AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT COMPLICITY IN CHILD KIDNAPPING and BIOCHEMISTRY
- From: "federationwarrior" <james.kirkbond@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 14 Jan 2006 09:32:17 -0800
WARNING: THESE ARE PROJECTED ANSWERS BUT ACTUAL BIOCHEMISTRY CHANGES
IN THE FATHER.
Projected answers:
BY HARVEY WEINSTIEN AS TO THE VIOLATIONS BY AUSTRALIAN CHILD VANISHING
TACTICS ON THE FATHER.
CHILD MINOR IN QUESTION IS NARA SINGHDEREWA 3.6 YEARS OLD IN AUSTRALIA.
My name is Harvey Weinstein, I'm the Associate Director of the Human
Rights Center at the University of California, Berkeley and a Clinical
Professor in the School of Public Health.
Great. I'd like to start off by asking you about the whole notion of
mind control. I know you have had a great deal of exposure to the
concept due to your own personal experience. But do you remember a time
before you had any notion of the fact that governments had been
experimenting in the realm of mind control? Do you remember that time?
Context that time with Nara's father.
Sure. That was prior to 1979.
What happened in 1979?
In 1979 I read a review of a book in The New York Times Magazine. It
was a book by John Marks called The Search For The Manchurian
Candidate, in which he revealed the secret CIA-funded experimentation
program called MK-ULTRA. And, it was in the review if that book that I
realized for the first time that my father had been a victim of that
particular program.
Now, it's interesting because obviously your father would have had a
medical history, upon which was based very standard clinical
assumptions about his condition. How did it become clear that MK-ULTRA
was linked to your father, that he was not suffering from some natural
phenomena? And how did your whole investigation move forward from
there? Well, my father do you want the whole story? No, you can just
give us an abbreviated version.
Basically I had become a psychiatrist to find out what had happened to
my father. And, even though by 1979 I had finished medical school, done
psychiatric training and practiced as a psychiatrist, I still had never
quite figured out the pieces of the puzzle as to why someone who one
month was relatively OK, within 3 months after that, was someone
who's mind didn't work anymore. And, the realization that there was
something else going on that was over and above what I would find in
the psychiatric literature, sort of opened my eyes to the fact that
there was that it was a much more complicated explanation that I had
ever dreamed of before.
Formulating from your mind as a psychiatrist, what do you think the
intention and goal was of those who authored these programs? I mean,
are they inherently anti-humane in their nature or is there a
scientific desire for truth which precedes our humanity for each other?
Do you know what I'm saying?
Yes, I do. I think that the goal for those people who planned the
program was very straightforward. It was an attempt to figure out a way
to interrogate people and to develop procedures so that people
couldn't hide anything, in terms of interrogation of any kinds of
secrets. Secondly, that it was an attempt to learn how people's
behavior could be changed so that they would do what someone was
bidding them to do, in particular, a government organization. Those
were the people working for the CIA, Army or Air Force Intelligence.
For the physicians or the scientists involved, I think it was probably
a complex series of motivations. One was that there were people who
felt that they wanted to learn as much as they could about how to
change human behavior. That, in Ewen Cameron's case, it was an
attempt to understand schizophrenia. That if he could develop these
methods that would wipe people's brains clean and teach them new ways
of being, then he would probably be well on his way to win a Nobel
Prize. For other people it was an opportunity, at some level, to
exercise power over others and I can't tell you about any particular
individual but it would seem to me that given the nature of some of the
experiments, including what were called terminal experiments, there
were major power issues involved over controlling someone else.
In reference to your father's case, in particular, what were some of
the forms of technology that were deployed, mind science technologies,
that you know of?
Orwellin terms of "technology"--
I mean, that's a harsh word.
Yeah. Basically, he was using at the time, what was sort of high tech
sound techniques. He was using multiple kinds of loop recorders to
force people to listen to recorded messages 24 hours a day, for weeks
on end, with multiple loud speakers and pillow speakers, and stuff that
had not been done before. The other, I suppose, technologies that were
used was excessive shock treatments with the latest in equipment to
basically destroy people's thinking patterns.
