a paranoid man being constantly surveilled-is he still paranoid or just correct? Receivers were put into small children's heads, masked by a small scar, usually. Then the government projected transmissions via radar array, later by satellite, to mold the experiments thought patterns, unwittingly affecting the structure of their brains. This caused an explosion in intellect, with an explosion in mental illness as a by-product. Haven't you noticed that since the late 70's cases of mental illness in the US have increased ridiculously? ADHD and Depression being the most prevalent, but more serious mental illness such as Bipolar and Schizophrenia as well. As their methods improved it went from a small scar to a vaccine-implantation. They moved to a biodegradable transceiver recently and began incorporating it into the flu vaccine-that's why the flu vaccine seldom has much effect. I don't know why they won't at least admit to their expertise regarding nanotechnology, that would seem to be something to crow about. Since it's the same people who conducted the philadelphia expriment, who knows what they are thinking.
Is there legal recourse against the government for victims of experimentation?
- Thread starter Mr. Hamtastic
- Start date
If you really DO believe what you're saying, you're not only paranoid but HIGHLY delusional as well !!! How long has it been since your last visit with your mental doctor??
Read-only, you are just believing because it's more comfortable to deny. U-2's being UFO's was another bit of their propaganda. Just open your mind a little, you'll see, maybe even you hear the static of connection, you just try to ignore it.
Short answer, Yes, you can sue.
Yes, and some have even been settled.Mr. Hamtastic said:
Tuskegee Experiment
In 1974, the Justice Department settled a lawsuit and paid damages to survivors of the experiment and to the estates of the deceased.
1953 a CIA project named MK-ULTRA controlled a U.S. academic chemical interrogation research program:
The Justice Department announced today (Published: October 12, 1988 NY Times) that it had settled a lawsuit by nine Canadians who charged that the C.I.A. made them the subjects of mind-control experiments involving drugs.
Heres where your train goes off the rails. Proof please. The above settled cases produced internal documentation of these experiments.Mr. Hamtastic said:
Sometimes, most of the time actually, people are just simply mentally ill without needing MIB, government experimentation, mad scientists, etc.
As far as increased diagnosis of mental illness, this is directly related to better medical training, clearer ethics (in that doctors list these illnesses rather than protect the family from stigma) and a dismissal of "evil spirits" inspite of the religious rights demands that 'the devil made him do it' as a medical condition.
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
OK, I missed the italicized as your addition. I actually tend to believe things similar to that may have happened - his wording is a little hard to follow so I am not sure - but I can understand your skepticism.
This is true, and unwittingly incorrect. As medical science improves, to include psychiatry, more ACCURATE diagnosis(diagnoses?) will be made, but consider this. If you go to your doctor and complain of severe pain in your hand, will the doctor order an xray of your entire arm? These implants are almost certainly embeded into the cartilege of the nose, or just inside the eye socket, for non biodegradable ones. Being non-metallic, they'd blend into an xray or ct scan like they weren't even there. They simply aren't aware of what to look for, and when told, they are taught to regard it as sheer paranoia. I think that a strong electric shock to the eye socket would disable it, but would probably cause severe trauma. In any case, until someone dies and their skull and nasal cavities can be thoroughly investigated, there will be no proof to be had. Besides which, they incorporate a deep-seated desire to assist the project, at least here in the US, by transmission of a subliminal signal on the same carrier wave. Even if you want out of the project, you find yourself trying to assist the project. I suspect this to be why so many facial injuries are incurred in suicides, it's probably a failsafe for nondetection. I would just like them to show me how to use this stuff to my benefit. If I were to sue, it would be for clinical data only, more than likely. I want to know if through this technology I can tap into unreachable resources in my brain that I can apply to everyday life, or is this just another step towards MMI and the singularity? Why would the gov't be looking towards the singularity and transhumanism at all? It seems counter intuitive to me.
solidsquid
Registered Member
I cannot say definitively about the others but I know the families and the surviving members of the Tuskegee experiment settled out of court:
Source - http://www.tuskegee.edu/Global/Story.asp?s=1207586
As your statement shows, tuskegee was won because it was shown as a racial issue. This is about humanity.
That kind of mental manipulation is not possible with current technology that I'm aware of. I assume you would need a working knowledge of that technology in order to detect it.
That's just it, detection is an unintended side-effect on the subject. As they refine the tech, detection will become less frequent.
