maanantai 5. joulukuuta 2011

doesnt look the way it feels
does feel the way it loks?ksältä Birgit käy kysymässä, voivatko eskarilaiset tulla käymään. Olin unohtanut asian. Totta kai voivat. Yritän hakea pöydältä, seiniltä ja kaapista jotain jännää alamittaisille näytettäväksi, ja huomaan kopioineeni vesitehtäviin turhan sivun. Pyydän opiskelijoita heittämään sivun veks. Sitten jokin irrationaalinen kakaruus iskee minuun. Sanon korottavani numerolla kaikkien niiden arvosanaa, jotka saavat myttäämänsä paperitollon jompaankumpaan roskikseen omalta paikallaan istuen. Tunnelma sähköistyy, ryhti suoristuu. Opiskelijat vilkuilevat toisiaan, naureskelevat, tähtäilevät ja Simo heittää tollonsa sukkana sisään. Kesken heittelyn eskarilaiset tulevat, istuutuvat tottuneesti takapulpetteihin ja pöydille, ja alkavat tuijottaa minua kysyvästi. Pyydän lukiolaisia panemaan parastaan, ja kyselen muutamia tehtäväpaperin käsitteistä. Käsiä nousee merenä niin että luulen joutuneeni hattivattimetsään. Selitän huleveden, ja pieni Onni takarivistä nostaa viittaa: ”Onko hulevesi sama kuin kuravesi?”. Lukiolaisten sydän näyttää sulavan. On se, melkein sama. Kello soi, mutta lukiolaiset eivät säntääkään käytävään. Tunnelma on hyvä, lämmin. Aivan erilainen kuin seitsemän minuuttia aiemmin. Kun tämän vaan muistaisi: ei ankeus ole ennalta määrättyä.

lauantai 3. joulukuuta 2011

torstai 1. joulukuuta 2011

keskiviikko 14. syyskuuta 2011

maanantai 5. syyskuuta 2011

In order to preserve our habitat,
many business models need to die. Boo hoo. Fucking die.
Αν είναι να μην πεθάνω ένδοξα καλύτερα να μην πεθάνω καθόλου. Α.Λ.Civilizations have clashed in an unexpected way this year, as ordinary people using Facebook and Twitter knocked down dictators in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya—and are threatening absolute rule in Syria. A so-called Arab spring brought waves of liberation to a long-oppressed region. Something similar is happening in more democratic countries. In Spain throngs of young people, known as “the indignant ones,” occupied public plazas nationwide, protesting unemployment and exclusionary politics. In Israel ordinary citizens from both right and left united in massive demonstrations against high housing prices. And in India one man’s campaign against corruption went viral, bringing thousands to the streets in support. This social might is now moving toward your company. We have entered the age of empowered individuals, who use potent new technologies and harness social media to organize themselves. A few have joined cause with WikiLeaks and its terrifying stepchildren, upending the once secure corridors of the U.S. State Department and Pentagon. But most are ordinary people with new tools to force you to listen to what they care about and to demand respect. Both your customers and your employees have started marching in this burgeoning social media multitude, and you’d better get out of their way—or learn to embrace them. The institutions of modern developed societies, whether governments or companies, are not prepared for this new social power. People are changing faster than companies. “I don’t think it’s crazy to ask if your CEO is the next Mubarak,” says Gary Hamel, one of business’ most eminent theoreticians of management. “The elites—or managers in companies—no longer control the conversation. This is how insurrections start.” Says Marc Benioff, CEO of “This isn’t just about Arab spring. This is about corporate spring.” In this new world of business, companies and leaders will have to show authenticity, fairness, transparency and good faith. If they don’t, customers and employees may come to distrust them, to potentially disastrous effect. Customers who don’t like a product can quickly broadcast their disapproval. Prospective employees don’t have to take your word for what life is like at your company—they can find out from people who already work there. And long time loyal employees now have more options to launch their own, more fleet-footed start ups, which could become your fiercest competitors in the future. “Companies that have been around more than five years are having a hard time because this is so different from what they know” is the jarring observation of Doreen Lorenzo, president of design and consulting firm Frog. Move up Move down 12 images Gallery: Agents of Corporate Change Video: Yammer, Chatter, Jive, Or What Should We Use? Video: Why Techonomy? But overall these changes suggest a bright future for business and society globally. The world is becoming more democratic and reflective of the will of ordinary people. And pragmatically, social power can help keep your company vital. Newly armed customer and employee activists can become the source of creativity, innovation and new ideas to take your company forward. A growing number of executives and companies are converts to this point of view. It calls for humility of a sort most business leaders aren’t used to. “Trust is built by sharing vulnerability,” says John Hagel, a long time author and consultant who co-chairs Deloitte’s Center for the Edge. “The more you expose and share your problems, the more successful you become. It’s not about the top executive dictating what needs to be done and when, it’s about providing individuals with the power to connect.” Benioff recounts his own epiphany about humility and transparency at Salesforce, which sells online software for salespeople. “In 2005 we had reliability problems with one of our servers. We weren’t talking about it, and customers were upset. It turned into a p.r. problem. And my marketing leader Bruce Francis came in and said, ‘Marc,you need to expose everything. You need to have a website that is directly connected to the computers. If they are running, the website should be green, and when they’re not it should be red.’ I had to open up.” Such a system has been in place ever since. “Social success is really based on trust,” Benioff opines. “If you don’t have transparency you will be eliminated by the system around you.” He is now writing a book arguing that every company must become what he calls a “social enterprise.” The headlines abound with examples of the precariously shifting dynamic. Companies that show greed or insensitivity to workers or customers quickly find themselves on the defensive. Hershey looked Scrooge-like and clueless in August when 400 college students hired through a State Department-sponsored foreign-exchange program revolted, walking off their jobs. They didn’t like their stressful work in a candy-packing factory, sometimes on all-night shifts. These kids from China, Nigeria, Turkey and Ukraine are facile digital communicators and used YouTube, Facebook and other tools to bring attention to their plight. Adidas recently found itself under attack in New Zealand when fans of the hugely popular national rugby team were outraged to learn that Adidas team jerseys were being sold for significantly more there than elsewhere in the world. Fans went online to research comparative product prices in New Zealand and the U.S. and then to organize fellow fans in protest. Soon national news programs were focusing on the protest and Adidas’ flat-footed response. People started returning Adidas clothing to stores in disgust, and employees felt so threatened they removed logos from company vehicles, reported the New York Times. Executives can’t hide from the outrage. In the Netherlands earlier this year a social media campaign against bankers’ bonuses focused on Amsterdam-based ING. People began threatening en masse to withdraw deposits. CEO Jan Hommen voluntarily waived his upcoming $1.8 million bonus and ordered all company directors to do the same. British Prime Minister David Cameron recently proposed shutting down social media during riots like those that brought chaos to the U.K. recently. But Google Chairman Eric Schmidt replied to that idea in an interview in the Guardian with advice that applies equally to CEOs: “It is a mistake to look into the mirror and try to break the mirror. Whatever the problem was [that caused the riots] the Internet is a reflection of that problem. If you have a problem, use the Internet to understand what the problem is.” If there’s a primary culprit for this changed landscape, it’s Facebook. The social network’s astonishing success in less than eight years has brought it more than 750 million active users in every country on earth, made it the world’s busiest website—and the most popular tool for fomenting insurrection around the world. Why? Because Facebook gives all its users a personal broadcast platform. In the past only a select few had such power—Walter Cronkite, for example, or those at the BBC. People on Facebook, by contrast, usually just broadcast to friends, which seems only modestly impactful, at first. However, a peculiar new dynamic—call it a viral consensus—may develop. Say you post a status update, photo or video that expresses a view that your friends agree with or respond to; that message can spread like influenza. Friends click “like,” or comment on the update, saying, for example, “Yeah, I think Mubarak has got to go, too!” or “I’m throwing out all my Adidas stuff!” That rebroadcasts it to their friends. The “meme,” or idea, can go viral and spread almost instantly to vast numbers, if it happens to strike a chord with the zeitgeist. LinkedIn is another central tool for empowerment all executives ought to ponder—and not only because they already maintain a profile there (along with more than 115 million others). At its heart LinkedIn is a way to maintain a permanent public work résumé. Many of your company’s most valued employees now have CVs out on the street full time—searchable by millions, including your competitor’s recruiters. Do you want to take a chance mistreating or ignoring such people? Plenty of other social software tools are now in the hands of ordinary people as well. They live on mobile phones that are really powerful computers—broadcast terminals able to spew opinion or information at will, as well as receive it. YouTube, for example, provides endless hours of light entertainment—or can be used by anyone anytime to broadcast video. In 2009 one appeared showing a Domino’s Pizza worker putting cheese in his nose while making a sandwich, among other abominations. Its stock dropped 10% in short order. One employee’s bad judgment damaged an entire company’s reputation. Twitter is a potent broadcast tool for anyone with a following; FourSquare, a way to coordinate in the physical world; GroupMe, just sold to Skype, enables you to send a single text or make one telephone call to a group of up to 25. All these services are basically free. New incarnations of social power emerge almost daily from legions of entrepreneurs worldwide who see how rapidly success can come in a densely networked world. That ease of company creation is yet another example of individual empowerment. GroupMe’s two founders—ages 24 and 29—sold their company in August for around $50 million just one year after it debuted. Bo Fishback created his tool of social power with stunning speed. He’s CEO of Zaarly, a location-based market place for buyers and sellers of both products and services; buyers post what they want, and people looking to earn money make offers to provide it. The company was born in February, when Fishback—a perpetual entrepreneur—attended “Startup Weekend” in Los Angeles. He pitched his idea Friday, had a working prototype by Sunday and says that Tuesday he closed $1 million in financing. (He already knew veteran investors, granted.) Two weeks later Zaarly launched in beta at South By Southwest Interactive in Austin, Tex. and did $10,000 worth of transactions. The service debuted in late May in several cities and by late August $3.4 million in transactions had been requested and 50,000 people had registered. Fishback’s whole life as a Net-centric businessman presumes social power. “Empowered individuals are what drives Zaarly on both sides of our marketplace,” he says. “On the buyer side it transcends typical marketplace dynamics where you can only buy what someone else is already selling. On the fulfiller[or seller] side this demand-driven market gives people a new way to work for themselves.”