So now, when they would use these types of de-patterning, I think they
called it what was it? De-Patterning and Psychic Driving. Can you
explain, clinically, what happens to the mind when you have this
recurring pattern driven into someone's mind?
No, I can't explain. What I can tell you is that if you use massive
shock treatment, and if you give people massive doses of drugs, such as
PCP, or Mescaline, or Amphetamines, or LSD, or the other things that
Cameron used I would suspect that you destroy the normal physiological
pathways of synaptic transmission. And basically what,
clinically-what you see is someone who is an organic preparation,
they can't think. Their mind - if you want to think of it in terms
of a spirit, or soul - is gone. You just have a physiological
preparation which can be fed, which can urinate and defecate, but an
ability to motivate, to think, to act in any kind of purposeful fashion
is wiped out. So basically what Cameron was trying to do was to turn
the mind, turn the brain into a tabula rasa, something that he could
etch his own programming onto. In point and fact, it wasn't
successful for lots of different reasons. But, that was what he was
trying to do.
Now I guess there are lots of theories about whether Cameron was
contacted by the CIA what time they came together and where that
relationship emanates from. What do you think the CIA's elemental
desire was? What could the intelligence community have gained from this
type of research?
Well, ultimately they didn't gain anything, that's the bottom line.
What they thought they were going to gain at that time was this ability
to control people and also to learn how to protect their own agents
against control by others. Those were the two major goals for these
services. And it wasn't just the CIA, it was the military
intelligence in the United States, it was military intelligence in
Canada, it was intelligence in Great Britain, and other countries as
well. This was in the, you know, the midst of the Cold War. It was
after the Korean War and during a time when about 8,000 American POWS
had given false confessions, and there was a concern that Communists
would be able to take over our people. So that was the goal. But it was
very clear, very soon, that what the Communists had done was basically
develop psychological methodologies using peer pressure, in which
people were so debilitated and so afraid, that they would do anything
to escape from a very negative situation. But the CIA didn't pay much
attention to that and continued to look for these drugs in other sort
of major traumatic interventions for years and years afterwards.
Let me ask you, was there a point in our history I guess we look at the
history and this is outside of the realm of just clinical--but was
there was a point in military research where it went from weapons
against civilians, that were like bombs, artillery to point where they
moved to a psychological warfare? Do you think this was the dawning of
that age, or do you think we've always had a fascination,
psychologically, with control?
You have multiple questions there. Um, first of all, if you look at
military operations in this century. At the beginning of this century
wars were 90% of the casualties of war were military. And, in current
wars, 90% of the casualties are civilian. So there has been, over the
last 100 years, a real shift towards who is affected by war. That's
one thing. Secondly, the phenomenon of psychological operations, Psy
Ops. I think that that is something that, again, probably has evolved
since - primarily since the second World War. I think it was there to
some degree earlier, but it has certainly been the case in guerrilla
operations, which are the major wars that we have in the world
nowadays, and insurgency operations and rebel movements. It certainly
was true with respect to the Cold War where there was increasing
attention paid to the use of intelligence operatives, and attempts to
find out what other people knew. Remember it was Harry Truman, I think,
in 1947 who set-up the forerunner of the Central Intelligence Agency
for the first time, and it was only in the early 1940s that the United
States Government, for the first time, became aware that it didn't
have an intelligence-gathering apparatus and that's when the Office
of Strategic Services was set up. So that, it's relatively recent in
terms of American history, although I suspect that well, I know that
people have been interrogating people for hundreds and hundreds of
years.
Right.
People certainly know about the Spanish Inquisition, for example.
Just for historical reasons, can you just give us a brief statement
about who Ewen Cameron was and what was happening at the Allan Memorial
Institute in Montreal?
Sure. Ewen Cameron was probably the foremost psychiatrist of his time
in the 1950s. He was Chair of Psychiatry at McGill University and
Director of Allen Memorial Institute. He was, at one time, President of
the American Psychiatric Association, the Canadian Psychiatric
Association, the World Psychiatric Association, and others. So he was
one of the preeminent psychiatric physicians during that era. He was
someone who was very concerned about schizophrenia and about providing
mental health services to people. So, at one level, the origins of his
interests were very strongly positive in terms of aiding his patients.
