Headlines were made last week concerning revelations of a 64-year-old scandal only recently discovered by historian Susan M. Reverby of Wellesley College. Reverby discovered that a key researcher who was part of the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis study had also headed a project in Guatemala that deliberately infected prisoners and insane asylum inmates with various venereal diseases, ostensibly in order to study how the diseases were transmitted and if they human contagion could be blocked.
Inoculation was difficult, the researchers found, and they had to result to making abrasions and dripping rabbit-infected pus on the genitals of human beings, some of whom had no idea what was being done to them, to try and get the desired results. The study was inconclusive, and ended after only a few years, but not before more than 700 individuals had been inoculated. The human subjects were supposed to be treated with penicillin if they contracted any disease, but record keeping and controls on the project were poor. None received adequate informed consent. Moreover, the researchers involved, working for the U.S. Public Health Service, knew the experiment would never pass muster if done in the United States. A similar experiment in U.S. prisons in 1911 was shut down because of controversy over the unethical experimentation upon prisoners. See Reverby’s preprint version (PDF) of her academic article for a much fuller discussion of what occurred.
These revelations are only the latest in an ongoing series of scandals regarding government illegal and unethical experimentation. Earlier this year, investigative journalist H.P. Albarelli detailed the many activities of the government its decades-long mind control project, as well as the use of drugs in clandestine operations in his book A Terrible Mistake: The Murder of Frank Olson and the CIA’s Secret Cold War. (Albarelli was also a guest at FDL Book Salon last January.) Albarelli’s book also covered the LSD poisoning by the CIA of the entire French village Pont-St.-Esprit in August 1951, a story picked up only a few months ago by BBC.
There are plenty of other underreported and important stories out there on the terrible scandal that has been U.S. illegal experimentation. The Department of Defense experimented on over 7000 soldiers at its Edgewood Arsenal, part of "a secret testing program in which U.S. military personnel were deliberately exposed to chemical and biological weapons and other toxins without informed consent." Troops were tested with "nerve gas, psychochemicals, and thousands of other toxic chemical or biological substances and perhaps most gruesomely, the insertion of septal implants in the brains of subjects in a ghastly series of mind control experiments that went awry." The program ended in 1976 after approximately twenty years. Remarkably, a lawsuit by veterans is still alive and wending its way through the courts.
It was approximately only ten years ago when another DoD experiment scandal became big news. Project Shad was a DoD experiment that exposed at least 4,000 Navy men to various chemical agents and decontaminant chemicals, "including Bacillus globigii (BG), Coxiella burnetii [which causes Q fever], Pasteurella tularensis [which causes tularemia or 'rabbit fever'], Zinc Cadmium Sulfide, Beta-propriolactone, Sarin, VX, Escherichia Coli (EC), Serratia Marcescens (SM), Sodium Hydroxide, Peracetic acid, Potassium hydroxide, Sodium hypochlorite, ‘tracer amounts’ of radioactivity and asbestos, [and] Methylacetoacetate." So outrageous were these experiments, denied by the government for 35 years, that there were Congressional hearings (PDF) in 2002, and major news reports by CBS Evening News. Today, the story has dropped off the radar, though thanks to some Congressional pressure, and the activism of some of the Shad victims, veterans and the government can get more information on Shad and its land-based twin experiment, Project 112, at this Veterans Administration webpage.
The government use of drugs and other experimental torture techniques during the Bush administration has led to a number of studies and reports. Most recently, the DoD Inspector General concluded an investigation on the drugging of detainees, or so-called "unprivileged enemy combatants" in DoD custody. But the results of the review remain classified, and the fact the report was even ever concluded was kept from public knowledge for many months. In 2008, now-Vice President Joesph Biden had been one of three senators asking for an investigation into the drugging charges. Biden’s office at the White House refused to reply to questions for comment on the report’s existence or what have been revealed by the investigation.