sunnuntai 28. elokuuta 2011

Page 2 of 2 If you want your company to tap into social power, a range of emerging software products can help you do so. Some aim to make it easier to conduct an ongoing dialogue with customers. But a thriving industry is also building tools to harness employee power inside a company. Four prominent businesses offer their version of a hybrid Twitter/Facebook for employees: with its product Chatter, IBM with its Connections software, as well as startups Yammer and Jive, which just announced it intends to go public. The aim is to tap a company’s internal social energy to speed collaboration and innovation. Craig Herkert, CEO of SuperValu, which owns or supplies over 4,000 U.S. grocery stores, is a convert to Yammer. “With the old way, all information flowed via e-mail. Now store managers and support staff all over the country can post on Yammer what they’re doing, what they’re proud of, or say, ‘Hey, I’ve got a problem. Does anyone know how to fix it?’ I have Yammer on my desktop, my laptop, my cellphone and my iPad. I can see what everyone is doing—that’s radical transparency.” A little Toronto start up called Rypple applies social thinking in a different way—for internal employee management. Its social evaluation tool lets everyone in a company rate everyone else and gives people continuous real time feedback. It taps social and peer pressure to make job evaluation more effective at driving future performance. The product was largely developed in a beta installation at Facebook itself, whose internal organization strives to be flat and unbureaucratic. (At Facebook newly hired product engineers get a few weeks of technical training and then pick a team to work on.) Anne Benedict is senior vice president of Global Talent at MediaBrands, which has started rolling out Rypple to its 6,500 people. “The highest-value employees are introspective enough to want feedback on themselves,” she explains. “MediaBrands is a media agency, so the technology is perfect for us, because it promotes the use of social networking we preach to our clients.” The humility and authenticity that social power demands of you can yield numerous benefits with customers and employees. Nadira Hira, 30, is writing a book to be published next year about attitudes toward work in her generation, those who are roughly 16 to 32 years old today. “What many companies get wrong when they think of ‘social’ is they think of it as a marketing ploy, rather than as just a way of extending what you already really are as a company or a brand,” she says. “If you do care about your employees and your customers, it allows you to show it and extend your reach.” Tony Hsieh, CEO of Zappos, used Twitter and his personal blog in late 2008 to announce and manage unexpected layoffs. He talked extensively about what was happening and how painful the process was for himself and others in the company. The layoffs went surprisingly smoothly, especially after he responded to feedback by, for example, extending an employee discount until after the holidays. When confronting social power, you might as well jump in with both feet, because you just can’t hide. “One common mistake of old-school companies is to ban social media across the company,” says Clara Shih, CEO of HearsaySocial, whose software helps businesses, mostly consumer brands, manage their social media. “But at least in America our job is such an important part of our identity that most people want to talk about it. Passionate employees are going to talk about the brand and the company on Facebook and Twitter and LinkedIn.” When her clients defend lock-down policies against social media, claiming they’ve successfully kept employees offline, Shih unleashes Hearsay’s “rogue page finder.” For one big company it recently turned up 60,000 different social media pages where employees mentioned or discussed company matters. (Not to mention the thousands of employee profiles on LinkedIn.) Hearsay’s tools presume something elemental in a world of social power: that the empowerment of employees is directly tied to the empowerment of customers—because they will inevitably end up working, maybe even conspiring, together. Ordinary people often seem better at managing and accessing information than the giant corporations they work for or buy from. “Companies literally don’t know what’s being said about them,” says millennial maven Hira .“They don’t even Google themselves!” Move up Move down 12 images Gallery: Agents of Corporate Change Video: Yammer, Chatter, Jive, Or What Should We Use? Video: Why Techonomy? But that’s the first thing somebody will do if they’re thinking about going to work at that company.” This is a critical shift in power. “In the old days the managers were on phone calls and in briefings. They had information,” says Chris Cox, who oversees product at Facebook. “The underlings were just working away. But with technology that makes it easy to share and organize stuff, that imbalance goes away.” Adds David Sacks, CEO of Yammer: “‘Information is power’ used to mean that hoarding information gave you power. Now we’re seeing that sharing information is power. The more you can share, the more you can help other people—and the more it becomes apparent you’re an expert and a valuable employee.” Long before most of us saw it coming, Ray Ozzie, one of the software industry’s most celebrated communications toolmakers, focused his product-development career on a shift toward social power. But he still doesn’t think companies get it. Ozzie replaced Bill Gates as Microsoft’s chief software architect after the company bought Groove Networks, which he founded. He left Microsoft last year. “Individuals are elated with these new capabilities, yet corporations are as risk-averse as they always were. Many companies are hesitant to create a culture that permits self-empowerment because they are afraid of what might happen if people did things by themselves.” Ozzie’s creation of Lotus Notes back in the late 1980s aimed to arm employees with better information and allow them to collaborate in teams. But though it was a commercial success, Notes’ potential to promote employee empowerment went mostly unrealized. Since then, however, powerful collaborative software—notably Facebook but also Skype, LinkedIn and other tools—has crept into corporations over the Net and in handbags and pockets, carried by employees bringing superior consumer software into the workplace. Companies are still scrambling to catch up, and most of them probably never will. Consumer technology will remain better and cheaper than what’s made for business. The larger size of the consumer market attracts more investment and innovation, and economies of scale drive down prices—a formula at the heart of the relative empowerment of the individual over the company. David Stein, Co-CEO of Rypple, says that for ordinary employees “the expectation now is that the tools people use at work are as easy and fun as the ones they use in their personal life. If you use 1950s-based management systems, employees are going to revolt. They don’t want to feel like ‘the man’ is just telling them to do things.” And at Skype, CEO Tony Bates isn’t bothering to target the business market, because, as he says, “individuals are bringing it into business themselves. In many companies Skype is the number one form of communications.” Shoshana Zuboff has been describing this fundamental shift toward individuals and social power since 2002. That’s when the longtime Harvard Business School professor and historian co-wrote The Support Economy: Why Corporations are Failing Individuals and the Next Episode of Capitalism. She says the clash between empowered people and hierarchical institutions was set in motion in the 1950s. “The mass-production economy provided existential security for many, many people,” she says. “That, in turn, produced a new human mentality—of a self-determining individual. This mentality was once the unique precinct of the elite: the wealthy, artists, poets, philosophers. And it became the mentality of everyone.” She now argues for an urgent rethinking of how all business is conducted. “We’re talking about a fundamental shift away from a mass production model,” she says. “Value has been understood as something companies create: How do I take what I have and sell it to you? But in this new world value is not created inside the organization. It rests in the unfulfilled needs and desires of the individual. Now I have to come to you and say, ‘Who are you? Tell me about yourself. How do you want to live?’” She says the music industry notoriously failed at this in the past decade. “It brought forward the value it had created—the CD. And if you didn’t want it, how did they respond? Well, how about if they hunt you down and put you in jail?” An increasing number of enlightened companies aim to turn social power to their own advantage by putting customers not in jail but on a pedestal. They become healthily obsessed with what’s said about them online. Gatorade now operates a full-time social media command center where it not only monitors what’s said about it on Facebook, Twitter, blogs and elsewhere,but also intervenes when appropriate to clarify or offer assistance. And Domino’s Pizza responded somewhat brilliantly to that egregious employee video in 2009 with a self-effacing social media and advertising campaign that did not pretend the incident hadn’t happened. By mid-2010 it had regained market share and dramatically boosted online reputation and e-commerce sales. Farmers Insurance uses Hearsay Social’s software to help 15,000 agents nationwide maintain their own Facebook pages. It has even begun marketing itself, aptly enough, in the Farmville game people play inside Facebook. Ford takes cues from young people immersed in social media in how it designs cars and how it communicates. “Digital suffrage is upon us,” proclaims Venkatash Prasad, Ford’s high-wattage leader of product social networking efforts, in an e-mail. “Everyone has a right to a byte of the action, and we have embraced this might of the byte within Ford, through the use of internal and external social networks.” Prasad brags that Ford recently sent a car across America, tweeting: “Not a human in a car, a car.” Adds Sheryl Connelly, Ford’s manager of consumer trends, in another e-mail: “If you want to reach a millennial, you have to go where they live, and that means online. Millennials want more than engagement. They want their contributions to be meaningful.” Accepting social power as inevitable can significantly change the kind of products you design. Coca-Cola is installing machines in fast-food restaurants that allow customers to formulate their own beverages. No longer choose just a Coke or Sprite. Now you can come up with new flavor combinations and other customizations that your newly empowered heart desires. If you ignore these forces, you will probably fail. Says consultant and author Gary Hamel: “The underlying principles on the Web of natural hierarchy, transparency, collaboration and all the rest—those characteristics are going to have to invade management. The idea of a hierarchy that fundamentally empowers the few and disempowers the many is more or less dead.” To demonstrate what’s possible in this new world, Hamel helped spearhead an online forum for Web-influenced management ideas at Don’t think that the trends in technology, and resulting social power, will ever give you a respite from the tides of change. Says Microsoft and Lotus veteran Ozzie: “All this was unstoppable from the moment somebody installed the first network—this steady march toward reducing friction and reducing transaction costs faced by individuals. And you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.”

lauantai 23. heinäkuuta 2011

keskiviikko 22. kesäkuuta 2011

entine mies sanoi ettei koskaan ole liian myöhäistä

sude[ suuhu, eikö sitten jo ole myöhäistä kun on jo suden suussalulz, ei ajasta ole mihinkään. ihmisen kannalta pelkkää tuhlausta. elinolosuhteet kuitenki paranevat.

sunnuntai 12. kesäkuuta 2011

miehen elämää
muistatko kun ostettiin rusettinauhoja tukkaan
tarvitsen nauhan kaulaan, on liian kuuma pukea muuta

perjantai 3. kesäkuuta 2011

Ukkonen on sääilmiö rajuimmasta päästä. Salama on valtava määrä toistaiseksi kesyttämätöntä energiaa; miljoonien volttien sähköjännitteen purkautumista purkauskanavassa, jonka äkillinen laajeneminen synnyttää jyrinän.

keskiviikko 1. kesäkuuta 2011

tiistai 24. toukokuuta 2011

genesMaailman kalleimmaksi arvioidun huippuoriin toistaiseksi ainoa suomalainen jälkeläinen syntyi maanantaina Kirkkonummella. Työnimellä "Totti" kulkeva orivarsa tuli maailmaan näyttävästi kesken kaatosateen ja juuri salaman lyödessä.

tiistai 3. toukokuuta 2011

kokemuksellinen vaje:)

Tutkimuksen mukaan suomalaisten hyvän elämän tekijät ovat tärkeysjärjestyksessä hyvä terveys, sujuva arki, oikeudenmukaisuus, turvallisuus ja mielekäs työ. Helsingin keskustan kadut, torit ja puistot ruuhkautuivat täysin autoista ja ihmisistä. Paikalla oli arviolta kymmeniä tuhansia Suomen voitosta riemastuneita juhlijoita. Auton torvien soitosta nouseva meteli oli korvia huumaava ja kaikkialla heilui Suomen lippuja.

