## U.S. and international
classified experimentation law
are a disaster.

## Rampant government mind control
experiments are the result.

#### by Cheryl Welsh, director, Citizens Against Human Rights Abuse,(Cahra)
and third year law student, Lincoln Lawschool, Sacramento, CA.

####

January, 2004

C.A.H.R.A. Home Page

> This article appeared in Winter 2003/2004 Issue of Mkzine at www.mkzine.com Please support MKZINE and order a hardcopy today!

> #### Publisher's Message:

> The second issue of mkzine has endured numerous obstacles, thus preventing its publication in a timely manner. I have only printed about 500 copies of this issue in order to fulfill my subscriptions, along with extras for additional orders. Also, the two magazine distributors we utilize would not accept this issue because of the significant delay. My apologies if this edition is not as elaborate as the first, but hopefully you will find the content to be as intellectually stimulating and emotionally compelling. Notwithstanding the trials and tribulations, our small but dedicated staff is preparing for the third issue (Spring - Summer 2004), which will tentatively be out in April.

> Our most pending challenge, however, is the financial viability of mkzine. Since we have no paid ads to date, and sales of the magazine have been nominal, the likelihood of further issues after the third looks dim. My plea to you, reader, is to consider purchasing a subscription for 2004 and to buy a few copies of our first issue (I have plenty in my garage). If you know of someone who might want to provide us with financial assistance in our pursuit of disseminating ground-breaking information relating to mind control and other related abuses, that would be a most welcomed option. We have received a plethora of encouraging letters and appreciate the positive response. Again, please contemplate a way to keep mkzine alive. Take good care! Ron Patton

> MKzine, a 64 page glossy-covered magazine, examines coercive mind control, invasive human experimentation and other related abuses. MKzine is available twice yearly. Our first issue was the Spring-Summer 2003 edition. We are presently experincing difficulties with the layout of our second issue, however, we do anticipate the magazine will be printed and mailed out sometime in January. It will be featured as the Winter 2003/2004 issue. The yearly subscription price is $10 U.S., $14 Canada, and $18 International. Seperate issues are half the 2003 subscription price. The prices for a 2004 subscription (Spring-Summer 2004 & Fall-Winter 2004) will be $12 U.S., $16 Canada, $20 International. Seperate issues will be half of the 2004 subscription price. Send checks, money orders to: MKzine, PMB 175, 1910 East 4th Ave., Olympia, WA 98506

### Table of Contents

> 1. Dismissing the crime: mind control as a conspiracy theory
> 2. Why there is no proof of mind control experiments
> 3. Large-scale, offically sanctioned and horrific crimes are prevalent
> 4. Expert says U.S. classified human experimentation law is 'scandalous'
> 5. The program of U.S. federal regulations for experimentation is heavily influenced by the medical establishment.
> 6. What does happen when classified experiments go wrong:
> victims are called paranoid and the government hides criminal behavior behind national security
> 7. Health and legal professionals support mind control claims, to no avail
> 8. Law expert says future unlawful experiments inevitable
> 9. How the legal system processes an unlawful mind control experiment court case
> 10. Classified human experimentation on an international scale: wide scale abuses and no legal recourse.
> 11. US involvement in foreign unlawful experiments though 1994.
> 12. An explanation of how rampant unlawful classified experiments have occurred and will most likely occur in the future.
> 13. Conclusions: no legal remedies now or in the future, experts say

### Dismissing the crime: mind control as a conspiracy theory

> That governments possess classified mind control weapons and are zapping and controlling people is accepted as a conspiracy theory without further investigation. Mind control and victims who claim to be bombarded by government radiowaves are a widely reported phenomena and are dismissed by the general public as conspiracy nuts or mental illness. For example, The London Independent, January 17, 2001 article, Paranoid? You have no idea... by Paul Lashmar, listed 10 conspiracy theories and described the tenth conspiracy as,

> > Mind control. The American military conducted a series of mind control experiments in the 1950s and 1960s. But most of the files were destroyed in the 1970s when the US Congress began sniffing around. A large number of people are convinced they have been programmed by the CIA. The Electronic Surveillance Project Association, founded to counteract harassment of civilians, claims individuals have been targeted with microwave weapons.