Finally, we have the ongoing question of human experimentation by the CIA as part of the construction of and operations concerning their "enhanced interrogation" torture program. Earlier this year, Physicians for Human Rights released a peer-reviewed white paper detailing some of the CIA actions. As the following press release by PHR explains, there is a direct line of scientific malfeasance and unethical behavior that runs from the Guatemala experiments of the 1940s to the CIA and DoD illegal experimentation of our era. In an excellent article on the topic by one of the PHR report authors, psychologists Stephen Soldz, explains:
Secretary of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was notified by letter of these abuses, abuses that violate the same research ethics principles — informed consent and minimization of harm — that were violated by the Guatemalan STD research. But, rather than express her outrage at this “reprehensible research,” Secretary Sebelius maintained her silence, as did every government official, other than a CIA press spokesman who denied our claims without presenting the slightest bit of evidence. Secretary Sebelius’ department referred an official complaint regarding unethical CIA research to the very same CIA that had already publicly denied the charges. So far, no government agency has committed to investigating these CIA abuses, which occurred far more recently than the Guatemalan horrors.
The letter denying the complaint and referring it back to the CIA was signed by Howard Koh, Assistant Secretary of Health at the U.S. Public Health Service, the same agency that conducted the Guatemala experiments decades ago (and conveniently never published the results).
What follows is a press release from Physicians for Human Rights (courtesy Stephen Soldz’s website):
Physicians for Human Rights Decries Obama Administration’s Double Standard on Illegal Human Experimentation; 1946 Guatemala Case and Alleged CIA Experimentation on Black Site Detainees Both Deserve Equal Justice
Cambridge, MA–In the wake of revelations about America’s experimentation on unwilling human subjects in Guatemala in 1946, Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) calls on President Obama to equally investigate credible evidence of illegal human subject research on detainees in CIA custody during the Bush administration.
“What was done to 700 Guatemalans 64 years ago without their consent is appalling,” said Physicians for Human Rights CEO Frank Donaghue. “But President Obama’s apologies for the Guatemala case ring hollow when the White House refuses to investigate similar crimes that allegedly occurred in the past decade. The credible evidence of illegal human experiments by the CIA on black site detainees deserves equal attention and justice.”
PHR’s June 2010 report, Experiments in Torture: Human Subject Research and Evidence of Experimentation in the ‘Enhanced’ Interrogation Program, was the first peer-reviewed analysis of evidence indicating that the Bush administration allegedly conducted illegal human research and experimentation on prisoners in US custody. The research was apparently used to insulate interrogators from potential prosecution and to standardize the use of torture.
“The conduct of health professionals in both cases—Guatemala and the CIA black sites—makes a mockery of bedrock principles of medical ethics and the law,” stated Scott Allen, MD, lead medical author of the PHR report. “Human subject research protections mean nothing if they don’t apply to all people all of the time—regardless of politics.”
CIA physicians and psychologists collected and analyzed data on the physical and psychological impact of the “enhanced” interrogation tactics, analysis which became the basis of Department of Justice memos justifying the torture program. This alleged program of illegal human subject experimentation violates medical ethics, federal law, and international research standards, including the Nuremberg Code and the Common Rule. These practices could, in some cases, constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity.
“While the proposed federal commission on the abuses in Guatemala is welcome, the American people must also learn the truth about what was done in our name over the past decade to detainees in CIA custody,” said Nathaniel Raymond, Director of PHR’s Campaign Against Torture and lead author of the PHR report. “The Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services must investigate these credible allegations of human experimentation on detainees by the CIA with the same mandate as the Guatemala case.”
PHR calls on President Obama, working with Congress, to appoint a federal commission to investigate what American physicians and psychologists did to people subjected to torture in US custody. John Durham, the Department of Justice prosecutor tasked with investigating the destruction of CIA interrogation videotapes as well as interrogations that went beyond what was authorized by the Department of Justice memos, should also be given a clear mandate to probe allegations of illegal research at the black sites, Guantanamo and elsewhere.



54 Comments

tweeted and recommended jeff. thank you for your reporting.
Thanks, Suzanne. I will have a lot more to offer on this subject in coming weeks, including some new never released material. Maybe, just maybe this country is ready for a reckoning with its past. I hope so, because what was past was, proverbially, only prelude, and we are still dealing with these issues today. We ignore this vital topic at our own peril. Why it hasn’t gotten the attention of, say, illegal wiretapping, I don’t know.
Good to see you writing on this Jeff. Unfortunately I will not be around for a while to participate in this discussion.