Esplanadilla ravintola Kappelin katolle kiipesi kymmeniä ihmisiä. Juhlijoita kipusi myös lyhtypylväisiin.

sunnuntai 1. toukokuuta 2011

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from MKULTRA)
Jump to: navigation, search
"MKULTRA" redirects here. For other uses, see MKULTRA (disambiguation).
Declassified MKULTRA documents

Project MKULTRA, or MK-ULTRA, was the code name for a covert, illegal CIA human research program, run by the Office of Scientific Intelligence. This official U.S. government program began in the early 1950s, continuing at least through the late 1960s, and it used U.S. and Canadian citizens as its test subjects.[1][2][3][4]

The published evidence indicates that Project MKULTRA involved the use of many methodologies to manipulate individual mental states and alter brain functions, including the surreptitious administration of drugs and other chemicals, sensory deprivation, isolation, and verbal and sexual abuse.

Project MKULTRA was first brought to wide public attention in 1975 by the U.S. Congress, through investigations by the Church Committee, and by a presidential commission known as the Rockefeller Commission. Investigative efforts were hampered by the fact that CIA Director Richard Helms ordered all MKULTRA files destroyed in 1973; the Church Committee and Rockefeller Commission investigations relied on the sworn testimony of direct participants and on the relatively small number of documents that survived Helms' destruction order.[5]

In 1977, a FOIA request uncovered a cache of 20,000 documents[6] relating to project MKULTRA, which led to the Senate Hearings of 1977.[2] In recent times most information regarding MKULTRA has been officially declassified.

Although the CIA insists that MKULTRA-type experiments have been abandoned, 14-year CIA veteran Victor Marchetti has stated in various interviews that the CIA routinely conducts disinformation campaigns and that CIA mind control research continued. In a 1977 interview, Marchetti specifically called the CIA claim that MKULTRA was abandoned a "cover story."[7][8]

On the Senate floor in 1977, Senator Ted Kennedy said:

The Deputy Director of the CIA revealed that over thirty universities and institutions were involved in an "extensive testing and experimentation" program which included covert drug tests on unwitting citizens "at all social levels, high and low, native Americans and foreign." Several of these tests involved the administration of LSD to "unwitting subjects in social situations." At least one death, that of Dr. Olson, resulted from these activities. The Agency itself acknowledged that these tests made little scientific sense. The agents doing the monitoring were not qualified scientific observers.[9]


* 1 Title and origins
* 2 Goals
* 3 Budget
* 4 Experiments
o 4.1 Drugs
+ 4.1.1 LSD
+ 4.1.2 Other drugs
o 4.2 Hypnosis
o 4.3 Canadian experiments
* 5 Revelation
* 6 U.S. General Accounting Office Report
* 7 Deaths
* 8 Legal issues involving informed consent
* 9 Extent of participation
* 10 Notable subjects
* 11 Conspiracy theories
* 12 See also
* 13 References
* 14 Further reading
* 15 External links

[edit] Title and origins
Dr. Sidney Gottlieb approved of an MKULTRA subproject on LSD in this June 9, 1953 letter.

The project's intentionally oblique CIA cryptonym is made up of the digraph MK, meaning that the project was sponsored by the agency's Technical Services Division, followed by the word ULTRA (which had previously been used to designate the most secret classification of World War II intelligence). Other related cryptonyms include MKNAOMI and MKDELTA.

A precursor of the MKULTRA program began in 1945 when the Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency was established and given direct responsibility for Operation Paperclip. Operation Paperclip was a program to recruit former Nazi scientists. Some of these scientists studied torture and brainwashing, and several had just been identified and prosecuted as war criminals during the Nuremberg Trials.[10][11]

Several secret U.S. government projects grew out of Operation Paperclip. These projects included Project CHATTER (established 1947), and Project BLUEBIRD (established 1950), which was renamed Project ARTICHOKE in 1951. Their purpose was to study mind-control, interrogation, behavior modification and related topics.

Headed by Sidney Gottlieb, the MKULTRA project was started on the order of CIA director Allen Dulles on April 13, 1953,[12] largely in response to alleged Soviet, Chinese, and North Korean use of mind-control techniques on U.S. prisoners of war in Korea.[13] The CIA wanted to use similar methods on their own captives. The CIA was also interested in being able to manipulate foreign leaders with such techniques,[14] and would later invent several schemes to drug Fidel Castro.

Experiments were often conducted without the subjects' knowledge or consent.[15] In some cases, academic researchers being funded through grants from CIA front organizations were unaware that their work was being used for these purposes.[16]

In 1964, the project was renamed MKSEARCH. The project attempted to produce a perfect truth drug for use in interrogating suspected Soviet spies during the Cold War, and generally to explore any other possibilities of mind control.

Another MKULTRA effort, Subproject 54, was the Navy's top secret "Perfect Concussion" program, which was supposed to use sub-aural frequency blasts to erase memory, however the program was never carried out.[17]

Because most MKULTRA records were deliberately destroyed in 1973 by order of then CIA Director Richard Helms, it has been difficult, if not impossible, for investigators to gain a complete understanding of the more than 150 individually funded research sub-projects sponsored by MKULTRA and related CIA programs.[18]
[edit] Goals

The Agency poured millions of dollars into studies examining methods of influencing and controlling the mind, and of enhancing their ability to extract information from resistant subjects during interrogation.[19][20]

Some historians have asserted that creating a "Manchurian Candidate" subject through "mind control" techniques was a goal of MKULTRA and related CIA projects.[21] Alfred McCoy has claimed that the CIA attempted to focus media attention on these sorts of "ridiculous" programs, so that the public would not look at the primary goal of the research, which was developing effective methods of torture and interrogation. Such authors cite as one example, the fact that the CIA's KUBARK interrogation manual refers to "studies at McGill University", and that most of the techniques recommended in KUBARK are exactly those that researcher Donald Ewen Cameron used on his test subjects (sensory deprivation, drugs, isolation, etc.).[19]

One 1955 MKULTRA document gives an indication of the size and range of the effort; this document refers to the study of an assortment of mind-altering substances described as follows:[22]

1. Substances which will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be discredited in public.
2. Substances which increase the efficiency of mentation and perception.
3. Materials which will prevent or counteract the intoxicating effect of alcohol.
4. Materials which will promote the intoxicating effect of alcohol.
5. Materials which will produce the signs and symptoms of recognized diseases in a reversible way so that they may be used for malingering, etc.
6. Materials which will render the induction of hypnosis easier or otherwise enhance its usefulness.
7. Substances which will enhance the ability of individuals to withstand privation, torture and coercion during interrogation and so-called "brain-washing".
8. Materials and physical methods which will produce amnesia for events preceding and during their use.
9. Physical methods of producing shock and confusion over extended periods of time and capable of surreptitious use.
10. Substances which produce physical disablement such as paralysis of the legs, acute anemia, etc.
11. Substances which will produce "pure" euphoria with no subsequent let-down.
12. Substances which alter personality structure in such a way that the tendency of the recipient to become dependent upon another person is enhanced.
13. A material which will cause mental confusion of such a type that the individual under its influence will find it difficult to maintain a fabrication under questioning.
14. Substances which will lower the ambition and general working efficiency of men when administered in undetectable amounts.
15. Substances which promote weakness or distortion of the eyesight or hearing faculties, preferably without permanent effects.
16. A knockout pill which can surreptitiously be administered in drinks, food, cigarettes, as an aerosol, etc., which will be safe to use, provide a maximum of amnesia, and be suitable for use by agent types on an ad hoc basis.
17. A material which can be surreptitiously administered by the above routes and which in very small amounts will make it impossible for a person to perform physical activity.

[edit] Budget

A secretive arrangement granted the MKULTRA program a percentage of the CIA budget. The MKULTRA director was granted six percent of the CIA operating budget in 1953, without oversight or accounting.[23] An estimated $10 million USD or more was spent.[24]
[edit] Experiments

CIA documents suggest that "chemical, biological and radiological" means were investigated for the purpose of mind control as part of MKULTRA.[25]
[edit] Drugs
[edit] LSD

Early CIA efforts focused on LSD, which later came to dominate many of MKULTRA's programs.

Once Project MKULTRA officially got underway in April, 1953, experiments included administering LSD to CIA employees, military personnel, doctors, other government agents, prostitutes, mentally ill patients, and members of the general public in order to study their reactions. LSD and other drugs were usually administered without the subject's knowledge or informed consent, a violation of the Nuremberg Code that the U.S. agreed to follow after World War II.

Efforts to "recruit" subjects were often illegal, even though actual use of LSD was legal in the United States until October 6, 1966. In Operation Midnight Climax, the CIA set up several brothels in San Francisco, CA to obtain a selection of men who would be too embarrassed to talk about the events. The men were dosed with LSD, the brothels were equipped with two-way mirrors, and the sessions were filmed for later viewing and study.[26]

Some subjects' participation was consensual, and in these cases they appeared to be singled out for even more extreme experiments. In one case, volunteers were given LSD for 77 consecutive days.[27]

LSD was eventually dismissed by MKULTRA's researchers as too unpredictable in its results.[28] Useful information was sometimes obtained by questioning subjects after they had ingested LSD.
[edit] Other drugs

Another technique investigated was connecting a barbiturate IV into one arm and an amphetamine IV into the other.[29] The barbiturates were released into the person first, and as soon as the person began to fall asleep, the amphetamines were released. The person would then begin babbling incoherently, and it was sometimes possible to ask questions and get useful answers.

