” crime. And bring the whole world closer to ending such pernicious experimentation altogether.
Exclusive Reportage on Counter-Terrorism “Manufactured-Target” Targeting & Gross Human Rights Violations in Amoral Human Experimentation Crimes by Intelligence Agencies, Law (Lie) Enforcement, & US/NATO Military Divisions: Off-the-Charts Torture & Abuse of “Targeted Individuals”
GLOBAL BRAIN ENSLAVEMENT, DNA BIORESONANCE, & EXOTIC MILITARY TECH: TARUN RAVI REPORTS | REPORT 296 | At Bitchute | At Brighteon | At Odysee | At Rumble | Posted Oct 4, 2022
CARNICOM DISCLOSURE UPDATE 2022 – PANEL 2 | BIOTECH TRANSFORMATION VS RESILIENCE IN DIVINE CREATION | At all channels | Posted Sep 28, 2022 Report 295 | Michelle Ford/California Assembly on Restoring Your Status as American on Land & Soil | At Bitchute | Brighteon | Odysee | Rumble| Posted Sep 25, 2022
Free Keene’s web site/A peace-liberty-voluntarism project pursuing and promoting peaceful living in Free Keene, New Hampshire
Free State Project
Free State Project’s website/A Liberty in our Lifetime project in New Hampshire, pursuing liberty, community, and peaceful living
New Earth Project
New Earth Project website/Open platform to unite humanity and create initiatives to support the emergence of absolute freedom and sovereign creative expression for all
Public Intelligence Blog
Blog for Earth Intelligence Network, Phi Beta Iota the Public Intelligence Blog/Promotes hybrid transparent governance, collective intelligence, true cost economics, and whole systems understanding