He also was one of the people who was called as a witness during the
Nuremberg trials. He evaluated Rudolph Hess, and came to the
conclusion, among others, that Hess was sane and competent to stand
trial. However, in a series of papers that he wrote after that, one of
his conclusions was that social and behavioral scientists must take
control of these disordered personalities and the people who have the
capability of inflicting danger on others, such as Nazis. In other
words, that social and behavioral scientists should have a say in
basically the reordering of the world. What he took from the Nuremberg
trials, I think, was a kind of a sense of power and, based on
expertise, which I think led to some of the misuses of power that he
used later on.
Let's talk about, again, sort of bring us up to date What was the
evolution of his research, his anti-humane research that occurred at
Allan Memorial and his connection to the CIA?
Well, I think the evolution of his research, as I said, was based on
his desire to cure schizophrenia. And, the story goes, he was actually
taping a session with a patient on day, a woman, and began to play it
back to her. And, as he played it back to her she got more and more
anxious until she bolted out of his office and he thought to himself:
gee, if he makes people listen to what they say maybe he can force them
to change their behaviors. So he tried this and discovered that he
couldn't force people to sit in the room and listen and then he had
to figure out a way to make them listen. And that led to the
development of this process called De-Patterning. In other words, if
you destroy someone's brain, if you, as he said, develop a tabula
rasa, then they would be forced to listen to these messages, these
recordings. Then he decided that it was important to try to move beyond
just a tape recording of the patient to, sort of, multiple messages and
different kids of ways and he became more and more sophisticated at
doing that and, in fact, one of his papers refers to a phenomenon
called "group pressure," which, again, was something that people
were becoming aware of as a result of the Korean War and what had
happened with Communist POWs. That there was a phenomenon in which
brainwashing could occur based on, sort of, the group that one was
involved with. So when you begin to look at his experimental
procedures, you begin to see more and more of a relationship to what
was becoming common knowledge as a result of the Communist brainwashing
techniques.
When do you think the US intelligence services became linked to him?
Um, I think that the grant that he got, I can't remember exactly, it
think it's in the mid-50s, early 50s. And the way that happened was
John Gittinger, who was a psychologist working for the CIA as part of
the MK-Ultra program, read one of Cameron's papers about - I think
it was the one on psychic driving, or it may have been the one on
de-patterning - but in any case, he read about it and he contacted
Ewen Cameron, again, in the 50s, and that began the process whereby the
CIA's front organization began to fund those procedures.
Now, a lot of people have connected the historical roots of mind
control and the modern application of mass marketing techniques like,
Christopher Simpson who wrote "The Science of Coercion" - and the
idea that there is, literally, this "science of coercion" which
emanates from the Nazis. Obviously not originating with the Nazis since
most basic organized religion is a form of brainwashing and mass mind
control but through the Nazi propaganda techniques. Which then comes
back to America in the form of advertising culture. Do you see modern
day media with all its repetitive messaging as a form of psychic
driving? Do you think that there is a link between them?
Well, I'm not - I wouldn't say I'm anywhere near an expert, at
all, in sort of the social psychology of 'selling'. It is clear
that commercials work because people buy goods based upon what they
read about. I think that the work that Cameron and others was doing is
more akin to torture than it is to - and brainwashing, I think, is
torture - than it is to this sort of broad movement of selling goods
and materials. There was a paper that was written by Farber, Harlowe
and West very interesting in the early 1950s and basically it was a
paper that described what it was that the Communists did in their
brainwashing techniques and it depended on three different variables:
debility, dependency and dread. If you put someone in a position of
being disabled by not feeding them, or not allowing them to sleep, or
overwhelming them with sound, if you put them in periods of darkness,
if you make them dependent on you as the jailer, or the interrogator so
that they, if they, if they want to go to the bathroom they have to get
your permission to do that. And if you do this in a way where they
can't predict from one minute to another what is going to happen
next, so they're always dreading. There's no consistency to
what's going to happen, anybody can be can be put in a position of
being open to brainwashing, that was sort of a seminal paper. And
it's very interesting that a couple of years ago I was asked to look
at some of the material from the School of the Americas, and some of
the interrogation materials that they had in the manuals, and what I
found in there was that it echoed exactly, word for word, what the
Farber, Harlowe & West article said, and this is, you know, forty years
later. So the striking thing is that much of this material has
permeated torture techniques, interrogation techniques around the world
up to the present day.
