By all accounts, military and CIA interrogators at the prison were using coercive tactics—sleep deprivation, deception, fear, or drugs—on large numbers of prisoners, and even recruiting prison guards to assist them'.
One of a list of activities deemed CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY is the dosing of prisoners held in these prison camps------EXPERIENTAL-----as well as CONTROLLING. It is VERY CLEAR in all legal and court rulings that ABU GHRAIB torturers were CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY------DEPRAVITY-----and military courts CONVICTED the worst PRISON STAFF OFFENDERS.
Top-Ranked Abu Ghraib Soldier Gets 8 Years in Prison
By By Monte Morin
| Times Staff Writer |
Oct 21, 2004 | 8:00 AM
The highest-ranking soldier charged with beating and humiliating Iraqi detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison and snapping keepsake photos of the deeds was sentenced in military court today to eight years in prison for abusing detainees.
Staff Sgt. Ivan L. "Chip" Frederick II, 38, an Army reservist and night supervisor at the prison, was demoted by the military, forfeited his salary and received a dishonorable discharge.
Frederick pleaded guilty in military court Wednesday to assault, maltreatment, dereliction of duty, indecent acts and conspiracy. He confessed to the charges as part of a plea deal. Prosecutors agreed to drop other counts in exchange for his cooperation in future courts-martial.
Frederick — a resident of Buckingham, Va., and a Virginia state prison guard in civilian life — is one of seven members of the Army Reserve's 372nd Military Police Company based in Cresaptown, Md., to be charged in the scandal. Another, Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits, in his mid-20s, of Hyndman, Pa., is serving a one-year prison sentence after pleading guilty in May to three counts.
A military intelligence soldier, Spc. Armin J. Cruz, 24, was sentenced in September to eight months in prison, a reduction in rank to private and a bad-conduct discharge for his role in the abuse.
Before knowing all this NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG illegal streaming video and PORNOGRAPHY exposure for myself in my living space I spoke in detail as part of public policy discussions how Baltimore City was allowing what would be termed CRIMES AGAINST MEDICAL ETHICS/HUMAN RIGHTS as regards DOSING with DRUGS-----in particular my earlier exposure to LSD-THERAPY SUGAR CUBES tied to Roland Griffiths, a professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins’ Behavioral Biology unit.
The reckless disregard for human life in these LSD-THERAPY SUGAR CUBE dosing is TREMENDOUS. Although this case of NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG has not included such DOSING, the continuous threats of having me INSTITUTIONALIZED IN PSYCH WARD where I did describe how people forced into these TEMPORARY COMMITMENTS are dosed -----
So, the element of PSYCHO-SEXUAL TORTURE in NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG by extension of LSD-THERAPY DOSAGE along with dosage during commitment while fighting an EARLIER NOSY NEIGHBOR PORN operation shows a pattern looking very much like the torture of prisoners in ABU GHRAIB.
BELIEVE ME----THAT LSD-DOSAGE WAS A KILLER----NOT LITERALLY, BUT HAVING THAT POSSIBLE ENDING.
Medical personnel at Abu Ghraib ignored medical ethics and human rights
Aug 20 2004A Health and Human Rights article in this week’s issue of THE LANCET highlights how US Army medical personnel at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison ignored medical ethics and human rights standards and were complicit with human rights abuses of Iraqi prisoners. The author of the article concludes that a comprehensive inquiry into the behaviour of medical personnel in places such as Abu Ghraib is needed to reform the military health system.’
We discussed in DEPOSITION earlier during FIRST BALTIMORE POLICE VISIT for concerns over illegal surveillance. FEEDBACK yesterday was ---how can NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG use this past incident AGAINST ME.
NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG yesterday FEEDBACK as to how to use my episode against me----you know, framing me for MENTAL ILLNESS----hearing voices----to cover illegal surveillance PORNOGRAPHY activities.
‘Acid Test’: The case for using psychedelics to treat PTSD, depression
By Tom Shroder
September 4, 2014
Roland Griffiths, a professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, studies the effects of psychoactive drugs on the mind in his lab, which is set up to look like a living room. (Andre Chung/For The Washington Post)
This article is excerpted from Tom Shroder’s “Acid Test: LSD, Ecstasy and the Power to Heal,” which comes out Sept. 9.
The book focuses on researchers’ attempts to determine whether psychedelic drugs administered with talk therapy can help people with post-traumatic stress disorder and other psychiatric ailments. Such studies flourished in the 1950s when more than 25,000 doses of psychedelic drugs were administered to thousands of patients and the accepted assessment held that the drugs would be “of utmost value in psychotherapy.” Rampant recreational drug abuse in the ’60s provoked government restrictions on research, but a small group of scientists persisted in the belief that psychedelic drugs were too potentially valuable to be discarded. In the past decade, a number of clinical trials have won approval at major research institutions, including Johns Hopkins.
These studies have shown promising results using MDMA, psilocybin and other psychedelics in controlled clinical settings under close medical supervision, even as abuse of drugs sold on the street as psychedelics continues to claim victims.
Roland Griffiths, a slender man with a thatch of white hair and piercing eyes, got his PhD in psychopharmacology in 1972 from the University of Minnesota, then went to Johns Hopkins’ Behavioral Biology unit, where he specialized in determining the relative abuse potential of drugs.
Griffiths became a recognized expert in his field, was happy and successful in his work. In his personal life, he discovered meditation, and that changed him in a fundamental way.
“I had remarkable experiences that were unlike anything else I had had. … And all of a sudden, for lack of a better descriptor, it opened a spiritual window in the world for me,” he said.