I look forward to all your reporting.
I certainly hope so. Thanks for your efforts at making that happen.
Before anybody starts waxing apoplectic, I’m not saying that any of this was ETHICAL behavior but the Belmont Report wasn’t even published until 1979. The alleged CIA black site experimentation is so far just that: ALLEGED. It’s a bit of a stretch to call something that is undeniably unethical a “crime” when it was not made a crime until the 1980s. When I’m employed, I’m usually employed doing Human Subject Research and much of it within the framework of the DoD. I can’t go into it in detail as it would compromise my security clearance but I have never seen the informed consent protocol so much as bent and every study must adhere to the principles of respect for persons, beneficence, justice, fidelity and veracity.
Everybody who sees me post here will agree that I never reflexively support the United States in anything but this piece needs a bit of factual context. The Guatemalan research was done PRIOR to even the Nuremberg Codes, which were more of a scolding than a system of ethical guidelines and well before the Declaration of Helsinki, (1964) and the Belmont Report to the Congress of the United States.
IF the CIA is found to have violated those protocols since adoption, then they should be prosecuted. I’ll volunteer to be a consultant to the prosecution.
It should be noted that I wouldn’t be surprised if the Cheney group wanted to experiment on prisoners and detainees but I have never met anybody who I believe would be involved of anything remotely like that. Nobody I know was ever even approached to be sounded out about possible participation in such activity and again, I wouldn’t hesitate to testify in order to put anybody involved in it in prison for the rest of their lives, even if it was my own best friend. Some of the military doctors I know are as right wing as they come but I would swear none would be involved in such atrocity. It should also be pointed out that if there isn’t informed consent, physician involvement, if there isn’t an IRB and adherence to the Belmont Report and the adopted protocols, it isn’t “research” it’s just plain torture. They can’t hide behind the research tag.
The CIA is not likely to be willing to share evidence of any alleged experimentation, since almost everything the CIA does is covered by “state secrets.”
Nifty trick, no?
Reverby was on democracynow for the full hour this morning. I understand she was also on NewsHour last night.
Perhaps no MDs would allow themselves to be involved with such atrocities, but what about psychologists? Jeff already touched on that.
Ya know, we have learned better over the years. The problemm I have now is what is going on in the current decade. The CIA needs oversight with meaning, not a curtain shaker with no face.
I’m not saying that it didn’t happen, just that I’m not aware of it happening and I’m in a better position to know than almost certainly anybody who writes or comments for FDL.
My sense is much of the medical experimentation has been privatized and the information is much more difficult to come by. See BT’s thread below and also Op Ed news The Cure Industry.
Keep up your excellent work, Jeff.
I would be delighted to assist you in any way that you might deem appropriate because I believe in you and I support what you’re doing.
The United States has to publicly account for all of the horrors for which it is responsible, including naming names and holding offenders accountable. Should it fail to do so, we will never have the peace of mind, pride, and self-assurance that comes from a transparent system that assures liberty and justice for all.
M
As for Psychologists, I have no idea but a PHYSICIAN has to be involved in all human subject research except such research as demographic research or behavior that can be observed without consent, (like driving patterns, audience behaviors, etc). A physician must be included on any Independent Review Board. Otherwise, like I said, it’s not “research” and cannot be treated as such in a legal setting. Ever.
They still have to be overseen by an Independent Review Board. Period. Whether board members can be corrupted by money is a different matter and I’m not attempting to evaluate that aspect. Just pointing out what the law requires.
The world would be spared a lot of misery if the organization were completely disbanded. It never did serve a useful function.
Who says it has to be American doctors doing the experiments? The CIA can recruit local doctors to do their dirty work. Few people know what goes on at a black ops site in Waziristan.
What we already know with regard to torture and the use of LSD and Haldol, it is feasible that the American Military and/or the CIA would not be disinclined to perform medical experiments on “the other”.
Don’t look for any information (or phony apologies) regarding the CIA-conducted atrocities of the Cheney-Bush era until about 2050. That appears to be the standard methodology: bury the info until the potential plaintiffs have suffered their horrible, untimely deaths, and most of the potential defendants have passed away peacefully in their stately mansions. That’s how they “handled” the deliberate release of radiation from Hanford (to see the effects upon downwind American citizens), mkultra, and other government sponsored crimes against humanity.
