Blogs

The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues

Posted by Soleilmavis on May 8, 2013 at 4:30am

The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues

http://www.bioethics.gov/

US presidential bioethics commission might be heard on the Obama's brain project. 2013

http://www.bioethics.gov/node/839

The President stated that he will ask the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues to examine the ethical, legal, and societal implications raised by this research initiative.  We stand ready to assist the President and will engage in discussions with the White House to determine how we can be most helpful in examining the ethical considerations of this important area.

Here is the link:

http://www.occupycorporatism.com/obama-brain-project-gov-study-on-how-to-better-control-our-minds/ 

It says:

Maintaining our highest ethical standards: Pioneering research often has the potential to raise new ethical challenges. To ensure that this new effort proceeds in ways that continue to adhere to our highest standards of research protections, the president will direct his Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues to explore all ethical, legal and societal implications raised by this research initiative and other recent advances in neuroscience.

This is a great oppurtunity for TIs to be heard, if they overcome discrediting, discarding, denial strategies as the case may be.

Past events

 

Targeted people in America give testimony Feb 28th, 2011

http://www.tvworldwide.com/events/bioethics/110228/default.cfm?id=13288&type=flv&test=0&live=0

The Commission and eleven invited experts participate in a roundtable discussion at the end of a day of presentations on the ethics of genetics and neuroimaging testing.

http://www.tvworldwide.com/events/bioethics/110228/default.cfm?id=13273&type=flv&test=0&live=0

 

Testimonies from Mind Control Victims at Bioethics Meeting in NYC 18-19 May,2011

https://peacepink.ning.com/profiles/blogs/testimonies-from-victims-at-4

https://peacepink.ning.com/profiles/blogs/testimonies-from-victims-at-3

https://peacepink.ning.com/profiles/blogs/testimonies-from-victims-at-2

https://peacepink.ning.com/profiles/blogs/testimonies-from-victims-at-1

https://peacepink.ning.com/profiles/blogs/testimonies-from-victims-at

 

From Eleanor White

Many thanks to Peter Rosenholm for this direct link to the video footage of the February 28/11  bioethics.gov  panel hearing in which some OS/EH targets managed to speak on the topic of human experimentation.  The targets of course were talking about involuntary human experimentation.

It's only an hour. 

All targets sounded good - and I'd like to comment that by only having a very short time to make your point, that shortness seems to make your spiel far better than if there was no time limit.

 

From Marc Burnell

Really enjoyed the meeting, got to see the familiar faces that I hear alot doing activism. We really let them have it. Lonnie Ali-wife of Muhammed Ali was down there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tE4yIgfWbfc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYpWpNmqD2k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTBo1dEBWQo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHlEYVz2zwY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxNAK8we0ac

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXddhosiCLA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fk5lMB72yN0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYpWpNmqD2k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tE4yIgfWbfc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvDTIQ0WhNQ\

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMciw4X7rx4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qF56ER83QYM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6jgpo6gxtk

 

More reports of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues by Deborah Dupre

http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/extreme-human-rights-abuses-through-experimentation-presented-to-obama-1-vid

 

From Bob S.

The Bioethics Commission is investigating only one narrow issue: Do present Federal Regulations and international standards adequately guard the health and well-being of participants in scientific studies supported by the Federal Government.

 

No one who testified at the first Bioethics Commission meeting dealt with the one and only question that the Commission is investigating. Everyone talked about harm suffered from abuse of electronic technology. No one tried to argue that the harm was coming from government. No one tried to argue that the harm was the result of government scientific studies. 

 

DEW technology is available to the public. So the Commission needs to know why the witnesses think that what they experience is coming from government. The commission is not investigating electronic harm that comes from outside government.

 

Neither is the Commission investigating intentionally harmful attacks that come from within govrnment. It is only investigating the narrow question of whether Federal Regulations and international standards are sufficient safeguards to protect participants in scientific studies supported by the Federal Government.  If you say or imply that government is attacking us instead of experimenting on us, you are taking yourselves outside the scope of the Commission's investigation.