> And recently, Jonathan D. Moreno, ethicist at the University of Virginia, wrote in the journal, Nature Reviews, Vol. 4, February, 2003,

> > Mind Wars. During the 1940s and 1950s, the bulk of psychological research funding was provided by national security agencies that were interested in gaining an advantage during the cold war. Many of the scandals associated with this research, such as the CIA and army experiments with LSD and other hallucinogens, has become part of our cultural heritage. They have also spawned a legion of conspiracy theorists prepared to entertain any rumored 'mind control' technology without being inhibited by scientific implausibility.

> Dismissing victims as crazy is not new. The often quoted, August 31, 1997, New York Times Magazine article, Atomic Guinea Pigs, discussed radiation experiment victims who were labeled "the crazies" by the Department of Energy officials. Their claims were ignored until 1993 when declassified government documents revealed a huge cold war classified program of human radiation experiments. Similarly, given the development of new brain technologies and heavily classified nonlethal electromagnetic weapons, the recent claims deserve investigation. Especially given the history of "the crazies", public inquiry into victim claims should be a serious obligation, not a flight of fancy or "conspiracy theory."

> Contents

### Why there is no proof of mind control experiments

> Mind control is a conspiracy theory because there is no scientific proof of government mind control technology or mind control experiments. But there are relevant reasons why this is so. In addition to the radiation experiments, in the late 1970s, the U.S. government declassified Mkultra mind control government documents on the CIA's experiments. Shockingly, absolutely no national or international laws were passed as a result of mind control or radiation experiments that would prevent the very same tragedies from happening again. In a catch-22 worthy of Joseph Heller, the current alleged mind control victims are unable to provide proof of what is classified and adding insult to injury, are labeled conspiracy nuts or worse.

> Government secrecy is the main obstacle in proving mind control experiments. According to Daniel Ellsberg, a top Pentagon official, who leaked the Pentagon Papers in the 1970s, the successful keeping of secrets is a routine occurrence. In Ellsberg's 2002 book, Secrets, page 43, he explains,

> > It is a commonplace [belief] that "you can't keep secrets in Washington" or "in a democracy"... These truisms are flatly false. They are in fact cover stories, ways of flattering and misleading journalists and their readers, part of the process of keeping secrets well. ...But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of secrets do not leak to the American public." ..The reality unknown to the public and to most members of Congress and the press is that secrets [that] would be of the greatest import to many of them can be kept from them reliably for decades by the executive branch, even though they are known to thousands of insiders.

> Contents

### Large-scale, offically sanctioned and horrific crimes are prevalent

> Yet another roadblock to proof of mind control involves the horrific nature of the claim. Usually victims are told that the government could or would never do such terrible and bizarre things to ordinary people. A typical response is a letter from R. James Woolsey, former CIA director, addressed to myself, Cahra director on Sept. 3, 1997 stated,

> > In the very unlikely event that any part of the U.S. government should attempt to develop or use any of this sort of stuff [electromagnetic weapons targeting the mind]against any American, or in any way other that through legal authorization and appropriation by the Congress, the relevant government officials would doubtless find their activities disclosed forthwith ... Conspiracy theorists always seem to me to forget that we have: (a) First Amendment,(b) two independent branches of the federal government outside the executive, and (c) a federal system.

> Again, this dismissive response to claims of unlawful mind control experiments by former CIA director Woolsey illustrates either a 'conspiracy' cover story reply or a less likely explanation that Woolsey was unaware of the U.S. government's abysmal failure to address unlawful CIA and radiation experiments.