Other experiments involved drugs such as temazepam (used under code name MKSEARCH), heroin, morphine, MDMA, mescaline, psilocybin, scopolamine, marijuana, alcohol, sodium pentothal,[30] and ergine (in Subproject 22).
[edit] Hypnosis

Declassified MKULTRA documents indicate hypnosis was studied in the early 1950s. Experimental goals included: the creation of "hypnotically induced anxieties," "hypnotically increasing ability to learn and recall complex written matter," studying hypnosis and polygraph examinations, "hypnotically increasing ability to observe and recall complex arrangements of physical objects," and studying "relationship of personality to susceptibility to hypnosis."[31] Experiments were conducted with drug induced hypnosis and with anterograde and retrograde amnesia while under the influence of such drugs.
[edit] Canadian experiments

The experiments were exported to Canada when the CIA recruited Scottish psychiatrist Donald Ewen Cameron, creator of the "psychic driving" concept, which the CIA found particularly interesting. Cameron had been hoping to correct schizophrenia by erasing existing memories and reprogramming the psyche. He commuted from Albany, New York to Montreal every week to work at the Allan Memorial Institute of McGill University and was paid $69,000 from 1957 to 1964 to carry out MKULTRA experiments there. In addition to LSD, Cameron also experimented with various paralytic drugs as well as electroconvulsive therapy at thirty to forty times the normal power. His "driving" experiments consisted of putting subjects into drug-induced coma for weeks at a time (up to three months in one case) while playing tape loops of noise or simple repetitive statements. His experiments were typically carried out on patients who had entered the institute for minor problems such as anxiety disorders and postpartum depression, many of whom suffered permanently from his actions.[32] His treatments resulted in victims' incontinence, amnesia, forgetting how to talk, forgetting their parents, and thinking their interrogators were their parents.[33] His work was inspired and paralleled by the British psychiatrist William Sargant at St Thomas' Hospital, London, and Belmont Hospital, Surrey, who was also involved in the Intelligence Services and who experimented extensively on his patients without their consent, causing similar long-term damage.[34]

It was during this era that Cameron became known worldwide as the first chairman of the World Psychiatric Association as well as president of the American and Canadian psychiatric associations. Cameron had also been a member of the Nuremberg medical tribunal in 1946–47.[35]

Naomi Klein states in her book The Shock Doctrine that Cameron's research and his contribution to the MKULTRA project was actually not about mind control and brainwashing, but about designing "a scientifically based system for extracting information from 'resistant sources.' In other words, torture." Stripped of its bizarre excesses, Dr. Cameron's experiments, building upon Donald O. Hebb's earlier breakthrough, laid the scientific foundation for the CIA's two-stage psychological torture method."[36]
[edit] Revelation
1977 United States Senate report on MKULTRA

In 1973 CIA Director Richard Helms ordered all MKULTRA files destroyed. Pursuant to this order, most CIA documents regarding the project were destroyed, making a full investigation of MKULTRA impossible. A cache of some 20,000 documents survived Helms' purge, as they had been incorrectly stored in a financial record building and were discovered following a FOIA request in 1977. These documents were fully investigated during the Senate Hearings of 1977.[2]

In December 1974, The New York Times reported that the CIA had conducted illegal domestic activities, including experiments on U.S. citizens, during the 1960s. That report prompted investigations by the U.S. Congress, in the form of the Church Committee, and by a presidential commission known as the Rockefeller Commission that looked into domestic activities of the CIA, the FBI, and intelligence-related agencies of the military.

In the summer of 1975, congressional Church Committee reports and the presidential Rockefeller Commission report revealed to the public for the first time that the CIA and the Department of Defense had conducted experiments on both unwitting and cognizant human subjects as part of an extensive program to influence and control human behavior through the use of psychoactive drugs such as LSD and mescaline and other chemical, biological, and psychological means. They also revealed that at least one subject had died after administration of LSD. Much of what the Church Committee and the Rockefeller Commission learned about MKULTRA was contained in a report, prepared by the Inspector General's office in 1963, that had survived the destruction of records ordered in 1973.[37] However, it contained little detail.

The congressional committee investigating the CIA research, chaired by Senator Frank Church, concluded that "[p]rior consent was obviously not obtained from any of the subjects". The committee noted that the "experiments sponsored by these researchers ... call into question the decision by the agencies not to fix guidelines for experiments."

Following the recommendations of the Church Committee, President Gerald Ford in 1976 issued the first Executive Order on Intelligence Activities which, among other things, prohibited "experimentation with drugs on human subjects, except with the informed consent, in writing and witnessed by a disinterested party, of each such human subject" and in accordance with the guidelines issued by the National Commission. Subsequent orders by Presidents Carter and Reagan expanded the directive to apply to any human experimentation.

On the heels of the revelations about CIA experiments, similar stories surfaced regarding U.S. Army experiments. In 1975 the Secretary of the Army instructed the Army Inspector General to conduct an investigation. Among the findings of the Inspector General was the existence of a 1953 memorandum penned by then Secretary of Defense Charles Erwin Wilson. Documents show that the CIA participated in at least two Department of Defense committees during 1952. These committee findings led to the issuance of the "Wilson Memo," which mandated—in accord with Nuremberg Code protocols—that only volunteers be used for experimental operations conducted in the U.S. armed forces. In response to the Inspector General's investigation, the Wilson Memo was declassified in August 1975.

With regard to drug testing within the Army, the Inspector General found that "the evidence clearly reflected that every possible medical consideration was observed by the professional investigators at the Medical Research Laboratories." However the Inspector General also found that the mandated requirements of Wilson's 1953 memorandum had been only partially adhered to; he concluded that the "volunteers were not fully informed, as required, prior to their participation; and the methods of procuring their services, in many cases, appeared not to have been in accord with the intent of Department of the Army policies governing use of volunteers in research."

Other branches of the U.S. armed forces, the Air Force for example, were found not to have adhered to Wilson Memo stipulations regarding voluntary drug testing.

In 1977, during a hearing held by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, to look further into MKULTRA, Admiral Stansfield Turner, then Director of Central Intelligence, revealed that the CIA had found a set of records, consisting of about 20,000 pages,[6] that had survived the 1973 destruction orders because they had been stored at a records center not usually used for such documents.[37] These files dealt with the financing of MKULTRA projects and contained few project details, however much more was learned from them than from the Inspector General's 1963 report.

In Canada, the issue took much longer to surface, becoming widely known in 1984 on a CBC news show, The Fifth Estate. It was learned that not only had the CIA funded Dr. Cameron's efforts, but perhaps even more shockingly, the Canadian government was fully aware of this, and had later provided another $500,000 in funding to continue the experiments. This revelation largely derailed efforts by the victims to sue the CIA as their U.S. counterparts had, and the Canadian government eventually settled out of court for $100,000 to each of the 127 victims. None of Dr. Cameron's personal records of his involvement with MKULTRA survive, since his family destroyed them after his death from a heart attack while mountain climbing in 1967.[38]
[edit] U.S. General Accounting Office Report

The U.S. General Accounting Office issued a report on September 28, 1994, which stated that between 1940 and 1974, DOD and other national security agencies studied thousands of human subjects in tests and experiments involving hazardous substances.

The quote from the study:

... Working with the CIA, the Department of Defense gave hallucinogenic drugs to thousands of "volunteer" soldiers in the 1950s and 1960s. In addition to LSD, the Army also tested quinuclidinyl benzilate, a hallucinogen code-named BZ. (Note 37) Many of these tests were conducted under the so-called MKULTRA program, established to counter perceived Soviet and Chinese advances in brainwashing techniques. Between 1953 and 1964, the program consisted of 149 projects involving drug testing and other studies on unwitting human subjects...[39]

[edit] Deaths

Given the CIA's purposeful destruction of most records, its failure to follow informed consent protocols with thousands of participants, the uncontrolled nature of the experiments, and the lack of follow-up data, the full impact of MKULTRA experiments, including deaths, will never be known.[18][22][39][40]

Several known deaths have been associated with Project MKULTRA, most notably that of Frank Olson. Olson, a United States Army biochemist and biological weapons researcher, was given LSD without his knowledge or consent in November, 1953 as part of a CIA experiment and died under suspicious circumstances a week later. A CIA doctor assigned to monitor Olson claimed to be asleep in another bed in a New York City hotel room when Olson exited the window and fell thirteen stories to his death. In 1953, Olson's death was described as a suicide that occurred during a severe psychotic episode. The CIA's own internal investigation concluded that CIA Director Stanley Gottlieb had conducted the LSD experiment with Olson's prior knowledge, although neither Olson nor the other men taking part in the experiment were informed as to the exact nature of the drug until some 20 minutes after its ingestion. The report further suggested that Gottlieb was nonetheless due a reprimand, as he had failed to take into account Olson's already-diagnosed suicidal tendencies, which might have been exacerbated by the LSD.[41]

The Olson family disputes the official version of events. They maintain that Frank Olson was murdered because, especially in the aftermath of his LSD experience, he had become a security risk who might divulge state secrets associated with highly classified CIA programs, many of which he had direct personal knowledge. A few days before his death, Frank Olson quit his position as Acting Chief of the Special Operations Division at Detrick, Maryland (later Fort Detrick) because of a severe moral crisis concerning the nature of his biological weapons research. Among Olson's concerns were the development of assassination materials used by the CIA, the CIA's use of biological warfare materials in covert operations, experimentation with biological weapons in populated areas, collaboration with former Nazi scientists under Operation Paperclip, LSD mind-control research, the use of biological weapons (including anthrax) during the Korean War, and the use of psychoactive drugs during "terminal" interrogations under a program code-named Project ARTICHOKE.[42] Later forensic evidence conflicted with the official version of events; when Olson's body was exhumed in 1994, cranial injuries indicated Olson had been knocked unconscious before he exited the window.[41] The medical examiner termed Olson's death a "homicide".[43] In 1975, Olson's family received a $750,000 settlement from the U.S. government and formal apologies from President Gerald Ford and CIA Director William Colby, though their apologies were limited to informed consent issues concerning Olson's ingestion of LSD.[40][44]