 

How do those of you who will testify at the NY meeting plan to give testimony to convince the Committee that you and hundreds of other TI''s are involuntary participants in government scientific studies?  If you know how to do this, you should be sharing your strategy with others who plan to testify.  If you don't know how to do it, you should be asking a lawyer how you can present testimony in a way that will be relevant to the Commission's investigation.

 

I am a lawyer who can answer such questions, but instead of asking me how to present effective testimony, all the witnesses at the last meeting followed their own judgment and gave testimony that the Commission is justified in disregarding as being irrelevant to the Commission's investigation.

 

The Commission does not have the authority to investigate any issue other than the issue for which the President requested an investigation and report. Not one witness at the first meeting addressed the real issue that the Commission is investigating. All the witnesses wasted the opportunity that they were given at that meeting to provide the kind of evidence that the Commission could not ignore.

 

I have been giving legal strategy advice to TI's for 8 years. They have always ignored my legal advice and followed instead the advice of Anti-TI Activists who have told them to follow strategies that were useless and harmful. Any strategy that is useless is also harmful beause it prevents TI's from using time and energy in following a strategy that is effective.

 

Giving useless and irrelevant testimony to the Commission is useless and also harmful because it prevents you from taking advantage of the rare opportunity to speak directly to people who have the power to help us. All of the witnesses wasted the opportunity that they had at the last meeting.

 

Are the witnesses at the next meeting going to do the same? You have no hope of achieving a solution if you try to be your own lawyers instead of following the advice of a real lawyer who understands the TI situation.

 

Everyone outside the TI community understands the necessity of obtaining and following the best legal advice they can get. They pay a lot of money for good legal advice, but the results are worth the cost. Incredibly, TI's won't follow good legal advice even when they get it free. So they kept losing for 8 years when they could have been winning. And now they are setting themselves up to lose with the Bioethics Commission.

 

All the witnesses at the last Commission meeting followed a losing strategy by giving testimony that seemed irrelevant to the Commission's investigation. It looks like witnesses at the next meeting are going to do the same. You are blowing the great opportunity that the Commission is giving you.

Bob S

 

 

From Norman Rabin

May 9, 2011:  
A blue ribbon U.S. Government panel/commission, the federal Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments [ACHRE], studied their issue and related matters,  and concluded that: U.S. Citizens (and others) are not protected from: "Non-Consensual U.S. Classified Human Research/ Experimentation".  (October 1995, Final Report, of ACHRE)
  
Both Senator John Glenn's bill (S.193, 105th U.S. Congress, January 22, 1997, which never became law), and President Clinton's Administrative Order of governmentwide federal policy change (NOT completed before Clinton left office): "Strengthened Protections for Human Subjects of Classified Research", of March 27, 1997 [May 13, 1997, Federal Register], cited ACHRE's recommendation, and attempted to enact such, SPECIFIC protections.
 
The current Presidential Bioethics Commission does not have to re-invent the wheel.  But, they could simply confirm the Truthful, timely, need for that Policy Change to be re-started, and to be completed.
The Original Policy Change Notice was put forward as an 'Interim Federal Rule', which means that it would have taken effect immediately upon publication, and then, after a Public Comment Period, would have become finalized (hopefully intact and effective), an as 'Finalized Federal Rule'.

[[[     As lawyers know, and even as (believe it or not) law enforcement officers know: it is important that laws be
specific.
   IT IS NOT ENOUGH THAT THE U.S. Constitution outlaws what we are targeted by.
   IT IS NOT ENOUGH THAT Federal Rules generally require informed consent for Human Research/ Experimentation (but, there are loopholes, and exceptions, which President Clinton's order sought to close)
   IT IS NOT ENOUGH THAT a law outlaws the use of surveillance devices to acquire 'information where we have a reasonable expectation of privacy'.
   Rather, in practice,  when Classified matters are involved, normal procedures to stop a crime are not taken.
   That's why we need laws and federal regulations which specifically INCLUDE, or which specifically are designed for, (alleged or actual) Classified Human Research/ Experimentation.