Can we expect to get the final answer to this mystery when this potential defendent has passed away peacefully?
I don’t know where to begin to answer your comments. One could start with your anecdotal reference, as your own experience is insufficient to evaluate the totality of the problems with research protections. I have been studying this a great, great deal of late, and I can tell you these protections are paper-thin, as least as regards the government. While your every-day researcher groans under the demands of IRB review, the classified work goes by with barely a look. Have you ever heard of the Cohen memorandum regarding classified research? If you have, then I’ll be able to believe that you at least have the bona fides you suggest you do (and don’t worry, it’s not a classified document, and I have a copy). I’ll be writing more about that document later (the rest of you will have to wait).
As for ethics and laws, as an article in a 1996 issue of the British Medical Journal but it, “ethical issues of informed consent in guidelines for human experimentation were recognised as early as the nineteenth century.” As early as 1898, In 1898 Albert Neisser, the discoverer of the gonococcus, was fined by the Prussian Royal Disciplinary Court for injecting serum from patients with syphilis into patients (mostly prostitutes) who were admitted to his clinic for other medical conditions.
In 1953, the Wilson Directive was grudingly adopted by the military in order to operationalize the Nuremburg Codes within DoD. But there was an internal struggle against them, and the Directive itself was kept classified for over 20 years!
And the issue with ethical experimentation today? You do not address the serious problem of the loosening of human subject protections that was noted by National Book Award winning author Harriet Washington (see her book Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present). You do not address the issue of waivers for informed consent, a hot button issue at least for government research, as I will be reporting more on very, very soon.
You claim things are better since the Belmont Report, but really there is article after article claiming things are not good, and really there is very little accountability. The fact that the Office for Human Subject Protections can refer back to the allegedly offending agency (the CIA) a request for investigation shows how toothless the system really is. It has taken decades for most of the scandals to come out, and the government has fought them all the way (as has private industry).
As noted in a 2004 article in the Annals of Internal Medicine said in regards to oversight of human participants research: “The oversight of research involving human participants is widely believed to be inadequate.”
When it comes to classified research, research under need-to-know, Special Access Program protection, the protections of participants are nil. The detainees exist in a foggy legal limbo, and while I know of stories that could be told or amplified, the attorneys for the detainees cannot tell the stories they heard because what they hear is classified. Some detainees who have left the system have spoken out on what was done to them, but their stories have mostly been ignored, and others stay silent for fear of their lives.
I could say much more, and there is much more to be said and revealed. Readers won’t have to wait long, as a major expose by Jason Leopold and myself should be coming out in the next few weeks. (I know I’ve been promising this for a month or two now, but I think the pub date is pretty secure now.)
Yes, precisely my point. And thanks for mentioning the radiation experiments, a huge scandal in the 1990s, which were conducted by the Department of Energy (and its precursors), the Department of Defense, the CIA, etc. There is so much evidence of a pattern of behavior by this government that if the U.S. of A. were in court as a repeat offender, one might really be able to raise an argument for indefinite detention. (Sly irony there.)
Would you care to talk about the procedures for a waiver of informed consent? It’s in the common rule regulations.
Jeff thank you for staying on this story and the history of illegal experimentation. Have you been invited by any msm outlets to come on to their programs to discuss these illegal activities?
As I sad Jeff, I don’t KNOW if any of that went on, just that I’m not AWARE of any of it going on. Since your piece never even mentioned safeguards, as if they didn’t exist, I thought that your readers should be aware that there are SUPPOSED to be safeguards in place and that if there were not, the perpetrators cannot then in a LEGAL context, hide behind the auspices of a “research study”. My overarching point was that IF the protocols weren’t followed, it wasn’t “research”, it was torture or something else. A great many of the things that you discuss, (Guatemala, “Project Shad”, the CIA experiments with LSD), were all carried out PRIOR to a legal framework being put into place. Once again, I’m not attempting to evaluate the ethics of these studies, merely pointing out that you can’t pass a law and then prosecute people under that law whose actions took place before the law was made.