So you are asking: If perfect undetectable mind control techniques are perfected, how could they be detected? That would raise disturbing ethical questions. Only people familiar with the person could say they weren't acting like themselves.
My dad was in the military and before he died of cancer, he sued and won. Well, he either won or it was settled out of court. Something to do with radioactive exposure. He didn't talk about it much. I think the money made sure he didn't.
When I think of gvmt experimentation, I think of the Tuskegee men.
Now it seems like every college student signs up to be a guinea pig.
When I think of gvmt experimentation, I think of the Tuskegee men.
Now it seems like every college student signs up to be a guinea pig.
That's why we need to start carefully investigating the skulls of intelligent people diagnosed with auditory hallucinations, paranoia, or schizophrenia, particularly the eyesockets. Another option would be if someone with one of these features would voluntarily submit to having each eye removed, the socket inspected, then the eye replaced.
Do you suffer from any of these?
Yes, and I'll happily volunteer, if that's what you're asking. Auditory hallucinations from my personas. Just put me in touch with a willing pro bono doctor.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make with this.
Then again, the probability that such claims are sheer paranoia are pretty high.Mr. Hamtastic said:
Wow. Great example of a self reinforcing delusion.Mr. Hamtastic said:
55% of suicides are gunshots
20% are suffocation (including hanging)
17% are poisioning
The remainder include falls/leaps, cutting, drowning and fire. This is for the USA 2001.
http://www.suicide.org/suicide-statistics.html
You can get facial injury with gunshots but this is dependent on the knowledge of the suicidal person, and of course the type of gun (and bullets) used.
Falls/leaps could do significant facial damage, as well as to those who leap into traffic. Not sure if they were included in the falls/leaps category.
You get into europe and the gunshots fall. Example Lithuania, 1984 - 2003
"The most common methods of suicide among men were hanging, strangulation and suffocation (87.4% among all suicide deaths).
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1540427
I chose Lithuania because of its higher general suicide rate for that region. So my point is the reason you have facial injury is due to the preferred method of suicide, which varies by location, age and time period (gunshot suicides were down for ages 10-19 recently, with an increase in other methods. This was wrapped around a general decline in suicides for that age category.)
Mr. Hamtastic said:
So have you begun taking your lawyer training yet? I think you will have a difficult time finding one willing to take the case.
My suggestion would be to use google a bit more before posting.
Of course, tuskegee were legitimate cases of syphilis among thousands of other legitimate cases. Kurt Cobain would be an example of a test subject, while probably not the only one that year to die of shotgun to the head. Only one percent of all victims of suicide or even mental illness would be used in testing. If you're gonna hide a tree, it's best to do so in a forest.
I don't need a lawyer, I know I need evidence first. I need a willing Doctor, or someone who will let me exhume the skull of an american born since 1960 who was diagnosed with paranoia, schizophrenia, or auditory hallucinations. Any thoughts on a first step here?
Simon Anders
Valued Senior Member
I would try to make contact with a pathologist. Exhumations demand either a full out crime or a court approval for the procedure. But a will pathologist could do it informally. It would be like a very ugly, poor, smelly man asking out beautiful women, but statistics will catch up to the issue eventually. Someone will say yes. You could also go through any organization that has similar concerns to you and see if members have connections to a pathologist or anyone with access to cadavers.
You get an informal hit - ie. this person informally finds something - and now you have an engaged professional who can help determine if there is a pattern.
I think it is possible that these conditions may be created in ways that do not involve devices, however. Like they are the fallout of vaccinations or toxins in the water supply, etc.
Simon-that's part of the problem. Those who would form a group to combat this are probably quite fearful of what may happen to them. With pathologists-the stigma of pure disbelief would have to be overcome. I don't think there will be a 1 to 1 ratio of mental illness to subjects, probably more like ten thousand to one. This would be very hit or miss. That's why I think I need to find someone who is willing to remove my eyeballs and check the eyesockets. No local doctor or opthalmologist is open to the idea.
Perhaps I should try to figure out how to get some voltage into my eyesocket. Does anyone know if you can carve out a stable hole in the flesh where the eyelid stops and not eyelid starts? The recess you can put your finger in when your eye is closed, even push the eye down a bit.
Perhaps I should try to figure out how to get some voltage into my eyesocket. Does anyone know if you can carve out a stable hole in the flesh where the eyelid stops and not eyelid starts? The recess you can put your finger in when your eye is closed, even push the eye down a bit.