> The 2002 scandal involving Catholic church priests sexually molesting young boys is analogous to mind control experiments and is a compelling case of how terrible acts can be kept secret for years by a great and trusted organization. Many top Catholic officials kept the sexual molestations secret for years. See December 31, 2002, Los Angeles Times, Molestation scandal Wrenched Church Hierarchy and Faithful. The sexual molestations took place for decades, on a large scale and were called "the greatest scandal in the history of the American Catholic Church". The molestations were not known by the public because the policy of the catholic church was to ignore the problem. Surrounded by the denials of catholic officials, the charges were unbelievable, horrific and extremely difficult to prove. Finally, widespread media coverage forced the very reluctant church in Rome to address the scandal.

> The expose of the tobacco industry is also analogous to mind control experiments in that officials at the highest levels condoned and contributed to the tobacco deaths of smokers while at the same time, making billions of dollars for decades. In 1994, top officials lied under oath to Congress stating they didn't believe cigarettes were addictive or caused cancer. Tobacco company documents contradicted their testimony.

> In the information age, man's inhumanity to man is a common occurrence and clearly mind control experiments could happen today. Given the widespread and growing numbers of reported mind control victims for decades and the history of large scale U.S. secret cold war experiments, military defense contractors and top government officials have and probably are continuing to conduct unlawful experiments in the name of national security. And below are the reports in mainstream media of several experts who agree with this explanation.

> Contents

### Expert says U.S. classified human experimentation law is 'scandalous'

> National and international human experimentation law does nothing to protect human subjects from classified unlawful government experiments and actually protects the government from prosecution for criminal behavior. A key article entitled, The Ethics of experiments; scholars fear post-attack secrecy, on the state of current U.S. experimentation law appeared in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, March,3 2002,p. A-14,

> > "It borders on the scandalous that we still don't have rules in place that would at least begin to protect the people who are in those trials," cautioned Jonathan D. Moreno, director of the Center for Biomedical Ethics at the University of Virginia. ...Moreno pointed to a December news report that President Bush had given the secretary of health and human services [HHS] the authority to classify the information as secret. Moreno said that could allow the Defense Department or CIA to undertake secret human experiments with the HHS.

> In the 1999 book, Undue Risk, on the history of secret experiments, Dr. Jonathan Moreno wrote,

> > Today and ever since the end of the World War II, the universal sensitivity about human experiments is coupled with the fact that they are probably unavoidable in the real world of national security. Textbook theories, laboratory experiments, and computer and animal models can only go so far. At some point, when information is needed about how human beings will react to new forms of weaponry, human experiments will have to continue in this business. In a dangerous world one might well argue that it would be irresponsible for us not to do so.

> In one of the final chapters of his book, Dr. Moreno predicts the inevitability of future unethical classified government experiments.

> > In the next century, as in the past, military medical research involving human subjects will be dictated by the limits of information available from other sources. Because a new generation of weapons is being developed that are intended to incapacitate rather than kill an enemy, computer simulations and animal models can only go so far. Among the next generation of weapons is one that may involve a different sort of radiation than that emitted by atomic fission: microwaves. Electromagnetic waves may be used to disrupt an enemy soldier's central nervous system, to causes epileptic seizures,...

> Contents

### The program of U.S. federal regulations for experimentation is heavily influenced by the medical establishment.

> As Dr. Moreno points out, new laws are desperately called for. But nonconsensual experimentation victims don't have the political clout to make this happen. The medical establishment and pharmaceutical companies are powerful and want unencumbered medical research. As a result, congressional proposals to protect human subjects in experiments have all failed. The current federal regulations on human subject experimentation include ineffective enforcement or penalties for criminal behavior or for failing to follow the rules. The Plain Dealer, November 8, 1998 article entitled, U.S. Medical Researchers Flout Rules Around World, confirms this,

> > A legacy of medical exploitation, from secret Cold War radiation experiments to notorious syphilis studies on unwary blacks, has led the United States to adopt some of the world's toughest protections for people on whom scientists test new drugs, devices and vaccines. So firm is the underlying presumption that patients in experiments must be treated fairly and honestly that the protections of federal law apply not just to Americans but to any person, anywhere in the world, used in U.S.-financed research. But federal and foreign records disclose that the nation with some of the world's strictest research safeguards has flouted its own rules in dozens of countries, and has a history of "systemic deficiencies."