EDIT And this is important since you seem to feel that I’m defending these people’s actions or possible actions. I am NOT defending them or saying it didn’t happen. I thought I made that clear in my original comments but apparently it wasn’t clear enough. I AM NOT DEFENDING OR DENYING THAT THESE THINGS TOOK PLACE. Is that better now?
Thanks for the gut-wrenching news, Jeff. And that’s as firm and respectful a rebuttal as I’ve seen in a long time.
Let’s not forget, small pox-infested blankets were given to the natives by our fledgling government. No need to experiment, the horrendous effect was well known.
Two things: a) in what world do the people who condone and cover up these atrocities spend most of their time, a mechanical one, or an organical one? And b) what about the psy ops?
That right there, that Kissingerian reduction of the cosmos to a mechanism which we must master with the application of ever greater leverage, is our larger problem.
That makes of all of us mere Newtonian automata, not humans with inalienable rights. In 1956 or 57, the APA adopted that bizarro worldview as the basis for the type of psychology they would champion, despite Robert Oppenheimer's warning not to base psychology on a physics that had been outdated, that was no longer there. But, as we've seen, they did it anyway. (See Kinget, G. M. (1979). Objective psychology: a case of epistemological sleight-of-hand. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 11, 83-96.)
It's the weaponization of our fair science. Medical experiments leave evidence. What about psy ops?
Hasn't the gov't been conducting similar experiments on us (eg, Operation Bluebird, the Pentagon Pundits, etc.)? Scott Horton remarked on this back in February '09 in Pentagon Targeted and Mistreated Journalists, AP Head Charges:
How are the lessons learned in our black sites throughout our history applied here at home? (Waterboarding came home from our “civilizing” efforts in the Philippines, IIRC.)
When staged events manipulate public opinion, is that an experiment, or a well developed treatment? And what about the induction of “laboratory psychosis,” driving your subjects crazy?
By resorting to mechanical means to treat us organical beings, substituting ever greater leverage for suasion, it seems clear to me that TPTB have gotten all of us into the worst of all Sorcerer’s Apprentice situations.
I certainly understand that you are not defending or denying these actions. I did mention the failure to use accepted measures of informed consent in the article, and this more than once. Perhaps I could have gone more into the issue of the protections that are supposed to be in place, but then I would have been ethically bound myself to explain why those procedures have been so insufficient and ill-used over and over again, and that would have made a blog piece here too long. The issue is discussed in the PHR report referenced and linked in the article.
If you have worked for or on an IRB, then I can understand your frustration for my not referencing that system. But when it comes to governmental research, that system is, in my opinion, broken. But to make that case will take some exposition, and I promise you, I’m working on that story anyway.
Your reference to a “legal framework,” btw, appears, no doubt unintentionally, to have the effect of minimizing the “bad science” that took place, where long understood ethical guidelines were broken, and often with malice aforethought.
The foundation of this country was laid upon the genocide of indigenous peoples and slavery. That’s 500+ years of history regarding this continent that you are asking this country to now deal with and I am all for it. There’s no better time than the now. The honesty will save our collective sanity and the massive positive paradigm shift will lift us all in a way we cannot even imagine from our present perspective … it will be ALL GOOD.
Both Thomas Kiely and Peter B. Collins have had me on their radio shows, but I’ve never been asked by anyone else. A colleague of mine spent some time lobbying Amy Goodman to have me on to speak about the Army Field Manual issues, but there appeared to be no interest there.
How about appearing on RT.com like Michael Whitney?
As a case in point, here’s then-Surgeon General using a war metaphor for medicine (from this morning’s Democracy Now! segment, The Dark History of Medical Experimentation from the Nazis to Tuskegee to Puerto Rico:
Using weapons against a pathogen? That’s nucking futs, but I’m sure Kissinger would approve.
Just as we don’t think of mental illnesses as “real” illnesses, we don’t think of psy ops as “real” medical experimentation.
In keeping with the title (“from past to present day”), what “weapons” are being deployed against us right now? What experiments sans treatments are we being subjected to?
Is this how the Pentagon’s influence operators see their work? Or the people who are administering the drone treatments to Pakistanis?
There are three words that define the complete perversion of the healing virtues of the scientific art of psychology into weaponry: “Shock and Awe.” In the light of this thread, isn’t that phrase telling?