   There needs to be a LEGAL OBLIGATION incumbent upon the U.S. Government to reasonably investigate
the alleged 'classified' wrongdoing.
   Law enforcement officers need specific laws to be able to take to a judge, to use as 'legal leverage' to investigate U.S. Intelligence, or U.S. military, facilities, operations, and persons.
   And, how many lawyers currently do litigation involving Secrecy? 
Answer:  not too many at all.  But, if a lawyer / lawfirm had a specific law saying 'Classified human Experimentation without informed consent is [strictly] prohibited', then at least they could try to cite that law, on behalf of a client, to cite that law to law enforcement, and/or to a federal judge, and try to assert that their client's specific rights be upheld.
    I wish that 'General laws', or the 'U.S. Constitution', or even the 'golden rule' or 'common law regarding assault and battery' were enough for us to be protected, but they aren't.
    That's why you had President Clinton [Yale Law grad, Constitutional law professor, Rhodes Scholar], trying to add a new type of, governmentwide, specific, federal regulation, specifically protecting citizens from Classified Human Research / Experimentation, without Informed Consent - NO EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED.  ]]]

Web-references:
    
-   U.S. Senator Glenn’s bill on Human Experimentation  (S.193, 105th U.S. Congress),  can be found at:
             “http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:S.193:”.              
        
          [   U.S. Senator Glenn’s Introductory Remarks [of January 22, 1997] in proposing S.193 appear at:
                    http://www.raven1.net/mcf/s193ntro.htm  ]. 

          President Clinton’s March 27, 1997 Memorandum/ Administrative Order, “Strengthened Protections for Human Subjects of Classified Human Research”,  [Federal Registger, May 13, 1997, pp. 26367-26372], which attempted to institute a governmentwide Ban on Non-Consensual U.S. Classified Human Research, appears
at:                 http://fas.org/sgp/clinton/humexp.html .

          U.S. Representative Kucinich’s bill to Ban Space Weapons (H.R.2977, 107th U.S. Congress), can be
found at:                “http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.2977:”.
           [  U.S. Representative DeGette most recent:  bill concerning Human Experimentation (H.R. 1715 [of March
2009], 111th U.S. Congress), which includes a proposed Ban on federal funding of classified human research;,  can be found at:                     " http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1715 ":.]
           
            [ The October 1995 final Report of the federal Advisory Committee on Human Radiations Experiments [ACHRE], which is cited in each of:   Senator Glenn’s S.193,  and, President Clinton’s March 27, 1997 Administrative Order;,  including Recommendation 15 (which includes their recommending “the adoption of a federal policy 
requiring the informed consent of all human subjects of classified research and that this requirement not be subject to exemption or waiver”), appears at:                http://hss.energy.gov/healthsafety/ohre/roadmap/achre/report.html ,
with Recommendation 15 appearing at:                         http://hss.energy.gov/healthsafety/ohre/roadmap/achre/chap18_3.html   .]

From Soleilmavis

I think that The Bioethics Commission is still a chance for victims to get their voices heard by government.

Prepare your case summary with supporting documents, write to them and try to take a chance to attend the meeting.

 

Bioethics Comission Boards Meeting ....

https://peacepink.ning.com/profiles/blogs/registration-info-on-bioethics

 

More information about Bioethics Commission, please go to following 'Comments' of this post

 

Tags: bioethics, comission
E-mail me when people leave their comments –
Follow

You need to be a member of Peacepink3 to add comments!