At some point, a light went on in Griffiths’ mind and he realized his personal and professional concerns could converge seamlessly: He researched psychoactive drugs. A certain class of psychoactive drugs was reputed to induce just the kind of experiences he’d been so affected by in meditation. Psychedelic drugs.
Today's HOMELAND SECURITY structure is tied to THE NETWORK and indeed there are many voices on this NETWORK maybe new who are tied to these global private military corporations allowing this OPEN SECRET ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE with PORNOGRAPHY. As NOSY NEIGHBORS love to say------victims of these PORNOGRAPHY structures are OBJECTS TO BE USED TO AN END. Same words----same MODEL from STANFORD ---that global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS------former US UNIVERSITY TURNED GLOBAL HEDGE FUND CORPORATION.
STANFORD IS JOHNS HOPKINS IS YALE-----being far-right wing NEO-CONSERVATIVE ----
'Both sociopaths and psychopaths view people as objects to be used to an end, have no consideration for rules or boundaries and feel no remorse'.
So, here in Baltimore where this same PSYCHO-SEXUAL TORTURE model is fabricated across community structures all tied to THE NETWORK and NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG is just one element of that NETWORK.
'Graner was going to prey on others, period'.
That's why I call NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG------SEXUAL PREDATORS......they do it for PLEASURE as well as money.
Human Rights Report on
Forced Drugging in the U.S.
Tina Minkowitz, Esq.
September 14, 2013
A group of grass roots survivor activists have sent a report on forced drugging in the U.S (along with an executive summary) to the United Nations Human Rights Committee.
In March, the Committee asked the U.S. to explain how it sees nonconsensual medication in psychiatric institutions as being compliant with Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which prohibits torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment (including nonconsensual medical and scientific experimentation).
United Nations Special Rapporteur on Forced Psychiatry
On March 4, 2013, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, the UN's top torture watchdog, warned nation states…
How Similar Are the Stanford Prison Experiment and the Abu Ghraib Torture Scandal?
On May 8, 2018 By corvidaehistoryIn Iraq
In 1971 a psychology professor named Robert Zimbardo conducted an experiment where he took 28 “normal” Stanford University student volunteers and randomly assigned them to be prisoners or guards.
Pretty quickly, it turned into Lord of the Flies and the formerly civilized students who were just in an experiment started abusing each other. Thirty years later when news of the Abu Ghraib torture scandal broke, many people felt like there was an eerie similarity between the two: nice, normal people are put into a situation where they are suddenly prison guards and start abusing the prisoners. But how similar are the two situations?
First of all, let me start off by saying that I do think that Zimbardo’s research is important and helpful. History has shown that when they feel like others not “really” human beings or that the situation requires it, or that someone else will take the accountability, people who have no history of psychopathy/sociopathy do horrendous things. And I think his work helps us understand the actions of some of the guilty parties like Lindy England who really didn’t have a history of violent or abusive behavior before Abu Ghraib.
It also sheds some light on the use of humiliation as a corrective action for prisoners when the unit from Las Vegas was stationed there before the 372 Military Police Company ever showed up. On the other side, it might also explain the years of torture that went on at Abu Ghraib under Saddam Hussein before Americans ever set foot in Iraq. (Though no one seems to be interviewing those guards. It’s as if the only torture victims that matter are ones who are tortured by Americans. Iraqis who were tortured by other Iraqis don’t exist to Americans because it’s easier to ignore human rights abuses you don’t hear about in the news media.)
But…if you ever take the CITI certification to be cleared to work with human subjects, you’ll find Dr. Zimbardo and the Stanford Prison Experiment come up very frequently as an example of what not to do with human research, from both an ethics and research methods standpoint. And there are some definite problems when we use it as an explanation for the Abu Ghraib torture scandal— and almost any other case of prison abuse.
Abu Ghraib was not a college psychology experiment. The students knew they were going into an experiment while the soldiers were being mortared and blown up with IED’s thousands of miles from everything they had ever known. Some may quibble with me over this, saying that once they got into the experiment they felt like they were going to die and their lives were in danger. This is may be partly true, but human nature is a tricky thing.
Once we start trying to observe behavior, especially when people know they are being observed, the very act of observing can change their behavior. When researchers set up human behavior experiments, they deal with this all the time. It’s called expectancy bias— and many have pointed out that it is all over the Stanford Prison Experiment. Dr. Zimbardo deliberately created situations that would create more tension among the “prisoners” and “guards” such as sleep deprivation. One of the students who became the most notoriously abusive “guard” in the experiment stated that he went into his assignment as a guard trying to imitate a prison guard he had seen in the movie Cool Hand Luke. So he wasn’t exactly showing his unplanned and unobserved behavior.
On the other hand, Joe Darby, the whistleblower at Abu Ghraib, talked about having to literally dig through body parts to find eyeballs of prisoners for identification via retina scan after mortar attacks. The brand of crazy the soldiers were dealing with was unengineered and unpredictable. (You could be mortared at any minute.) So there were some definite differences between the two situations.
Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment also doesn’t account for another little crazy factor: psychopaths and sociopaths. This is why Zimbardo’s assertion that Abu Ghraib was not “just a few bad apples” isn’t entirely true, in my opinion. The assumption with the Stanford Prison Experiment is that all the subjects were regular, nice people before they entered the experiment and then when placed in a prisoner-guard dynamic became abusive.
Both sociopaths and psychopaths view people as objects to be used to an end, have no consideration for rules or boundaries and feel no remorse. But sociopaths are generally thought to be more erratic and unpredictable and shaped by environmental factors— think The Joker in Dark Knight or Cruella DeVille.