It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bioethics commission to meet in New York City on May 18-19

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 02:27 PM
The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues will conduct its fifth meeting in May. At this meeting, the Commission will discuss the topic of Federal standards regarding human subjects protection in Federally funded scientific studies.

The meeting will take place Wednesday, May 18, 2011, from 9 a.m. to approximately 4:45 p.m., and Thursday, May 19, 2011, from 9 a.m. to approximately 1:15 p.m.

The Warwick New York Hotel, 65 West 54th Street, New York, NY 10019.

As before, I’ll be showing up. At least one notable person (Ted Gunderson) plans on attending. There may be other surprises.

This time, things will be different.

They’re on to us!
When we showed up last time, they weren’t aware of the agenda beforehand. Nevertheless, they did manage to put everyone in a box - all the damaging comments were saved for the last session.

If many people from the last meeting show up at this one, I’m sure they’ll be bracing for another onslaught of testimony. Those of us who show up need to defy expectations.

My recommendations:

•Returning speakers need to cover new ground - with focused questions and comments. There’ll be some brainstorming over that later, no doubt.
•If you’re planning on showing up, practice your speaking skills! Get an interview with Tammy or Michael (ask Tammy or myself for contact information), or other Internet radio shows near the bottom rung of the talk show ladder - those guys are always hungry for guests. Practicing in a low profile venue will give you the confidence and experience to speak in what may be a very high profile venue.
•Let’s try to make sure every session has at least one person speaking about these issues.
Based on the video footage, I have some suggestions for commenters.

We all know about the psychological manipulation in which they try to make you feel guilty or that it’s your fault. There’s no need to speak about these matters.

Along those lines, whatever your beliefs or background, they’re going to belittle you based on those things, or make you feel that you’re being persecuted because of those things. It’s the experimentation that matters, not the lies you were fed about why you were experimented on.

General commenting guidelines
I suggest reviewing the footage and looking for flaws in each speaker’s testimony. What did they do wrong? Can you do better?
As before, they will allow spoken and written comments, with written comments preferred. Everything you say or write will be entered into the public record. They are only interested in experimentation, not “stalking”. With that in mind:

•Do not mention stalking/harassment except in passing, and only if it supports your story. Example: “I complained to the FBI [about the electronic harassment], and then I started getting followed everywhere and harassed…” would be acceptable. We all know it’s part of the program, but it isn’t obviously related to experimentation, which is the only thing the commission is interested in.
•Don’t make any accusations you can’t back up. Describe symptoms, rather than alleged technology, unless a weapon was literally held up against your head. You may believe that a specific person is responsible for it all, but don’t make statements of that sort unless you’re ready for a court battle with that person over your accusations.
•The committee members are highly educated. You’re not going to slip information rooted in blatant scientific errors past this group. If in doubt, leave it out.
•Your testimony should stand on its own. You are speaking to an uninitiated audience, so don’t refer to other targets’ web sites (they won’t have read them) or use targeting-related terminology, which suggests you’ve fallen prey to group-think - the one impression you can’t afford. Market yourself as an experimentee or human test subject, rather than a “targeted individual” (even though both are probably correct).
•Do not identify yourself as affiliated with any group (such as FFCHS) or a regular of a mailing list or web site (such as this one). Your statement should stand on its own, without leaning on others’ testimonies; and besides, you don’t want to get dragged down by poorly considered statements from individuals who do identify themselves as part of a group.
•Do not connect the dots by referring to others’ experiences or saying this happens to lots of people. It’s up to them to connect the dots.
•It’s okay if you’re a nobody! “Nobodies” are excellent candidates for nonconsensual human experimentation, as they can be ‘disappeared’ without anyone noticing.
•Your statement will become part of the public record. Avoid highly embarrassing details.
•Keep it short: you should be able to say what you need to say in under five minutes.
•The panel has no real power. They merely make recommendations to the President. Do not make demands of them or criticize them for failing to act.
Also, bring a printout of what you want to speak about, so you can submit the written testimony in case you don’t get a chance to talk.


It's about time people were getting there opportunity to tell what kind of experimentation is going on with them post MK-Ultra....


new topics

log in