> And in an October 4, 2002 Boston Globe article, Panel Urges Changes in Research on Humans Institute of Medicine Worries that Public Trust is Threatened by Deaths, reporters Michael Kranish and Alice Dembner stated,

> > Medical research institutions should make 'fundamental changes' in the way they conduct experiments on human beings in order to stop a string of accidental deaths, an influential advisory panel said yesterday. ...The Institute of Medicine panel also recommended that federal oversight of human research include privately funded experiments, currently, the government regulates federally financed experiments and those conducted at institutions that receive federal dollars. The panel also said a no-fault insurance program should be established to compensate people who are harmed during the experiments.

> The Boston Globe article continues, "George Annas, chairman of Health Law department at Boston University's School of Public Health, said, "We need a lot more reform that the IOM (Institute of Medicine) seems to recognize. This is but another voice crying in the wilderness. All their major recommendations have been made over and over again." The article reported, "The release of the report (IOM report) comes as Congress this year has failed to come to an agreement on legislation to tighten protection in human experiments."

> Contents

### What does happen when classified experiments go wrong: victims are called paranoid and the government hides criminal behavior behind national security

> The September 13, 1997 Hamilton Spectator article entitled, Playhouse of horrors: they believe they were young guinea pigs in military mind-control experiments during the cold war, by Jim Bronskill, described another example of fifty years of unethical experiments.

> > "A person who claims to have been a victims of government mind-control programs is generally not going to be believed and is going to be considered mentally ill," said [Santa Clara law professor and author of the 1978 book, The Mind Manipulators, on CIA mind control experiments.] Scheflin. "And indeed, a lot of people suffer from the neurotic delusion that they were victims of mind control But not all of them are delusional. Otherwise, there would be no victims. We know there are victims because we know the experiments were done."

> The Hamilton Spectator continued,

> > March 1995, New Orleans therapist Valerie Wolf and two clients traveled to Washington to address a U.S. presidential advisory committee probing government-sponsored radiation experiments on people in the decade following the Second World War. ...In early 1995, when word spread that Wolf would appear in Washington, nearly 40 other therapists from around the United States contacted her to tell of clients who had reported being used in mind-control and radiation experiments.

> "We know beyond any shadow of a doubt that the CIA and army mind-control programs were much bigger, and much broader and much more extensive than we have knowledge of at this time." [Scheflin said in support of Valerie Wolf's experience].

> The Presidential Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments meetings were conducted to gather evidence of the disclosures of radiation experiments and included the testimony of mind control victims and therapist Valerie Wolf. As reported in the Hamilton Spectator article, "In its October 1995 report, the committee,... did recommend "all records bearing on programs of secret human research" from the late 1940s through the early 1970s "become a top priority for declassification review." This was never done and in addition, secrecy has increased since 9-11.

> Contents

### Health and legal professionals support mind control claims, to no avail

> The Hamilton Spectator article continues,

> > "A video letter to government officials included seven health and legal professionals. "The accompanying text called for the declassification of records, a presidential hearing to identify all U.S. government sponsored research involving covert mind control experimentation in the United States and elsewhere, criminal prosecutions where warranted and appropriate remedies for victims."

> The president's office sent a form letter reply and nothing further was done.

> The Hamilton Spectator article explains the devastating problem of lack of proof of mind control experiments.

> > Scheflin and the few others who take the subject seriously are severely handicapped. There are no research institutes, no grants and, despite promises, no firm indication the U.S. government will pry open its secret files. And without the necessary documentation, it's impossible to determine whose stories to believe. "I can't prove, without having the documents available, that what anybody is telling me, or part of what someone is telling me is true or not," said Scheflin "But I can tell you that it's [alleged mind control experiments] not out of the realm of possibility. And if it not true, it would be true of someone else who has not come forward."