Shock therapy, shock doctrine, shock and awe — What’s next? Whatever it is, I doubt there’s any penicillin for it, and further doubt they’d give it to us even if there was.
I hadn’t thought of them. I know Hank Albarelli was interviewed by them, and now that I think of it, they did cover (via Hank) the Pont-St.-Esprit story. I’ll keep them in mind.
I don’t complain (but will be honest about it when brought up) about media coverage for myself, only the issues I cover. That’s because I do this part-time and don’t have the time to do a lot of media anyway. My writing is often late at night. During the day, when most of the visual media would want me, I’m busy with work.
Well said.
Folks should contact Amy Goodman and other MSM outlets to encourage and request that they bring you on to discuss this issue.
Democracy Now contact info. It never hurts to ask.
http://www.democracynow.org/contact?to=8
Put in a request at NPR. Diane Rehm or Talk of the Nation, Fresh Air
http://help.npr.org/npr/includes/customer/npr/custforms/contactus.aspx
That was what I thought at the time, about “Shock and Awe,” Kind of a strange… militarily, unprofessional sounding name for the operation. Desert storm too, was metaphoric, so were many over the years but, this one reeks of… sinister.
The [namer] implicitly sees through the eyes of the subject of the [assault,] empathic, godlike, voyeurish, It shows some pathos of the perpetrator, that’s not cool.
Maybe, ah, torture is a sick relationship, like sadomasochism. How would you like it if the main power on earth got into the hands of them… evil doers.
Thanks, but I should note that Democracy Now has had on people like Steven Reisner talking about these issues, and Nate Raymond, Len Rubenstein, Stephen Soldz and others have had some media time on these stories.
The only exception is the issue of the Army Field Manual, about which I believe I could talk more expertly than anyone else. But then, there are others who could do a good job with that, too (like Matt Alexander), but the problem is the issue (not me) of the AFM and the current machinations around interrogations is not being covered by the media. Occasionally, some coverage appears from Spencer, Marcy, or Scott Horton — all good work! Of course, I’m working with Jason Leopold to address some of the Department of Defense-torture-interrogations-research issues in a more definitive way, and again, look for that article at Truthout real soon, with follow-ups here.
The role of racism in the mistreatment of research subjects, and medicine more generally, is a topic I believe that Hank Albarelli is working on, and I look forward to whatever this meticulous researcher uncovers.
The racist aspect of the Tuskegee and the Guatemalan syphilis experiments is quite apparent. The same goes with the experiments done upon military personnel, who are more highly composed of minorities than the population as a whole. Prisoners… ditto.
Great commentary. The Doolittle Report was a remarkable document, a real piece of twisted Americana, and very fateful for all of us as a nation. I wrote about it last February, in the context of the U.S. secret detention policies.
Excellent points, Margaret!
…and what an utterly appalling story, Jeff, but thanks for posting it.
I just now saw the rest of your exchange with Jeff… and I know that where I work, also in a research area, it is as you describe, but as for the DoD, I have no idea.
Must’ve missed that, thanks for pointing it out. As a student of comparative mythology, here’s where I think they’re getting that whole “embrace the Dark Side” shtick. It’s the mythology!
“Let not thy right hand what the left hand doeth,” is a biblical reference to the fundamental selfsameness of good and evil. “The lord giveth, and the lord taketh away,” is another.
It’s their way of saying, the gov’t embodies the impersonal, inhuman, everlasting Great Cosmic Mechanism. So, it is assumed, a different set of ethical principles applies to states than to persons. And not just the state, but the characteristics of the peculiar people who embody it become conflated with “the voice of authority.”
States kill all the time, even, to our horror, persons well known to be innocent. And it’s done to enforce the majesty of the peculiar social order that dominates today. It’s not about the justice, it’s about ritualized human sacrifice.
We experiment on them over there, the absolute Other, to save our sorry souls over here.
Take the disgusting term, “collateral damage.” It’s just an unfortunate side-effect of our treatment: firing remote-controlled rockets from thousands of miles away at people reduced to blurry images on screens; which nevertheless (we are led to believe) is targeted with surgical precision.