In his 2009 book, A Terrible Mistake, researcher H. P. Albarelli Jr. concurs with the Olson family and concludes that Frank Olson was murdered because a personal crisis of conscience made it likely he would divulge state secrets concerning several CIA programs, chief among them Project ARTICHOKE and an MKNAOMI project code-named Project SPAN. Albarelli presents considerable evidence in support of his theory that Project SPAN involved the contamination of food supplies and the aerosolized spraying of a potent LSD mixture in the village of Pont-Saint-Esprit, France in August, 1951. (The French word "pont" translates to "bridge" in English; a synonym is "span".) The Pont-Saint-Esprit incident resulted in mass psychosis, 32 commitments to mental institutions, and at least seven deaths. In his work as Acting Chief of the Special Operations Division, Olson was involved in the development of aerosolized delivery systems, he was present at Pont-Saint-Esprit in August, 1951, and several months before he resigned his position he had witnessed a terminal interrogation conducted in Germany under Project ARTICHOKE. Other researchers have reached conclusions similar to Albarelli's, including John Grant Fuller, author of The Day of Saint Anthony's Fire, a landmark book that originally cited ergot poisoning as responsible for the events at Pont-Saint-Esprit.[40][45]

Another known victim of Project MKULTRA was Harold Blauer, a professional tennis player in New York City, who died in January, 1953 as a result of a secret Army experiment involving MDA.[46]
[edit] Legal issues involving informed consent
Question book-new.svg
This section needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2011)

The revelations about the CIA and the Army prompted a number of subjects or their survivors to file lawsuits against the federal government for conducting illegal experiments. Although the government aggressively, and sometimes successfully, sought to avoid legal liability, several plaintiffs did receive compensation through court order, out-of-court settlement, or acts of Congress. Frank Olson's family received $750,000 by a special act of Congress, and both President Ford and CIA director William Colby met with Olson's family to publicly apologize.

Previously, the CIA and the Army had actively and successfully sought to withhold incriminating information, even as they secretly provided compensation to the families. One subject of Army drug experimentation, James Stanley, an Army sergeant, brought an important, albeit unsuccessful, suit. The government argued that Stanley was barred from suing under a legal doctrine—known as the Feres doctrine, after a 1950 Supreme Court case, Feres v. United States—that prohibits members of the Armed Forces from suing the government for any harms that were inflicted "incident to service."

In 1987, the Supreme Court affirmed this defense in a 5–4 decision that dismissed Stanley's case.[47] The majority argued that "a test for liability that depends on the extent to which particular suits would call into question military discipline and decision making would itself require judicial inquiry into, and hence intrusion upon, military matters." In dissent, Justice William Brennan argued that the need to preserve military discipline should not protect the government from liability and punishment for serious violations of constitutional rights:

The medical trials at Nuremberg in 1947 deeply impressed upon the world that experimentation with unknowing human subjects is morally and legally unacceptable. The United States Military Tribunal established the Nuremberg Code as a standard against which to judge German scientists who experimented with human subjects... . [I]n defiance of this principle, military intelligence officials ... began surreptitiously testing chemical and biological materials, including LSD.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, writing a separate dissent, stated:

No judicially crafted rule should insulate from liability the involuntary and unknowing human experimentation alleged to have occurred in this case. Indeed, as Justice Brennan observes, the United States played an instrumental role in the criminal prosecution of Nazi officials who experimented with human subjects during the Second World War, and the standards that the Nuremberg Military Tribunals developed to judge the behavior of the defendants stated that the 'voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential ... to satisfy moral, ethical, and legal concepts.' If this principle is violated, the very least that society can do is to see that the victims are compensated, as best they can be, by the perpetrators.

This is the only Supreme Court case to address the application of the Nuremberg Code to experimentation sponsored by the U.S. government. Although the suit was unsuccessful, dissenting opinions put the Army—and by association the entire government—on notice that use of individuals without their consent is unacceptable[Is this a fact or an opinion?]. The limited application of the Nuremberg Code in U.S. courts does not detract from the power of the principles it espouses[Is this a fact or an opinion?], especially in light of stories of failure to follow these principles that appeared in the media and professional literature during the 1960s and 1970s and the policies eventually adopted in the mid-1970s.

In another law suit, Wayne Ritchie, a former United States Marshal, after hearing about the project's existence in 1990, alleged the CIA laced his food or drink with LSD at a 1957 Christmas party which resulted in his attempting to commit a robbery at a bar and his subsequent arrest. While the government admitted it was, at that time, drugging people without their consent, U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel found Ritchie could not prove he was one of the victims of MKULTRA or that LSD caused his robbery attempt and dismissed the case in 2007.[48]
[edit] Extent of participation

Forty-four American colleges or universities, 15 research foundations or chemical or pharmaceutical companies and the like including Sandoz (currently Novartis) and Eli Lilly and Company, 12 hospitals or clinics (in addition to those associated with universities), and three prisons are known to have participated in MKULTRA.[49][50]
[edit] Notable subjects

* A considerable amount of credible circumstantial evidence suggests that Theodore Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber, participated in CIA-sponsored MKULTRA experiments conducted at Harvard University from the fall of 1959 through the spring of 1962.[51] During World War II, Henry Murray, the lead researcher in the Harvard experiments, served with the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), which was a forerunner of the CIA. Murray applied for a grant funded by the United States Navy, and his Harvard stress experiments strongly resembled those run by the OSS.[51] Beginning at the age of sixteen, Kaczynski participated along with twenty-one other undergraduate students in the Harvard experiments, which have been described as "disturbing" and "ethically indefensible."[51][52]
* Merry Prankster Ken Kesey, author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, volunteered for MKULTRA experiments involving LSD and other psychedelic drugs at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Menlo Park while he was a student at nearby Stanford University. Kesey's experiences while under the influence of LSD inspired him to promote the drug outside the context of the MKULTRA experiments, which influenced the early development of hippie culture.[53][54]
* Robert Hunter is an American lyricist, singer-songwriter, translator, and poet, best known for his association with Jerry Garcia and the Grateful Dead. Along with Ken Kesey, Hunter was an early volunteer MKULTRA test subject at Stanford University. Stanford test subjects were paid to take LSD, psilocybin, and mescaline, then report on their experiences. These experiences were creatively formative for Hunter:

Sit back picture yourself swooping up a shell of purple with foam crests of crystal drops soft nigh they fall unto the sea of morning creep-very-softly mist...and then sort of cascade tinkley-bell like (must I take you by the hand, every so slowly type) and then conglomerate suddenly into a peal of silver vibrant uncomprehendingly, blood singingly, joyously resounding bells....By my faith if this be insanity, then for the love of God permit me to remain insane.[55]

* Candy Jones, American fashion model and radio host, claimed to have been a victim of mind control in the 1960s.[56]
* Fugitive mobster James "Whitey" Bulger volunteered for testing while in prison.[57]

[edit] Conspiracy theories

MKULTRA plays a part in many conspiracy theories given its nature and the destruction of most records.[58]

Lawrence Teeter, attorney for convicted assassin Sirhan Sirhan, believed Sirhan was under the influence of hypnosis when he fired his weapon at Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Teeter linked the CIA's MKULTRA program to mind control techniques that he claimed were used to control Sirhan.[59]

Jonestown, the Guyana location of the Jim Jones cult and Peoples Temple mass suicide, was thought to be a test site for MKULTRA medical and mind control experiments after the official end of the program. Congressman Leo Ryan, a known critic of the CIA, was murdered by Peoples Temple members after he personally visited Jonestown to investigate various reported irregularities.[60]
[edit] See also

* Brainwashing
* CIA operations
* Human experimentation in the United States
* Operation Dormouse
* Operation Paperclip
* Project MKDELTA
* Project MKNAOMI
* Project MKOFTEN
* Sensory deprivation
* Sidney Gottlieb
* United States v. Stanley
* Kurt Blome