> Contents

### Law expert says future unlawful experiments inevitable

> The Hamilton Spectator article reported a prediction of more unethical experiments.

> > Government and media indifference to the mind-control issue has left Scheflin discouraged. ...Scheflin is dismayed that intelligence and military agencies have essentially been able to carry out mind-control research on unwitting people with impunity, a lapse he feels will spawn further injustices. "They will be even more empowered to conduct even more outrageous experiments on even more people," said Scheflin. "It's an inevitability.

> The following article lends support to Professor Scheflin's findings and reported that government mind control experiments continued into the 1970s, after government officials publicly stated that CIA mind control experiments were ended in the 1960s. Bill Richards' article entitled,

> Book Disputes CIA Chief on Mind-Control Efforts: Work went on Into 1970s, Author Says (January 29, 1979 Washington Post, p. A2) explains,

> > Despite assurances last year from Central Intelligence Director Stansfield Turner that the CIA's mind-control program was phased out over a decade ago, the intelligence agency has come up with new documents indicating that the work went on into the 1970s, according to a new book. John Marks, the author of the book, said the CIA mind-control researchers did apparently drop their much publicized MK-ULTRA drug-testing program. But they replaced it, according to Marks, with another supersecret behavioral- control project under the agency's Office of Research and Development. The ORD program used a cover organization set up in the 1960s outside Boston headed by Dr. Edwin Land, the founder of Polaroid, who acted as a "figurehead," said Marks in his book. The project investigated such research as genetic engineering, development of new strains of bacteria, and mind control. The book identifies the Massachusetts proprietary organization headed by Land as the Scientific Engineering Institute. The CIA-funded institute was originally set up as a radar and technical research company in the 1950s and shifted over to mind-control experiments in the 1960s with the exception of a few scattered programs. According to Marks, however, the ORD program was a full-scale one and just as secret as the earlier MK-ULTRA project.

> Contents

### How the legal system processes an unlawful mind control experiment court case

> One of two thorough firsthand accounts is a case on classified human subject government experimentation found in The Cold War Era Human Subject Experimentation, Hearing before the Legislation and National Security Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations House of Representatives, September 28, 1994, page 204. "Testimony of Elizabeth Barrett." Barrett wrote a detailed summary of how Barrett's father was dosed with halucinogenic drugs and died. Her family pursued legal remedies for years and uncovered government lies and cover-ups. Finally Elizabeth Barrett received a comparably small settlement without any government official or agency admitting guilt.

> Here is a recently uncovered example of the decades old government policy of covering up cold war experiments. The August 8, 2002 San Jose Mercury News article entitled, Scientist's death haunts family, stated:

> > The death in 1953 of a government scientist, Frank Olson, in a fall from a New York hotel window, is one of the most notorious cases in CIA history. ...Only recently Eric Olson, [Frank Olson's son; see http://www.frankolsonproject.org/] obtained files from a University of California-Davis history professor that showed White House officials had intentionally withheld details of Frank Olson's death from the family. ...a memo from Dick Cheney, a White House assistant at the time to Donald Rumsfeld, the chief of staff, on July 11, 1975... The memo warned that a lawsuit could involve "the possibility that it might be necessary to disclose highly classified national-security information in connection with any court suit or legislative hearings on a private bill. The documents also include memos written by White House counsel Roderick Hills to the president that were routed through Cheney and other officials. "Dr. Olson's job is so sensitive that it is highly unlikely that we would submit relevant evidence" to the court, Hills wrote, regarding a potential suit by the Olson family. "If there is a trial, it is apparent that the Olsons' lawyer will seek to explore all of the circumstances of Dr. Olson's employment as well as those concerning his death. Thus, in the trial it may become apparent that we are concealing evidence for national-security reasons and any settlement or judgment reached thereafter could be perceived as money paid to cover up the activities of the CIA." As a result, Hills urged settling the case out of court.