Compare that with BP’s efforts in the Gulf. Same thing: machining that mother of all bitches, Mother Nature, back under their remote-controlled mechanical thumbs.
Compare that with the use of co-located high-speed computers, using algorithms designed to steal faster than humanly possible, to manipulate stock markets.
And finally, compare that with how we’re hacking into human psyches in our black sites.
What’s the difference? It’s all about reducing organic life to mechanics, then applying ever greater leverage.
Kissinger spoke of the “Newtonian revolution.” What, he’s never heard of Einstein? We’re not point-instants in absolute vacuums, we’re seamless fields of vortices, self-filling and self-emptying.
That which we do to the least vortex of us, that we do unto all. IOW, for one potent example, it’s well known that even human mother’s milk is laden with the toxins we’ve dumped into the so-called “external environment.”
We can’t abuse any one “subject,” “detainee,” “prisoner,” or lake or river, mountain or ocean, or a portion of the atmosphere, or what not, without abusing us all.
Dubois said, the color line was the problem of his time; I dare say, the self/other line is the problem of ours.
I’m not apoplectic and think you raise good points, but I don’t understand how you feel that what was done was not “made a crime” until 1980? Things like poisening (even if you then administer an antidote) and battery (intentional unpermitted act causing harmful or offensive contact to another) has been a common law crime for long before the Guatemalan experiments.
So I must be getting a little lost on the research protocol aspects you and Jeff are discussing and what informed consent means/requires from those protocols (??) v. the common law crime of battery, which would definitely include intentionally engaging in a harmful or offensive contact with another without their consent.
Such a good discussion and as always superb reporting by Jeff.
For those who doubt or apologize in the name of national security or greater good, I promise given the power any government or other interest group can and will circumvent the best of laws.I certainly support and favor laws and constant vigilance and oversight. A nation that will torture will pay no attention to the ethics of medical experimentation.
But it is ultimately left to the professional and personal ethics of the actors. Such inhibitions have been an aspect of civilizations for thousands of years. Flawed and misinterpreted and distorted as they may be, holding each individual accountable, distinct from government demands is critical.
Finally I think it is important to understand the medical people who perpetrate these atrocities outside of the actions are not identifiable monsters with hairy hands. Read the later works of Mengle. A sensitive intellectual, idealist and aesthetic one would believe absent knowledge his history.
I personally knew one of the later directors of the Tuskegee studies. I would even say he and his family were friends for a number of years. A delightful civil good liberal person but he defended the studies to his death.
Finally, I have carried out potentially fatal human experimentation under the NCI and humbly say most if not all of us are capable of corruption.
Transparency and vigilance is critical. May seem minor but just today in the Augusta Chronicle from Savannah River the nuclear weapons plant. Cover up! Link.
Thanks to the reporters such as you Jeff.
To be very clear, all the research I did was under the strict NCI guidelines and professional and personal ethics.
You’re right, I meant to thank Margaret for sharing her invaluable first-hand experience.
Thanks, Sister! Your experience shows to me how far TPTB have deviated from the standard of old: acts that shock the conscience. The critique, IMO, is about substituting personal for comprehensive experience.
I live so close to the Washington state Navy base, Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, where the Navy taught the SERE techniques that were reverse-engineered by Mitchell Jessen & Assoc. (who themselves were based on the other side of the state, in Spokane), I can hear the tape-recorded trumpet sound at 8 AM and dusk. It’s less than 5 miles to the actual tank. I’m listening to F/A-18 “Growlers” and EA-6B “Prowlers” right now. My dad is a retired master chief who served on the admiral’s staff.
But I have no knowledge, etc., and the people I know I certainly wouldn’t suspect, etc. Nevertheless, it did happen within earshot of me.
My point being, not everyone on the teams supervised by self-confessed economic hit man John Perkins was an EHM, in fact,they were completely unaware. How would any of us know if we ever encountered a domestic covert op?
Precisely the peril presented by a national security state-within-a-state to a supposedly democratic republic. We lost control of it right from the start. Now, it belongs to a fanatical “Church of Our Man of Global Domination,” as Tom Englehardt called it:
All I can add is, et tu, Obama & the Democrats? Behind the scenes, when it comes to the NatSec state and its wars already under way and in planning, is there really any difference?