[edit] References

1. ^ Richelson, JT (ed.) (2001-09-10). "Science, Technology and the CIA: A National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book". George Washington University. Retrieved 2009-06-12.
2. ^ a b c "Project MKULTRA, the CIA's Program of Research into Behavioral Modification. Joint Hearing before the Select Committee on Intelligence and the Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research of the Committee on Human Resources, United State Senate, Ninety-Fifth Congress, First Session". U.S. Government Printing Office (copy hosted at the New York Times website). August 8, 1977. Retrieved 2010-04-18.
3. ^ "Chapter 3, part 4: Supreme Court Dissents Invoke the Nuremberg Code: CIA and DOD Human Subjects Research Scandals". Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments Final Report. Retrieved 2005-08-24.
4. ^ "The Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, Foreign and Military Intelligence". Church Committee report, no. 94-755, 94th Cong., 2d Sess.. Washington, D.C..: United States Congress. 1976. p. 392.
5. ^ "An Interview with Richard Helms". Central Intelligence Agency. 2007-05-08. Retrieved 2008-03-16.
6. ^ a b "Government Mind Control Records of MKULTRA & Bluebird/Artichoke". Retrieved 2010-03-26.
7. ^ "Interview with Victor Marchetti". Retrieved 2009-08-22.
8. ^ Cannon, M (1992). "Mind Control and the American Government". Lobster Magazine 23.
9. ^ "Opening Remarks by Senator Ted Kennedy". U.S. Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, and Subcommittee On Health And Scientific Research of the Committee On Human Resources. 1977-08-03.
10. ^ Walker, Andrew (2005-11-21). "UK | Magazine | Project Paperclip: Dark side of the Moon". BBC News. Retrieved 2010-03-26.
11. ^ "Jewish Law - Articles ("The Ethics Of Using Medical Data From Nazi Experiments")". 1946-09-25. Retrieved 2010-03-26.
12. ^ Church Committee; p. 390 "MKULTRA was approved by the DCI [Director of Central Intelligence] on April 13, 1953"
13. ^ "Chapter 3, part 4: Supreme Court Dissents Invoke the Nuremberg Code: CIA and DOD Human Subjects Research Scandals". Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments Final Report. Retrieved August 24, 2005. "MKULTRA, began in 1950 and was motivated largely in response to alleged Soviet, Chinese, and North Korean uses of mind-control techniques on U.S. prisoners of war in Korea."
14. ^ Church Committee; p. 391 "A special procedure, designated MKDELTA, was established to govern the use of MKULTRA materials abroad. Such materials were used on a number of occasions."
15. ^ Church Committee; "The congressional committee investigating the CIA research, chaired by Senator Frank Church, concluded that '[p]rior consent was obviously not obtained from any of the subjects.'"
16. ^ Price, David (June 2007). "Buying a Piece of Anthropology: Human Ecology and unwitting anthropological research for the CIA" (PDF). Anthropology Today 23 (3): 3–13. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8322.2007.00510.x. Retrieved 2008-04-13. [dead link]
17. ^ "Retrieved 25 April 2008". Retrieved 2010-03-26.
18. ^ a b "Chapter 3, part 4: Supreme Court Dissents Invoke the Nuremberg Code: CIA and DOD Human Subjects Research Scandals". Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments Final Report. Retrieved August 24, 2005. (identical sentence) "Because most of the MK-ULTRA records were deliberately destroyed in 1973 ... MK-ULTRA and the related CIA programs."
19. ^ a b McCoy, Alfred (2006). A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation from the Cold War to the War on Terror. New York: Metropolitan Books. pp. 8, 22, 30. ISBN 0805080414.
20. ^ Klein, N (2007). "2". The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. New York: Picador. pp. 47–49. ISBN 0-312-42799-9.
21. ^ Ranelagh, John (March 1988). The Agency: The Rise and Decline of the CIA. Sceptre. pp. 208–210. ISBN 0-340-41230-5.
22. ^ a b "Senate MKULTRA Hearing: Appendix C--Documents Referring to Subprojects, (page 167, in PDF document page numbering)." (PDF). Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Committee on Human Resources. August 3, 1977. Archived from the original on 2007-11-28. Retrieved 2007-08-22.
23. ^ "Declassified". Retrieved 2010-03-26.
24. ^ "Mind Control and the Secret State". Retrieved 2010-03-26.
25. ^ "Declassified". Retrieved 2010-03-26.
26. ^ Marks, John (1979). The Search for the Manchurian Candidate. New York: Times Books. pp. 106–7. ISBN 0-8129-0773-6.
27. ^ NPR Fresh Air. June 28, 2007 and Tim Weiner, The Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA.
28. ^ "Declassified". Retrieved 2010-03-26.
29. ^ Marks 1979: pp 40–42.
30. ^ Marks 1979: chapters 3 and 7.
31. ^ "Declassified". Retrieved 2010-03-26.
32. ^ Marks 1979: pp 140–150.
33. ^ Turbide, Diane (1997-04-21). "Dr. Cameron’s Casualties". Retrieved 2007-09-09.
34. ^ Collins, Anne ([1988] 1998). In the Sleep Room: The Story of CIA Brainwashing Experiments in Canada. Toronto: Key Porter Books. pp. 39, 42–3, 133. ISBN 1550139320.
35. ^ Marks 1979: p 141.
36. ^ Klein, N (2007). The Shock Doctrine. Metropolitan Books. pp. 39–41. ISBN 0676978010.
37. ^ a b Prepared Statement of Admiral Stansfield Turner, Director of Central Intelligence. ParaScope.
38. ^ "HistoryOnAir Podcast 98 - MKULTRA". 2005-06-16. Retrieved 2010-03-26.
39. ^ a b Quote from "Is Military Research Hazardous to Veterans Health? Lessons Spanning Half A Century", part F. HALLUCINOGENS 103rd Congress, 2nd Session-S. Prt. 103-97; Staff Report prepared for the committee on veterans' affairs December 8, 1994 John D. Rockefeller IV, West Virginia, Chairman. Online copy provided by, which describes itself as "Serving the Gulf War Veteran Community Worldwide Since 1994". (The same document is available from many other (unofficial) sites, which may or may not be independent.)
40. ^ a b c H. P. Albarelli (2009). A Terrible Mistake: The Murder of Frank Olson and the CIA's Secret Cold War Experiments. Trine Day. pp. 350–58, 490, 581–83, 686–92. ISBN 0-9777953-7-3.
41. ^ a b Marks 1979: chapter 5.
42. ^ Olson, E (2002-08-22). "Family Statement on the Murder of Frank Olson". Retrieved 2008-10-16.
43. ^ Ronson, Jon (2004). The Men Who Stare at Goats. New York: Picador. ISBN 0-330-37548-2.
44. ^ "Documents on Cheney Coverup of Olson Assassination" (PDF). Voltaire Network.
45. ^ Samuel, Henry (2010-03-11). "French bread spiked with LSD in CIA experiment". The Daily Telegraph (London). Retrieved 2010-05-22.
46. ^ Marks 1979: p 72n.
47. ^ United States v. Stanley, 483 U.S. 669 (1987)
48. ^ "Ritchie v. United States of America: United States District Court, Northern District of California No. C 00-3940 MHP. Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law Re: Motion for Judgment on Partial Findings" (PDF). Retrieved 2008-10-16. [dead link]
49. ^ "Book Review: Search for the Manchurian Candidate by John Marks". Retrieved 2010-03-26.
50. ^ Mills, Ami Chen (1991). CIA Off Campus: Building the Movement Against Agency Recruitment and Research (2nd ed.). Boston: South End Press. p. 38. ISBN 0896084035. Retrieved June 110, 2010.
51. ^ a b c Chase A (2000-06-01). "Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber". The Atlantic Monthly. pp. 41–65. Retrieved 2008-10-16.
52. ^ Cockburn, A; St Clair J (1999-10-18). "CIA Shrinks and LSD". CounterPunch. Retrieved 2008-10-16.
53. ^ Lehmann-Haupt, C (2001-11-01). "Ken Kesey, Author of 'Cuckoo's Nest,' Who Defined the Psychedelic Era, Dies at 66". The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-09-08.
54. ^ Baker, J (2001-11-11). "All times a great artist, Ken Kesey is dead at age 66". The Oregonian: pp. A1.
55. ^ McNally, DA (2002). A Long Strange Trip: The Inside History of the Grateful Dead. Broadway Books. pp. 42–3. ISBN 0-7679-1186-5.
56. ^ Bennett, C (2001-07-01). "Candy Jones: How a leading American fashion model came to be experimented upon by the CIA mind control team". Fortean Times. Retrieved 2008-10-16.
57. ^ Bruno, A. "James "Whitey" Bulger". Retrieved 2008-10-16.
58. ^ Knight, P (2003). Conspiracy theories in American history: an encyclopedia, Volume 2. ABC-CLIO. pp. 490. ISBN 1576078124.
59. ^ Teeter, Lawrence. "Interview with Sirhan's attorney Lawrence Teeter". KPFA 94.1/Guns & Butter show.
60. ^ Meier, M (1989). Was Jonestown a CIA Medical Experiment?: A Review of the Evidence. New York: Edwin Mellen. ISBN 0-8894-6013-2.

[edit] Further reading

* "U.S. Congress: The Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, Foreign and Military Intelligence (Church Committee report), report no. 94-755, 94th Cong., 2d Sess. (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1976), 394".
* "U.S. Senate: Joint Hearing before The Select Committee on Intelligence and The Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research of the Committee on Human Resources, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. August 3, 1977".
* "The Search for the "Manchurian Candidate": The CIA and Mind Control: The Secret History of the Behavioral Sciences".

perjantai 29. huhtikuuta 2011


tiistai 26. huhtikuuta 2011

lauantai 23. huhtikuuta 2011

julkaistu tänään klo 06:55, päivitetty tänään klo 07:24

Afganistanissa ainakin 476 vankia on paennut satoja metriä pitkän tunnelin kautta. Kandaharin vankilan johtaja vahvistaa paon ja pakotavan. Talibanien mukaan kaikki paenneet olivat järjestön jäseniä. Lisäksi järjestö väittää, että pakoon pääsi 541 vankia.

Vankilan johtajan mukaan paenneet olivat poliittisia vankeja.

- Satoja metrejä pitkä tunneli oli kaivettu vankilasta etelään. Sitä pitkin pakeni yhteensä 476 poliittista vankia viime yön aikana, kertoo vankilan johtaja Ghulam Dastageer Mayar.

Uutistoimisto AFP:n tietojen mukaan paenneet ovat talibaneja. Viranomaisten mukaan vain osa olisi talibaneja.

Talibanien edustajan Yusuf Ahmadin mukaan pakotunneli oli 360 metriä pitkä. Lisäksi Yusuf Ahmadi väittää, että vankeja olisi paennut yhteensä 541.

Ahmadin mukaan vangeista 106 olisi järjestön jonkin tason johtajia ja loput rivisotilaita.

Samasta vankilasta pakeni tuhat vankia noin kolme vuotta sitten. Silloin talibanit ajoivat räjähdysaineilla lastatun rekan vankilan porteille ja räjäyttivät muureihin reiän. eilinen pako aiheutti obamann sutumuksen ja määräyksen ampua obama ..eee osama!, mutta hän EI nähnyt sitä livenä

perjantai 22. huhtikuuta 2011 soija

torstai 14. huhtikuuta 2011

agnostisism wont get u throug the life that needs good faith

VERY good
if u don believe in lfife it dissappers. god like human like ...nothing and..everything? doesnt maatter, but faith for tomorrow. i hope all mu loves are here tomorro to say that doesnt mean u cannot fight religion if wantes its 38 years like today she *dye
pääsevät tekemään lakialoitteita.

Kansalaisaloite on kirjattu uuteen perustuslakiin, jonka työnsä päättänyt eduskunta on kertaalleen hyväksynyt. Uusi perustuslaki astuu voimaan vasta, kun uusi eduskunta hyväksyy sen toiseen kertaan riittävällä enemmistöllä.