That's amazing because, really, what you talk about there, it really
applies to some of the assertions made by the Project Monarch people,
where there's food deprivation, sleep deprivation, and they're made
highly suggestible. Remind me what Project Monarch - Project Monarch
was is a mind control research project that emanates from MK-Ultra, but
is based around aspects of Himmler's research in Nazi Germany. What
Himmler actually discovered was that children who had been exposed to
major forms of trauma - sexual trauma before the age of 5, like
pedophilia, or ritual trauma, like in satanic cults, these children
were - a.) they had higher abilities because their survival
mechanisms were enhanced, so they could see better, they were stronger.
And these, in some histories, were considered to be the 'master
race' that Hitler was actually looking for because they were, these
people were from the north where they had very inbred families. And b)
that these children were perfect candidates for compartmentalization
due to the mind's defense to the trauma they were enduring. And so
anyway, this emanates to modern day when the US Government, in a very
covert project, came to look for children of pedophiles to see if they
could find the same aspects-
I remember that.
And this one woman, Cathy O'Brien, was, in fact, 'recruited' out
of a family run child porn ring. Yeah, now, has anybody ever <>I
remember hearing about this - has anybody ever actually found
documents that document something called "Project Monarch." I
don't think there are any specific documents with a Monarch
letterhead on them. Because it was a covert, illegal operation but we
have, we've got an incredible history of her, particularly with her
and Gerald Ford, her with Reagan. She was involved in Monarch was
developed for the covert ops aspect of the CIA. In other words, people
who were involved in, let's say drug smuggling and prostitution who
they wanted to be kept in check. Control of these individuals could be
maintained through trauma-based mind control and compartmentalization
of the mind. That's why they talk about satanic cults being actually
used as networks for drug smuggling because the ritual-based there's
a ritualistic, trauma-based control in it. Now, it gets into this whole
thing that echoes much of what you have said about the use of sound and
those elements of the Farber, Harlowe paper. I have hung out with them
and while it seems hard to believe at first, they have pretty a pretty
strong case. That they were actually using harmonic equipment from NASA
on Cathy and her daughter. And at one point during her trial to get
custody of her daughter they invoked the National Security Act because
of the nature of what they were talking about. But, I mean, what
you're talking about is-that's a whole other story. What we are
trying to discover is the historical foundation of mind control
research in the intelligence community. What I'm going to ask you
next is from the standpoint of your knowledge about the study of people
for mind science applications and then your current work in the study
of human rights around the world, is there a point when people's
human rights are breached by being studied as a species? Because it's
one thing when you jail someone, and it's another when actually start
to poke around with subliminal advertising and putting messages in
media. How do you look at that?
Well, people's - one of the basic human rights is you have the
right not to be the recipient of torture, to be experimented upon. And
so that's led to the whole phenomenon of informed consent. The
Nuremberg trials laid down the conditions under which people can be
experimented upon, and certainly I think that Ewen Cameron and other
people totally ignored this whole process at that time. In the work
that I do, I am - some of what I have done is to document torture,
and to work with torture survivors. It's quite clear that
state-sponsored oppression is found worldwide. Amnesty International
has documented that more than 100 countries currently practice torture,
and so we have a phenomenon whereby, within our within humanity, we
have people who inflict pain or degradation on other people in order to
intimidate, isolate, extract information, and a variety of other goals
that certainly have wide-spread results and wide-spread responses on
the individuals, their families and their communities. I don't think
this is new, torture has been practiced for a long time. Where it
perhaps became unique was in the involvement of intelligence services
in using these techniques which certainly destroyed human dignity,
which is the principle upon which human rights are based, and which
ultimately resulted in long-term destruction of various people's
brains, like my father. So, that was probably the most significant
change in the 50s, 60s and 70s.
In psychology we have the whole structural fragmentation there's been
there's the whole Freudian approach, then there's Jungian and these
are in a sense evolutions in the study of the technology of the mind. I
look at technology in computers and microchips as one thing, but I
think of the mind and it's synapses and the atomic structure, that
the fact that the mind isn't located in one place - Or in every
place. Or in every place, right. No, beautiful. Isn't that the next
technological advance, to move into the body as a form of technology?