> Today, cases filed by alleged mind control victims do not even reach the discovery phase of typical court cases. Nearly 100% of the time, a judge will dismiss the case and the reasons given are that the legal system does not recognize mind control technology as real and therefore the claim could never be proven in court. The claim is described as 'frivolous', a legal term meaning the case is unprovable, and is dismissed.

> Contents

### Classified human experimentation on an international scale: wide scale abuses and no legal recourse.

> Numerous articles describe widescale global experiments and the attendant abuses that go unpunished. A November 7, 1993 New York Times article entitled, Soviet Atom Test Used Thousands as Guinea Pigs, Archives show, reported that "On the morning of Sept. 14, 1954, in the Ural Mountains about 600 miles southeast of Moscow, the Soviet military exploded an atomic bomb in the air near 45,000 Red Army troops and thousands of civilians as part of a military exercise. ...a film of the test recently obtained form secret Soviet military archives sheds new light on the often reckless nuclear testing during the cold war..."

> As reported in the Spring 2001, 13 Pace International Law Review 197, comment entitled, Research and Accountability: The Need for Uniform Regulation of International Pharmaceutical Drug Testing, by Dawn Joyce Miller,

> > ...no enforceable international law exists, and no enforcement mechanism is in place [for human experimentation]. [Welsh, The Nuremburg Code and other codes for experimentation are only a recommendation, have no binding legal powers and are not enforceable.] This has prompted some to call for the creation of an internationally binding document. M. Cherif Bassiouni, for example has drafted a convention for the prevention of unlawful human rights experiments. Others have called for the addition of a protocol to Article 7 of the ICCPR [International Code of Civil and Political Rights]. Finally, still others have noted the need for either a statute to the new International Criminal Court or a permanent international tribunal to hear international violations of medical research ethics. Whatever the form such a binding agreement and enforcement mechanism should take, it is becoming increasingly evident that countries cannot deal with these problems on their own.

> Boston University lawyer-ethicist, George Annas, editors and co-authors of the 1992 book Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code wrote the following about M. Cherif Bassiouni's decades long work to include human experimentation law within an international criminal code, page 166. Professor Bassiouni also mentions the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on proposed international experimentation law.

> > It must be mentioned that one of the most eminent experts in the field of human rights law, M. Cherif Bassiouni, has developed a draft convention for the prevention and suppression of unlawful human experimentation. This convention, which was drafted so as to define unlawful human experimentation as a crime under international law, was considered in 1984 by the United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. In its work, the Sub-Commission adopted a resolution that would have authorized a Special Rapporteur to "prepare a study on the current dimensions and problems arising from unlawful human experimentation. The resolution was referred to the Commission on Human Rights for action or consideration. It seems, however, that no further steps were taken. Bassiouni believes that one possible explanation for this is that representatives of certain countries feared that such a convention would infringe on the practices of their pharmaceutical industries. ...it is important to note that the draft convention is based in large part on the Nuremberg Code, more so than any other text promulgated in the past two decades. While, for the present, the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities has chosen not to pursue the subject of human experimentation, the possibility remains that the draft convention will be reintroduced at some point in the future.

> Contents

### US involvement in foreign unlawful experiments though 1994.

> The April 29, 1998 London Times article entitled, US and Norway 'used insane for Nazi-style tests' , reported US involvement up to the 1994 in international unethical experiments,

> > American and Norwegian hospitals were involved in sterilization experiments on the mentally retarded using radiation over a 20-year period up to 1994. Mr. Mellbye [former colleague of the then director of Norway's health services] said hospital records would prove the tests had taken place. "I cannot remember that anyone at any time put their foot down to stop what was happening," he said. "Both authorities in the health services, psychiatrist and other doctors knew what was going on." Mr. Mellbye said the Norwegian experiments were carried out with the co-operation of Americans "at the highest level" and that Norwegian doctors were encouraged to seek US financial support.

> Contents

### An explanation of how rampant unlawful classified experiments have occurred and will most likely occur in the future.