Who’s really in charge here? If an alien from a distant galaxy landed, could anyone take them to our leader?
In a context like this, it’s no wonder the perps of these covert experiments in horror have clean consciences.
Meanwhile, in the basements of many psychology departments, all kinds of other earthlings are enduring review board-approved medical and psychological experiments that certainly shock the conscience, and that’s all SOP, so what’s up with our selective horror here?
And it’s all the worse for “god-forsaken dirt” in which we plan on burying all manner of unearthly wastes. Our anthropocentrism couldn’t be more clear.
Beings of the cosmos, unite! We have nothing to lose but our names.
(OK, OK, I’ll get off the soapbox now.)
“But then, there are others who could do a good job with that, too (like Matt Alexander), but the problem is the issue (not me) of the AFM and the current machinations around interrogations is not being covered by the media. Occasionally, some coverage appears from Spencer, Marcy, or Scott Horton — all good work!”
Always appreciate someone who is willing to acknowledge all of the other work that people have done on such a critical issue. And you rightly point out the issue is not you or these other individuals but that the information get out there and justice be served.
Although would surely be great if Ed, CNN, Joe Scarborough, Maddow, Olberman someone would pick this up so a larger audience gets to hear about these horrific crimes committed. More spotlight
Excellent and thoughtful comments by everyone above. Yes, Mary, I think the basic laws should apply (battery, etc.), and much of the ethics apparatus while meant to help protect also contributes to the mystification of scientific research, which makes scientists into high priests of some absolute knowledge.
I do agree with this critique, knowbuddhau, which is in essence the Romantic critique of the Rational age (the 19th of the 18th century), and there’s nothing that William Blake didn’t say (for instance, and when you could understand him) that isn’t relevant today.
Thanks, too, Talking Stick, for noting your personal experience as it applies to these issues.
Thanks to Margaret, as well, for voicing her concerns and questions and speaking thereby, no doubt, for others who had the same thoughts or differences as well. Such great comments are the best payment for posting here, and also provide hope that these problems and others will get addressed by the society at large, and better solutions or ways of interacting with our fellow human beings embraced.
Metaphor, perhaps. It could also be related to something mystical/prophetic. Do you recall GWB talking about Gog & Magog? Shock & Awe could refer to Shekinah. Hebrew scholars have discussed the return of Shekinah being related to the mystical presence in the Tabernacle and that the presence of the Shekinah is to guide and protect Israel.
I came across the above when I researched “shock & awe” because, like you and others, I believed it had a much deeper meaning.
Shock and awe is primitive language common to sadists and is rapists. They seek awe and submission and adoration through overwhelming aggression. The Powell doctrine, if you will.
The lightening of his terrible swift sword.
thankyou gigi, I will look into that, and see what it means.
my immediate take is that this will lead to what the neocon/lib people are about.
Extreme right wing and christ fundementalism.
tabernacle seems like a mormon word to me… Not very authentic in the world at large, though gaining.
I know the neocon/lib people are into that. Ditto with the christian, religious right. I initially dismissed this possible relationship precisely because of that. When I first began researching “shock & awe” back in 2003 all roads took me there. Since then, I have found other resources that don’t take that tack. Much of my research was conducted in public & university libraries and not on the Internet.
My research is more from a Joseph Campbell perspective than that of a religious zealot. I am not at all religious. I eschew organized religion. Organized religion was created by man to control/dominate mankind.
Rapers and other bastards, get off on ( to see the fear and terror on their victim’s faces,) so… it isn’t too cool is it, that we are under rule by a kind of condensation of the worst of human kind, worst elements, and disfunctional creeps.
How the hell did this happen???
Who was,,, guckert servicing in the white house? did that story die already?
And what was slick really thinking??? I mean desacrate the f’n oval room??/ because he could….. !!!
From Sourcewatch:
There is certainly something atavistic and primitive about such a brute application of force. The word “awe” has religious or mystical connotations. The application of this doctrine by the U.S. government was, besides being a crime and terribly destructive, sick.
Wow! Thanks for this great discussion, Jeff and everyone.
Jeff,
Just in case you haven’t seen this yet:
Compensating Victims of Torture Should Be a Two-Way Street; Scott Horton; 10/7/10