Or is that too, too barren of an interpretation?
Well, I'm not sure I understand your question but there is no
question that technology has certainly entered the field of psychiatry
in a very big way because of the newer neuro-imaging techniques whether
they're PET scans or whatever. The fact is that now we can actually
look at different parts of the brain, give stimuli, and see them light
up. The question that sort of remains to be discovered is: what is the
meaning of that 'lighting up', and what does it tell us about how
the actions of those neurons or those neuro-transmitters or those
synapses actually affect human thinking in human behavior. But, it's
very apparent to me that technology is actually very quickly moving
into helping us discern more clearly what are the basic biological
elements of human behavior.
Now when you think of the mind for example there was this concept that
if a child has received heavy trauma before the age of five, that they
compartmentalize some of their memories. This compartmentalization and
the blockage of the mind of its own memories, can you explain a little
bit of why, you know?
No, I actually don't want to get into that discussion OK.--because
it's leads us to things like false memory syndrome and other things
that I just don't want to get into. That's fine I appreciate that.
Then I guess my next question is that, we say we only use 10 % of our
mind and I wonder what this really means. What's your personal view
of the mind and what our next level of exploration will be? Do you see
it as an unlimited realm, where we can move into it almost like a form
of space where we travel, and begin to investigate new aspects of it,
or do you think we've basically really figured it out and hit the
extent of our knowledge about the mind?
Well, I don't think that we've figured out what's going on with
the mind. I think that what we have discovered in recent years that
many of our earlier theories, whether they were Freudian or
Neo-Freudian, or whatever, have biological bases. I think - take the
phenomenon of sleep, we now know so much more about the architecture of
sleep than we ever did before. We know that certain, sort of,
psychiatric syndromes, whether it's Obsessive Compulsive Disorder or
depression, seem to have biochemical roots. I'm not someone who
thinks that it's all in the biochemistry because I think that there
are environmental, social vulnerabilities, and social and psychological
pressures external, which may in fact interact with the biology to
produce these syndromes. I don't think we know enough at all about
what that means. So, I think that we're sort of still on the frontier
of this science of the mind. I think that one concern I have is that we
focus so much on the biology that we forget that we live in a world
where we're impacted by everyday life, and that that has effects as
well. And then the real trick is trying to relate those two phenomena,
the social/environmental and the biological.
Last major question: Oftentimes scientific advances, at least in the
realm of health, are advanced at the expense of an animal or, in some
cases, a human being. In some ways, is there ever justification for -
Justification for experimenting on humans? Right.
Well, I think that's an interesting question. I was once asked
whether I thought that the results of the Nazi experiments on humans in
concentration camps, whether those results should be used, because
perhaps they could be useful, I'm not convinced they haven't been
used, in fact. My own response to that is, no, they shouldn't be
used. That if the kinds of work that motivate that research need to be
done, they should to be done, again, with informed consent in ways that
protect people. I think that there's much that we can't do on
animals. I think we try to do computer models, we attempt to experiment
in lots of different ways, but I think sometimes you have to use
humans, for example, in clinical trails of drugs, etc. to see if
they're going to be efficacious. But, the bottom line is no one
should ever be experimented upon unwittingly. People should have a very
clear understanding of the costs and benefits of any experiment they
choose to participate in. People should not be experimented upon when
they want, desire and need treatment; they should know the difference
between treatment and research. Investigators must be very clear about
the difference between treatment and research. This concept of
therapeutic experimentation is one that I find very troublesome. I
think that the issues of power that are involved in the role of being a
clinician, or being a researcher working on human subjects, are
critical. I think Human Subjects Committees have to be vigilant and
constantly need to - we constantly need to revisit what is that they
do because the bottom line is protecting people from ever going through
what my father did.