> One explanation for the total lack of protections for human subjects of classified experimentation is the following. The harsh reality is that given the pattern of governmental abuse, the most probable and unspoken but widely accepted philosophy used for national security experiments is that the sacrifice of the few are necessary in order to benefit the many. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, May 1, 2001, reported as much. In a book review of Gassed: British Chemical Warfare Experiments on Humans at Porton Down By Rob Evans, David Eisenberg wrote: "As with chemical weapons programs in other countries, Porton Down's activities were justified on the basis that the needs of the many outweighed the needs of the few. Porton serves as yet another example of how national security interests can be used to justify what in retrospect are unethical endeavors."

> Given the poor treatment of radiation experiment victims and the lack of public outcry, today, a significant number of Americans would probably privately agree that national security experiments are necessary and would look the other way. Still, classified, unlawful government experiments are undemocratic, unethical and violate fundamental human rights.

> Contents

### Conclusions: no legal remedies now or in the future, experts say

> Experts are warning of the consequences of the lack of U.S. or international laws to punish the crime of unlawful, classified human experimentation. "The message to scientists and governments around the world is that you can get away with unlawful experiments on unwitting victims with impunity." stated law professor Alan Scheflin on the 2000 History channel program Mind Control, America's secret war. Current alleged U.S. victims have no legal recourse and little hope for future legal remedies as law professor Alan Scheflin and ethicist Dr. Moreno explained.

> On an international level, the legal situation is even worse. Although Professor Bassiouni's 1999 Draft Convention for the Prevention and Suppression of Unlawful Human Experimentation would cover classified government mind control experiments, it has yet to be accepted and ratified by countries internationally. Then the U.S. Congress would have to ratify the convention so that is becomes U.S. law. Congress may then legislate U.S. law on human experimentation as ratified in the Convention. This is a positive process but it will take years. Also, the U.S. has not signed onto the newly formed International Criminal Court (ICC) and hasn't ratified the ICC treaty. As a result, the U.S. could not be brought to justice for unlawful human experiments, a violation of the Convention Against Torture, since a country must ratify the ICC treaty before it becomes binding on them. There may be legal ways around this but it becomes extremely unlikely and more difficult.

> Given the powerful medical and pharmaceutical lobbies and the lack of political clout of human subjects of experiments, the chances of passing human experimentation protections legislation, let alone effective legislation or an international protocol or convention on human experimentation protections are remote. And in fact the Human Research Subject Protections Act of 1997 introduced by Senator John Glenn did not pass. Professor Bassiouni included his 1981 Draft Convention for the Prevention and Suppression of Unlawful Human Experimentation in his 1999 book, International Criminal Law, but the convention has not been introduced into the treaty making process.

> In addition, experts like Professor Scheflin and Dr. Moreno are warning of the likelihood of current national security experiments. On the same 2000 History channel program, psychiatrist, Dr. Ross stated that given the past history of government experimentation on unwitting civilians, such as radiation experiments and LSD experiments, it is implausible that there hasn't been some clandestine experiments of nonlethal weapons on individuals today. Dr. Colin Ross described nonlethal weapons as various forms of energy such as acoustic and electromagnetic radiation which are "beamed at individuals in order to control them."

> In conclusion, a strong circumstantial case can be made that the growing number of alleged mind control are not conspiracy nuts and are likely the work of government scientists conducting classified experiments in the name of national security. Like Professor Scheflin, I am extremely discouraged by the state of human subject experimentation law. Given the extensive history and the legal outcome of radiation and CIA mind control cases, looking for legal or legislative solutions is a formidable challenge. A more productive short term approach may be to concentrate on gathering evidence and proof of mind control experiments, not for a legal remedy but to stop the ongoing experimentation. As director of Citizens Against Human Rights Abuse, Cahra, I plan to continue Cahra's focus on group projects and documentation. Working with investigative journalists, who are experts at gathering evidence and top private investigators with backgrounds in intelligence activities and government surveillance are two areas Cahra is concentrating on. At least when armed with facts, victims are in a much better position to decide how they want to approach the mind control issue.

> Contents

> C.A.H.R.A. Home Page