Oikeusministeriön työryhmän tehtävänä oli laatia pohjatyö laille, joka säätelee uudessa perustuslaissa mainitun kansalaisaloitteen yksityiskohdista.
Laki voimaan ensi vuonna?

Mikäli tuore eduskunta hyväksyy uuden perustuslain ja oikeusministeriön työryhmän nyt ehdottaman lain tämän vuoden puolella, kansalaisaloitteita voisi jättää jo ensi vuonna.

Kansalaisaloite voi sisältää joko lakiehdotuksen tai ehdotuksen lainvalmisteluun ryhtymisestä. Aloite voi koskea myös voimassa olevan lain muuttamista tai kumoamista. Jos aloite tehdään lakiehdotuksen muotoon, sen tulisi sisältää säädösteksti.

Laajassa ja monimutkaisessa lainsäädäntöasiassa vireillepanijalle helpompi vaihtoehto olisi tehdä ehdotus lainvalmisteluun ryhtymisestä. Aloitteen tulisi kohdistua yhteen asiakokonaisuuteen ja siinä tulisi aina olla mukana perustelut. Aloitteen vireillepanijana voisi olla yksi tai useampi äänioikeutettu Suomen kansalainen.
Paperilla tai netissä

Kansalaisaloitetta tukevat allekirjoitukset eli kannatusilmoitukset kerättäisiin paperilla tai sähköisesti internetissä. Allekirjoitukset olisi kerättävä kuuden kuukauden kuluessa.

Pääosin kansanedustajista koostunut työryhmä oli erimielinen siitä, miten lakialoite allekirjoitetaan sähköisesti.

Työryhmä päätyi ehdottamaan, että lain allekirjoittaminen vaatisi aina sähköisen henkilökortin tai pankkitunnusten käyttöä. Vihreiden ja vasemmistoliiton edustajat jättivät eriävän mielipiteen. Heidän mielestään sähköistä tunnistautumista ei pitäisi vaatia.

sunnuntai 10. huhtikuuta 2011

lauantai 9. huhtikuuta 2011

Sun suns sun at last northern

torstai 7. huhtikuuta 2011

sunnuntai 3. huhtikuuta 2011

maanantai 21. maaliskuuta 2011

tiistai 15. maaliskuuta 2011

i was honest

maanantai 7. maaliskuuta 2011

lauantai 5. maaliskuuta 2011

edwebb RT @ayaelb #Saudi activists say #Facebook founder of #Mar11 protest group shot dead by state security My story here:

perjantai 4. maaliskuuta 2011

WikiLeaks Cablegate-filerne
Herunder kan du søge i de lækkede dokumenter fra WikiLeaks. Alle dokumenter er på engelsk.
>Se Politikens fokus om WikiLeaks
>Finder du noget? Tip os

Denmark / Copenhagen / Rasmussen / Danish / Iran /
Wikileaks - 09TRIPOLI748
Dokument dato: 2009-09-17 10:10:00
Release dato: 2011-01-31 21:09:00
Kilde: Embassy Tripoli

DE RUEHTRO #0748/01 2601049
O P 171049Z SEP 09







CLASSIFIED BY: Gene A. Cretz, Ambassador, U.S. Embassy Tripoli, Department of State. REASON: 1.4 (b), (d)

1.(C) Summary: An interagency team led by Acting A/S for DRL Karen Stewart, and comprised of State, NSC, and OVP representatives, launched with Libyan counterparts a bilateral Human Rights Dialogue August 18 in Tripoli. Although a bizarre, last-minute Libyan delegation and agenda switch nearly scuttled the talks, FM Musa Kusa intervened to restore the original delegation and agenda, and personally launched the talks. In his opening remarks, Kusa acknowledged the GOL"s need for U.S. technical assistance in a range of areas, including illegal immigration and upgrading the capacity of Libya"s detention centers and prisons. Kusa and other GOL officials protested the critical comments about Libya contained within the annual Human Rights Report and noted their interest in setting the record straight on Libya"s human rights situation within the context of the Human Rights Dialogue. Kusa stressed that the GOL viewed the human rights dialogue as part of a larger group of bilateral dialogues with the United States on a number of topics, including security, civil-nuclear cooperation, and political-military engagement; his emphasis on this point, coupled with last-minute Libyan changes to the joint statement (which resulted in agreement for no statement) hinted at a deal struck with hardliners to put the talks back on track only if they had a broader -- or no -- public focus. While we will not know how serious the Libyans are about these talks until we receive their feedback on the action plans in mid-October, we are hopeful that they could lead to some positive engagement in the areas of immigration, refugee issues, and prison conditions. End Summary.

2.(SBU) The U.S. delegation included Acting A/S for DRL Karen Stewart; Scott Busby, Director for Human Rights, National Security Council; Herro Mustafa, Senior Advisor for the Middle East and South Asia, Office of the Vice President; Robert K. Harris, Deputy Legal Advisor; Maggie Nardi, Director, Office of Maghreb Affairs, NEA Bureau; Kari Johnstone, Acting Director, Office of Near East and South Central Asia, DRL; Charge, and Pol/Econ Chief. The Libyan delegation that initiated the dialogue was led by FM Kusa and included Abdussalam al-Tumi, Chairman of the Human Rights Commission at the Ministry of Justice; Dr. Mohamed Salah al-Saghir, Head of the Department of International Law and Agreements at the MFA; Murad Hamim from the MFA"s International Organizations Department; Hamid Ahmed Hdhiri, National Security Council; Abulqacem Gargum, Head of Judicial Police Service; Dr. Ramadhan Abdedayem, Head of the Department of Human Rights at the General People"s Congress; Nasreddine Ageeli, MFA Legal Consultant on Human Rights; Mohamed el-Mahdi Hajaji, Secretary of the Department of Associations and Non-governmental Activities at the Ministry of Social Affairs; Brigadier Abdelmonem Ettunsi, Director of the Illegal Immigration Office at the Ministry of Public Security; and Dr. Ibrahim Abu Khzam of Al Fatah University. [Note: The MFA sent a diplomatic note August 26 formally listing the GOL delegation that included representatives that were not actually present at the talks, such as Dr. Ali al-Rishi, the Secretary of Immigration and Expatriate Affairs at the MFA (A/S-equivalent), and Mohamed Matari, Director of the Department of American Affairs at the MFA. Likewise, delegates who did attend the meeting were not included in the MFA"s official participant list. University professor, Dr. Rajab Boudabbous was also listed as part of the official delegation. End note.]


3.(C) The U.S. interagency team led by Acting A/S for DRL Karen Stewart met with Libyan officials at 1030 local time August 18 at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Tripoli to initiate a bilateral Human Rights Dialogue. While the Libyan side initially responded positively to the concept of the dialogue and provided on August 17 a list of participants and an agenda that paralleled our proposed agenda, the actual GOL team for the morning session was led by a philosophy professor, a judge, and the Foreign Minister"s interpreter, none of whom was included among the original delegation. [Note: The GOL told us originally that their delegation would be led by the Justice Minister but told us August 17 that the A/S-equivalent for consular issues would be the lead. End Note.]

4.(C) After introducing himself as "a professor, not a politician," noting that "politics is the art of tricks," philosophy professor Rajab Boudabbous attempted to open the bilateral Human Rights Dialogue with a lecture on human rights and the Libyan concept of democracy -- direct rule by the people or "jamahiriya." The U.S. delegation interrupted Boudabbous" lecture, halted the talks, and sought information about the TRIPOLI 00000748 002.2 OF 005 whereabouts of the named GOL delegation. Boudabbous refused to clarify what had happened and continued with his lecture as if he had been uninterrupted. The U.S. team withdrew from the lecture, and taking a few moments to regroup, the Charge discussed the situation with MFA Director of the Americas Office, Mohamed Matari. [Note: Charge attempted to contact A/S-equivalent for the Americas Department Ahmed Fituri, who did not answer his phone throughout the morning. End note.] Matari told the Charge that he would inform Foreign Minister Musa Kusa of the U.S. side"s objections to the delegation and format of the dialogue. Charge conveyed the importance of the initiation of the dialogue, as previously agreed, to the bilateral relationship and future engagement, including at the upcoming UN General Assembly session.

5.(C) As the U.S. delegation was in the process of departing the MFA, FM Kusa arrived but deliberately ignored the Charge"s attempt to discuss the issue with him. Shortly thereafter, Matari called to inform the Charge that FM Kusa would lead the dialogue himself at 1830 hours and that he would like to host a dinner for the team at 2100 hours, as previously scheduled. Kusa"s staff later revised the schedule to begin at 1730 local time, "to ensure sufficient time for substantive discussions."


6.(C) At 1730 local time, the U.S. delegation met an appropriate GOL interagency team, led by the Foreign Minister, at Libya"s Foreign Ministry. Kusa opened the meeting by stressing the need for bilateral dialogue. He noted that he had heard about the U.S. delegation"s response to the professor"s viewpoint during the morning meeting, calling it an example of the "bad chemistry" that had plagued the relationship. Kusa portrayed the Libyan government as ready to continue a results-driven human rights dialogue based on mutual respect. He acknowledged that the GOL needs U.S. assistance to improve the human rights situation. Specifically, Kusa requested U.S. assistance to combat illegal immigration and trafficking-in-persons, to upgrade and build capacity in Libyan prisons, and to train police. Kusa said that he had requested EU assistance to tackle the illegal immigration problem, specifying that in a country of six million people, Libya had three million immigrants, most of whom were illegal. However, he said that the European governments did not agree to assist in combating the problem. With borders 6,000 km long, mostly along the desert, and poor neighboring countries, Libya "can do nothing" according to Kusa, to combat illegal immigration unilaterally. He described a dire situation in Libya, with increasing crime, disease, and other problems, as the result of illegal immigration. He said that one human rights organization (not specifying which one) had brought to his attention the existence of a trafficking-in-persons problem in Libya, which Kusa noted could only be identified and combated with foreign assistance.

7.(C) Kusa further noted that Libya needed to take advantage of U.S. experience to upgrade Libya"s prisons and detention facilities. He said Libya needed training for police officers and wardens on how to deal with prisoners in a way that respects their human rights. Referring to a UK project to upgrade Libyan prisons and train police officers, Kusa explained that the UK had sent experts to work on the issue areas he specified but that Libya needed even more assistance than what the UK was able to provide.