I have one more thing that was beautiful. I think that you just gave us
the definitive list of the guidelines for a reformed mental health
sector. You travel to countries like Indonesia. I have been around the
world several times my self and am so struck by how our world is so
fragmented, to the point where someone could be experiencing one
reality in one region and so different a reality in another. I mean, if
we look at the mind of Earth, the mind of our species, is it incredibly
isn't it so fragmented itself? I mean, do you ever look at the world
as a mind in itself, divided, compartmentalized by it's traumatic
experience? Is it that crazy to think of it that way, that we all share
I mean if you talk about Jung's collective unconscious that, we do
all share one mind and are all just shards of glass, and thus are part
of one window, what is the state of the collective unconscious right
now?
(laugh) I don't have a clue!
Right, right.
I'm not sure how to answer your question. As I go to different places
around the world, you know, and I'm leaving for Bosnia on Saturday,
just came back from Indonesia a couple of weeks ago, there are several
things that strike me. One is that people are people, and that they
value many of the same things, wherever you go, no matter what the
culture is, no matter what the language is that they speak. What's
also unfortunately common is these abuses of power, and the techniques
people use to maintain power, whether it's torture or oppression, or
disappearances, or murders, or rape, or whatever, unfortunately you see
those across cultures. I think that those of us in the US, or Canada,
or wherever, many people walk around with blinders on. That, at some
level, they're aware that there are health disparities, or social
disparities, we choose to try to ignore them as much as possible, and
that's in our own countries. What we choose to ignore, even more so,
are the incredible, painful deprivation and degradations that much of
the world experiences. You know, there almost 50 million refugees and
internally displaced people in the world, and it seems to me that most
of the west refugee policy is based on keeping people out, rather than
trying to protect people, and those people go through enormous,
enormous deprivations and privations, and horrors, that most of us
don't even want to think about. If we actually believe in any kind of
communitarian philosophy, or any kind of sense that we are in a world
together, I think that we're letting people down. It's incredible
to me how little people in this country know what's happened to
Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Rwanda, people sort
of follow the news only for so long then they choose to forget.
Unfortunately, there are people who's daily lives are filled with
social suffering, and we don't want to hear much about social
suffering, and if people come to this country who have suffered, we
want to treat them and make them well, and make them forget as fast as
possible. Of course we want them to express their feelings first, and
then forget. There's a real disconnect between the way that we live
in the West and the way most of the world experiences life.
True true, and this is the last, and you can go. Is this need to block
out, a form of survival? Do we, in some ways, block ourselves from the
whole experience to keep ourselves what's that natural inclination
toward insulation?
I think it's denial. I think, yes, it's a way of making sure that
we are comfortable in our own existence. You know, humanitarian aid
agencies talk about compassion fatigue, how much can people give money
to CARE, or Save The Children? We go from one crisis to another, and
then you just don't want to hear about it anymore. I think that's a
tragedy, because we go from one acute crisis to another and forget that
in between those acute crises we forget that the crises are still
occurring, they're just not reaching the public's attention by the
media. We do have a tendency, I think that it's normal, we want to
live our lives and comfortably and securely as possible, and also some
of what's happening to folks is so awful. It's acutely painful, I
mean, some of the work I do, I hear stories that are horror stories,
and you do want to maintain distance. On the other hand, you have to
empathize with what these people are experiencing and recognize that it
could happen to you. One of the things the first time I went to Bosnia,
I mean, people kept telling me, you know, we were just like you, we
went for Sunday drives.
Yes I think Singh is going through the same type of torture. It is a
systematic Australian strategy used with great effectiveness in the
GENERATION LOST cases and apartheied type immigration policies of the
early 1940 and through to even now in the Camps scattered.
By showing Singh that his child may be alive in Australia but but by
denying him him all forms of aceess his human torture!!!
WARNING: THESE ARE NOT THE OPNIONS OF J.I. SINGH FATHER OF NARA
SINGH-DEREWA.
TORTURE IS A HUMAN RIGHTS CRIME.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Wanted: concise statement opposing US Govt's Campaign of War &Occupation i
- Next by Date: UNITED NATIONS REQUEST FOR STATE ACTORS IN AUSTRALIAN KIDNAP CASE
- Previous by thread: Re: Wanted: concise statement opposing US Govt's Campaign of War &Occupation i
- Next by thread: UNITED NATIONS REQUEST FOR STATE ACTORS IN AUSTRALIAN KIDNAP CASE
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