Join Peacepink3

Comments

  • Soleilmavis September 16, 2011 at 4:46am
    The Report from The 2011 Presidents Commission on Bioethical Issues
    Posted: 13 Sep 2011 02:14 PM PDT
    From 1946-1948, a team of medical researchers in the United States Public Health Service intentionally infected more than 1,300 Guatemalan prison inmates, psychiatric patients, commercial sex workers and soldiers with sexually transmitted diseases. The team also used children in diagnostic testing. Done completely without consent, their experiments resulted in a living hell for many of their subjects.
    Today the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues delivered a report to President Obama that details this shameful chapter in American medical history.
    The Commission concludes that those involved in this research violated the ethical standards not only of our time but also of theirs. As is evident by their own internal communications—and the fact that just a few years earlier they obtained the informed consent of prisoners in Terre Haute, Indiana before conducting experiments there—these doctors also were morally culpable: they knew there was a moral requirement to obtain informed consent. But they chose not to ask for it in Guatemala. And they went to great lengths to keep their experiments as secret as possible while still obtaining funding from higher-level authorities who should have disapproved the experiments.
    Why should we today care about ill conceived experiments that took place some 60 years ago? First, by shining light on this dark chapter of our history, we honor the victims. We acknowledge that American doctors denied Guatemalans the respect they deserved as fellow human beings and violated their most basic human rights.
    Second, we need to learn essential practical as well as ethical lessons from the Guatemalan experiments so that nothing like this happens again. The United States now has many more rules and regulations governing medical experiments on human subjects than it had in the 1940′s and 50′s. But can we be confident that all researchers actually recognize the implications of these rules when they conduct their experiments at home and abroad?
    The doctors and their superiors who approved the Guatemalan experiments obtained the informed consent of human subjects in the Indiana prison, but they applied a double standard when they left the country and shielded themselves from critical scrutiny. Yet every ethical principle that applies to how American researchers treat human subjects in this country also governs how they should treat human subjects everywhere. The first sentence of the Nuremberg Code, written in 1947 in the wake of medical experiments conducted by Nazi doctors, could not have been clearer in stating that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.”
    Informed consent is necessary but not enough. Sound scientific research demands that, even with informed consent, researchers not inflict harms disproportionate to prospective benefits. In Guatemala, doctors inoculated people with sexually transmitted diseases before completing the diagnostic experiments needed to determine the actual effects of the inoculations. Research design and record keeping were haphazard at best. When in April 1947, a doctor publicly noted (in t
  • Soleilmavis May 29, 2011 at 8:33am
    More Victims of Experiments Go to Bioethics Panel
    Keith Johnson is an independent journalist and the editor of “Revolt of the Plebs,” an alternative news website that can be found at RevoltofthePlebs.com .
    By Frank Whalen
    On May 18-19 in New York City, the President’s Commission on Bioethics convened once again. Hundreds of people registered to speak about their firsthand experiences as unwilling test subjects of ongoing government  experiments.
    However, only 20 were selected to speak; they were each given a paltry 90 seconds to summarize stories that covered a lifetime of abuse.
    AFP previously reported on targeted individuals speaking before the Bioethics Commission at its Washington, D.C. meeting in March, and this latest forum resulted in more obstructionism.
    This reporter spoke with several individuals present in NYE. They mentioned supposed emails sent to  people granting them time to speak, only to discover they had never been sent. Others weren’t permitted to speak, only to learn later that they could have spoken. One eyewitness described the disorganization as “a deliberate effort to confuse the participants in an attempt to
    quash     this information.”
    Aside from AFP, media outlets consider this stuff untouchable. Participants recounted how, at the most recent NYE hearing, “The room was dismissed for a break and then we were called back to speak. With the exception of two [reporters], the rest did not  return.”
    Many details were given from those who have been repeatedly victimized. Some people spoke about gang stalking where strangers speak to individuals about  personal matters that they should not know about. Such occurrences could be coincidental, but as they happen several times a day, even while traveling across state lines, it suggests that surveillance is being used.
    When AFP asked about the purpose of this harassment, it was suggested that the perpetrators want to breed paranoia and fear in their victims. Others mentioned a connection to InfraGuard.
    According to its website, InfraGuard is “an association of businesses, academic institutions, state and local law enforcement agencies and other participants dedicated to sharing information and intelligence to prevent hostile acts against the United States.” Utilizing citizen spies and corporate partners in the private sector would certainly lead to comprehensive scrutiny on anyone.
    It’s clear that allowing a subject to know how thoroughly they were being watched would make them suspicious of anyone with whom they came into contact.
    This tactic seems useful, since the targeted individual can then be easily dismissed asmentally unsound, preventing them from obtaining legal protection or subjecting them to incarceration and forced medical procedures.
    It’s easy to see how these psychological operations are useful to the elite. As technologies are tested and results gathered, the stealthy evolution of governmentsanctioned mind control programs like MK-ULTRA could be used, amazing though this may sound, to create thousands of “Manchurian candidate” automatons that become the domestic terrorists officials are always warning us about.
    During AFP’s conference call, one woman identified as Leslie claims she discovered devices implanted in her body with no recollection of the surgery. She mentioned presenting visual proof to the commission.
    The President’s Commission on Bioethics acknowledges, and even seems remorseful about, experiments perpetrated against American citizens.
    Unfortunately, the media and elected representatives are unwilling to admit that these supposedly dissolved programs evidently still exist, and that they’re still harming innocent victims.
  • Soleilmavis May 23, 2011 at 11:04am
    FFCHS Participates in the Fifth Meeting of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues

    Non-consensual government experimentation is a daily reality for many thousands of victims in the US and worldwide. Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance (FFCHS), a human rights organization, hopes to have this issue addressed at an upcoming presidential commission meeting in New York City.
    http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/5/prweb8437614.htm

    Cincinnati, OH (PRWEB) May 18, 2011
    It is a rare opportunity when people in the electromagnetically-targeted community can speak directly to someone, anyone that is in a position to positively affect their situation. So the hopes of multitudes from the human rights group, Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance(FFCHS), seem to be riding on their participation in an upcoming meeting of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues in New York City this Wednesday, May 18, 9 am at the Warwick Hotel on 65 W 54th Street.
    The topic for this meeting is ‘Human Research Protections’ where the commission will be examining “federal standards regarding human subjects protection in federally-funded scientific studies,” according to their website.
    The momentum is building in this small section of social activism for the simple reason that although targeted individuals face daunting struggles in almost every area of their lives: physically, emotionally, psychologically, medically, socially, financially, neurologically and more, no agency, organization, or
    institution so far will acknowledge or address the claims of its victims, which further adds to their burden.
    “We have been calling this issue ‘the secret holocaust’ because we believe that remote mind control programming is being carried out on many, many thousands of people nationwide by the military and
    intelligence agencies using classified technologies that can remotely access and manipulate an individual mentally and physically whether they are aware of it or not,” says Derrick Robinson, president of FFCHS.
    From 1946 – 1948 the United States non-consensually infected Guatemalan prisoners and mental patients in a medical trial for syphilis. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11457552) The recent revelation of this atrocity sparked the creation of the Bioethics Commission by President Obama as it holds its fifth public meeting, which will be particularly marked by the scheduled appearance of Rafael Espada, M.D., the Vice-President of Guatemala, on May 18th.
    While the commission grapples with the question of whether those who participate in federally-funded human test trials are protected, there continue to be those who find they are victims of non-consensual federally-funded human test programs. What of them? Even Members of Congress have been subjected to non-consensual ‘Psy-Ops’ mind control operations by the US Army, as reported by Rolling Stone magazine in an article on February 23rd of this year, and denounced in a letter to Congress by the ACLU
    as reported by "The New Political" of Ohio State University.
    The letter states: “The Rolling Stone article reports that U.S. Army officers assigned to an “information operations” cell allege they were directed by their commanders to help them “secretly manipulate the U.S. lawmakers without their knowledge” and plant ideas “inside their heads” so they would provide more U.S. troops to Afghanistan.” (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/another-runaway-general-army-deploys-psy-ops-on-u-s-senators-20110223)
    Silent Sound technologies that subliminally influence human thought and emotion were developed in the early 90’s by Dr. Oliver Lowery of Norcross Georgia. They are now in deployment by the US government and “was used throughout Operation Desert Storm (Iraq) quite successfully," according to Edward Tilton, the president of Silent Sounds, Inc., in a letter dated December 13, 1996. (http://www.newsfinder.org/site/more/electronic_mind_control/)
    From Rolling Stone: "My job in psy-ops is to play with people’s heads, to get the enemy to behave the way we want them to behave," says Lt. Colonel Michael Holmes, the leader of the IO unit, who received an official reprimand after bucking orders. "I’m prohibited from doing that to our own people. When you ask
    me to try to use these skills on senators and congressman, you’re crossing a line."
    FFCHS believes many lines are being crossed here in the US daily. The organization was formed to address human rights violations brought about by the abuses of what it believes are non-consensual federally-funded mind control research programs. It seeks a halt to such programs and justice for those who are their victims. FFCHS is therefore requesting a vigilant and uncompromising report to the President by the Bioethics Commission of these issues and further requests congressional hearings and an investigation into the covert activities of all U.S. intelligence agencies.
This reply was deleted.