8.(C) Kusa went on to discuss the method for evaluating human rights issues on both sides. He asked that the annual State Department Human Rights Report be a subject of discussion within the framework of the dialogue. Kusa referred to "fallacies" in the 2008 Human Rights Report on Libya, specifically recalling a section on the rights of women and the existence of political prisoners. On the first issue, he pointed to various facts proving that women are empowered in Libya - "at least 150 women work in the Foreign Ministry." Regarding political prisoners, he insisted that the "political prisoners" to which the report referred were actually fundamentalists with links to Al Qaeda, whom the GOL was trying to rehabilitate. He explained that the Libyan government was "stretching its hands" and "opening its heart" to dialogue and discussion for the sake of transparency and to correct the wrong information that the USG was reporting on the human rights situation in Libya.

9.(C) Acting A/S Stewart thanked Kusa for taking a personal interest in launching the dialogue, noting that the dialogue would be integral to broader bilateral efforts to expand TRIPOLI 00000748 003.2 OF 005 cooperation across several spheres, including political-military, economic, education, and culture. She noted that the USG was engaged in human rights dialogues with many countries throughout the world, as the U.S. Congress and American people expect, and that the U.S. delegation would welcome the opportunity to address Libya"s needs for technical assistance in the areas outlined by Kusa. She explained that the human rights dialogue could be a model for engagement in other subject areas. NEA/MAG Office Director Maggie Nardi suggested that issue-specific working groups be designated to tackle each issue. Kusa expressed his agreement with the suggestions and emphasized the need for direct political dialogue in order to address "significant issues." He highlighted positive bilateral coordination on Darfur with USSES Gration, as well as the security and military engagement, which CODEL McCain had recently discussed with Muatassim and Muammar al-Qadhafi (reftel). Kusa went on to discuss his interest in broadening the framework for U.S.-Libyan relations in a number of areas, including combating fundamentalism. Acting A/S Stewart outlined our proposed framework for the dialogue with twice yearly senior-level meetings and working groups to advance progress in the interim on priority topics, including joint polices and projects involving multilateral institutions, prison conditions and management, migration and refugees, and specific human rights cases as they arise. FM Kusa declared his agreement with this general framework and asked the U.S. delegation to propose a work plan and timetable for discussing agenda items and actively addressing them.


10.(C) Turning the floor to his delegation, Kusa said that a group of specialists had been gathered on the Libyan side for the purpose of the dialogue. Stating "I do not even know all of their names," Kusa introduced the delegates he recognized and excused himself from the meeting. During the remaining two hours of discussion, the Libyan delegates would not admit their government needed assistance in the areas outlined by Musa Kusa -- illegal immigration, trafficking in persons, prison upgrades, or police training. Instead they parsed terms and argued over definitions. Arguing that Libyan society and culture is misunderstood by the USG, Abdussalam el-Tumi, Chairman of the Human Rights Commission at the Ministry of Justice, maintained that neither "prisoners" nor "prisons" existed in Libya; rather, Libya has "detention facilities" designed to rehabilitate those "sons and brothers" who have gone astray. Tumi described a Libya-UK prison program by which the UK provides technical assistance and training to Libyan police officers and prison guards. He said that UK representatives had visited Libya"s criminal detention facilities, photographed, and reported that detainees were treated in accordance with international human rights conventions. Tumi described the judicial process by which detainees are tried and sentenced, laws stipulating detainee rights, and the treatment of detainees in detention centers. Tumi eventually admitted that the GOL required assistance in the care of detainees -- specifically in the provision of medical care, vocational training, and social reintegration programs -- as well as in training police officers and upgrading and building capacity of prison facilities.

11.(C) Tumi asserted that trafficking-in-persons did not exist in Libya. Regarding the Human Rights Report, Tumi charged that it was not based on facts, was distanced from reality, and contained sections that were "laughable." He said that the Libyan government responded to individual charges of human rights abuse and that the issue areas outlined by Kusa - involving women"s empowerment and female circumcision - were misconceived. He insisted that "human rights as a complete concept" does not exist anywhere in the world, and he expressed his hope that the dialogue would continue in order to eliminate all misunderstandings regarding the human rights situation of each nation.

12.(C) Dr. Mohamed Salah al-Saghir, Head of the Department of International Law and Agreements at the MFA, also expressed his support for the dialogue and highlighted the international conventions and agreements to which Libya was a party. As Libya was a party to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), Saghir said that the Human Rights Report must be wrong in its assertion that women in Libya face discrimination. He insisted that international conventions have supremacy over local law and are embodied within local laws as soon as the GOL signs them. TRIPOLI 00000748 004.2 OF 005

13.(C) AA/S Stewart assured the Libyan team that the Embassy would work with them to discuss their objections to the Human Rights Report over the next few months. NSC representative Scott Busby encouraged the GOL to become party to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol and to sign a Memorandum of Agreement with the UN High Commission on Refugees as important steps to address Libya"s illegal immigration problem. Busby outlined areas where the U.S. might be able to provide assistance if Libya would provide assurance that it was complying with the international treaties and conventions it had signed involving refugees. Murad Hamim from Libya"s International Organizations Department at the MFA responded that the GOL did not need to sign the 1951 Convention, as it was already a party to the 1969 Organization of African Union (OAU) Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa, which embodies many of the same principles as the 1951 and 1967 Convention and Protocol. He noted the GOL"s surprise that the USG is not a party to the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families. Briefly addressing the issue of prisons, Harris noted that the United States and Libya both had responsibilities under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other treaties to provide proper treatment for persons under detention and that the United States looked forward to working with Libya in the context of the Human Rights Dialogue to share our experiences in efficient and humane management of detention facilities. In the time before the next meeting we looked forward to discussing next steps for progress and cooperation on this issue.

14.(C) Hamid Ahmed Hdhiri of Libya"s NSC noted that the problem of illegal immigration flows into Libya require dramatic solutions to the root causes of the problem -- solutions that go beyond security. He called for U.S. assistance to combat the flow of illegal immigration from both security and economic perspectives. Hdhiri recognized the value of the 1951 and 1967 UN Refugee Conventions, but he expressed Libya"s concern that the treaty could inflict harm on the country by encouraging additional immigrants to flow across the borders. He characterized Libya as a transit, rather than a source country, for illegal immigrants and called it a "burden" to the nation. He said that Libya was providing a humanitarian service by accepting protective responsibility for illegal immigrants who had been returned from European sea ports. Hdhiri noted that Muammar al-Qadhafi had suggested that an international conference convene to address the root causes of immigration from Sub-Saharan Africa, namely poverty and lack of opportunities for economic development.

15.(C) Finally, the Libyan delegation asserted that civil society does not exist in Libya because it is unnecessary. Representatives justified their statements by claiming that Libya is a homogenous, unified society in which one group does not dominate the other, and described civil society organizations as designed solely to address the needs of groups which are disadvantaged or discriminated against within a society. In response to the U.S. delegation"s concern about the registration process for NGOs, one delegate explained that individuals could form issue-focused "charity groups" to address specific "causes," such as anti-smoking or environmental awareness campaigns. The U.S. delegation tried to explain that "charity groups" might count as "civil society" if only they were unrelated to the government (although currently no charity group can be formed outside of the umbrella of a quasi-governmental organization) and that contacts with similar groups in the United States and elsewhere would represent the kind of international communication and links we hope other civil society groups could enjoy, but the Libyan side did not appear to grasp our understanding of civil society.

16.(C) Both sides ended the discussion by agreeing that the U.S. would develop work plans on the agenda items and timelines for addressing them. They agreed that the next session of the dialogue would take place after six months and that the U.S. side would host. Although both sides had agreed before the dialogue began to the wording for a joint press statement announcing that the dialogue had been launched, the Libyan side changed the wording at the last minute to inaccurately describe the discussions as covering also security, military issues, and political issues and downplaying the human rights focus, and was unable to compromise with the U.S. delegation on a mutually-acceptable statement. Likewise the Libyan side reneged on a commitment to state publicly that the dialogue had been initiated, without explanation of its reasoning. Immediately after the meeting, the Libyan side hosted a dinner for the U.S. TRIPOLI 00000748 005.2 OF 005 delegation, during which substantive issues were not formally discussed. Musa Kusa was unable to attend, although two members of the original delegation identified by the GOL, Dr. Ali al-Rishi, the Secretary of Immigration and Expatriate Affairs at the MFA, and Mohamed Matari, Director of the Department of American Affairs at the MFA, as well as Libyan A/S-equivalent for the Americas Ahmed Fituri, did. WHAT REALLY HAPPENED? 17. (C) On the margins of the dinner, Fituri told us that he had been called to a meeting at 0200 local time the same day, to discuss the Human Rights Dialogue. xxxxxxxxxxxx The GOL"s last-minute change to the proposed joint statement -- portraying the talks as more general in nature and focused on security and military issues as well as political issues -- likely was the deal struck by FM Kusa to get the talks back on track after our delegation walked out of the morning session. The GOL"s readiness to drop the statement on the condition that both sides keep the talks quiet seems to indicate that Kusa and more Western-leaning officials needed to mollify hardliners who were concerned about the public perception of the talks. The GOL has kept its word and never publicized any aspect of the talks, although they had plenty of footage and still pictures from the meeting. 18. (C) Comment: In spite of the bizarre, fitful start, FM Kusa made it clear that he personally values the dialogue. His direct, personal involvement will be essential to the dialogue"s successful continuation. And while the substance of the dialogue may have exposed some very wide gaps in our two countries" understanding of some key human rights concepts, it also revealed some common ground and seemingly genuine desire for engagement, particularly in the areas of refugees and migration, and prison conditions. We look forward to working with the interagency and the GOL to develop work plans and timelines for meaningful action on the agenda items. End Comment. NEXT STEPS 19. (SBU) As agreed with the Libyan delegation, State DRL will take the lead to draft and clear work plans and suggested action timelines for each of the specific human rights areas identified during the talks for submission to the Libyan MFA by mid-October. CRETZ

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    Oma blogiluettelo