Journalist Spencer Ackerman published an article in the Guardian, which covers a section obtained by the ACLU in reference to Human Subject Experimentation.
It's coming out, and I have taken the time to ask those involved to CONTINUE their Investigations
CIA torture appears to have broken spy agency rule on human experimentation
The Central Intelligence Agency had explicit guidelines for “human experimentation” – before, during and after its post-9/11 torture of terrorism detainees – that raise new questions about the limits on the agency’s in-house and contracted medical research.
Sections of a previously classified CIA document, made public by the Guardian on Monday, empower the agency’s director to “approve, modify, or disapprove all proposals pertaining to human subject research”. The leeway provides the director, who has never in the agency’s history been a medical doctor, with significant influence over limitations the US government sets to preserve safe, humane and ethical procedures on people.
CIA director George Tenet approved abusive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, designed by CIA contractor psychologists. He further instructed the agency’s health personnel to oversee the brutal interrogations – the beginning of years of controversy, still ongoing, about US torture as a violation of medical ethics.But the revelation of the guidelines has prompted critics of CIA torture to question how the agency could have ever implemented what it calls “enhanced interrogation techniques” – despite apparently having rules against “research on human subjects” without their informed consent.
CIA director George Tenet approved abusive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, designed by CIA contractor psychologists. He further instructed the agency’s health personnel to oversee the brutal interrogations – the beginning of years of controversy, still ongoing, about US torture as a violation of medical ethics.
But the revelation of the guidelines has prompted critics of CIA torture to question how the agency could have ever implemented what it calls “enhanced interrogation techniques” – despite apparently having rules against “research on human subjects” without their informed consent.
“The more words you have, the more you can twist them, but it’s not a bad definition,” said Scott Allen, an internist and medical adviser to Physicians for Human Rights.
The agency confirmed to the Guardian that the document was still in effect during the lifespan of the controversial rendition, detention and interrogation program.
After reviewing the document, one watchdog said the timeline suggested the CIA manipulated basic definitions of human experimentation to ensure the torture program proceeded.
“Crime one was torture. The second crime was research without consent in order to say it wasn’t torture,” said Nathaniel Raymond, a former war-crimes investigator with Physicians for Human Rights and now a researcher with Harvard University’s Humanitarian Initiative...
Informed consent, the director and his ‘human subject research’ panel
I have been using Twitter for a few years now and when there is an Opportunity, I ask those Journalists' or those who can Obtain the Material Evidence to FURTHER their Investigations, because it REACHES WAY, WAY BEYOND the PRISON WALLS of these Prison/Detainee Camps, Black Sites, and right into the Streets of this country..
Here are some samples and the SOURCE information I provide to BACK UP my REQUESTS.
Spencer Ackerman
I'm now on paternity leave. But this was an emotionally fraught story to report while looking at my newborn daughter:
Telling Anonymous NEUROSCIENTISTS are ALSO INVOLVED IN TORTURE
CIA releases docs regarding an investigation into the use of mind-altering drugs to enhance interrogation http://firedoglake.com/2015/05/11/cia-investigation-minimizes-use-of-drugs-on-black-site-detainees/ …
Alda Mysteriosa
TO NATHANIEL RAYMOND - Investigator RE: CIA TORTURE & APA involvement
No comments:
Post a Comment