Nov. 15, 2010

America in Peril: The dangerous practice of incarcerating citizens based on future events (Part I)

From Government Scams Expose by Hung Nam Tran

Transcription

PROFILE

Name: Hung N. Tran
Age: 40
Height: 120lbs
Nationality: Vietnamese
Education: University of Wisconsin Parkside
Likes: Positive, fun, kind and courageous liberal people
Dislikes: Selfish, arrogant, conservatives, communist, gay-
bashers and ignorant, redneck-type of people
Important: Family, chickens and friends
Hobbies: Cooking, ceramics & creating board games
Sports: Swimming & Football
Political Leaning: Constitutionalist
Goal: To achieve social justice & racial equality
Known as: Defender of the underdog, advocate of the mentally
ill and fierce protector of constitutional mandates.

AMERICA IN PERIL

The dangerous practice of incarcerating citizens based on future events.

PART I

by Hung Nam Tran

In responding to reports of "amazing results" achieved by the Soviets in using "truth drugs" for use in interrogations and recruitment, the CIA approved the use of chemical and biological agents by utilizing a combination of sodium pentothal, hypnosis, physical and psychiatric methods to extract information from obstinate individuals. In the 1950's, the director of Central Intelligence Agency, approved project BLUEBIRD. Its objectives were: (a) discovering means of conditioning personnel to prevent unauthorized extraction of information from them by known means, (b) investigating the possibility of control of an individual by application of special interrogation techniques, (c) memory enhancement, and (d) establishing defensive means for preventing hostile control of agency personnel.

In August 1951, the project was renamed project ARTICHOKE. Project ARTICHOKE initiated by the Office of Scientific Intelligence (OSC) which studied scientific advances. In 1952, overall responsibility for ANTICHOKE was transferred from OSC to the Inspection and Security Office (ISO). In 1956, the project was spilt and distributed different branches of government. Project CHATTER then created by the U.S. Navy involving Anabasis aphylly scopolamine and mescaline in order to inducing unconsciousness in the victim. Project NKNAOMI operated by the Army, another biological weapon for the use against humans resulted in death of soldiers from the surreptitious administration of LSD to unwitting Americans. The CIA principal program involving research and development of psychiatric techniques which was used to control human behavior called MKULTRA. In 1977, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was joined by the Subcommittee on Health and scientific Research chaired by Senator Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii and Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts they held a hearing on the MKULTRA Project. The committees discovered that there were 149 MKULTRA subprojects, many of which appeared to have some connections with research into behavioral modification, drug acquisition and testing or administering drugs surreptitiously. They most significant new data discovered were the connection between private institutions, universities, academic researchers and the CIA. The institutions include 44 colleges or universities, 15 research foundations or chemical or pharmaceutical companies and the like, 12 hospitals or clinics and 3 penal institutions. One of the universities participated in MKULTRA subproject 97 and 105 and was the University of Wisconsin Madison located in Wisconsin State Capitol in Madison, Wisconsin. One of the most interesting projects was subproject 39 conducted by Ionia State Hospital in Ionia, Michigan a suburb in Detroit. MKULTRA subproject 39 was designed to exploit the research potential of a group of 142 sex offenders confined in Ionia State hospital. On June 3, 1957, Sidney Gottlieb, Chief of TTS, Chemical Division of the CIA approved the use of sex offenders as research subjects on the theory that sex offenders are sexual psychopaths which posses mental disorder which predisposed them to sexual violence.

The idea of given treatment to those who are mentally ill is a noble goal. The problem arises associated sex offenders with mental illness was flawed. There is no scientific, documented or validated evidence pointing to those committed sex offenders ipso facto are mentally ill. Although people who are mentally ills had committed sex offenses due to mental abnormality, however, mental diseases or illness did not strictly subjected an individual to act out sexually specifically in a criminal way. In fact, evidence had overwhelming shown many individual whom afflicted with mental illness committed varieties of criminal acts.

Psychotic episodes affecting the brain were not selective or predisposed a person to any particular act. Rather, the brains which experiences extreme episodes of psychosis relegated the bodily function to an abnormal mental state of mind. Thus, there is no basis whatsoever to equate sex offenders who commit sex crimes mentally ill as a whole. the original concept of coining those who committed sex offense as mentally ills was originated at the same time as the MKULTRA Projects were about to be terminated by President Nixon. As early as 1950, the "Group for Advancement of Psychiatry", by its committee on Forensic Psychiatry published a report entitled, "Psychiatrically Deviated Sex Offenders," (report no. (1950)), recommended that repetitive sex offenders be treated as mentally ill. Thus, the standard manual for diagnosis used by psychiatrists of the American Psychiatric association's diagnostic and statistical manual of Mental Disorders known as the DSM-I was born.

In 1954, Dr. Benjamin Karpman, the chief psychotherapist at St. Elizabeth Hospital in Washington D.C. published his book, "The Sexual Offender and His Offenses", etiology, pathology, pyschodynamics and treatment to examine sexual deviancy from a psychoanalytic or psychogenic view point. He changed the term "sexual deviancy" to the more morally neutral term as we know today as "paraphilia". Listed as mental frottage and fetishism. This definition was incorporated into the DSM-II in 1967. Paraphilia,according to Dr. Karpman, was seen as akin to neurosis. He wrote:

"Dynamic psychiatry sees in paraphilias profound disturbances in the sex life of the person and patterns of sexual behavior not directed ultimately toward procreation, the goal of normal sex life." B. Karpman, the Sexual Offenders and His Offenses, P.479 (1954).

According to Dr. Karpman's morality, any sexual behavior which was not practice for purposes of procreation is considered sexual deviants and therefore, those who engage in sexual activities which are not for purposes of having children is considered mentally ill. Thus, a couple watching porn movies, a woman who likes to bare her breasts in public, a cross dresser, a person who engages in sodomy or those who like to play with sex toys are all considered mentally ill. There is no evidence that he came to this conclusion from the study of his patients or evinced evidence from his psychiatric research, rather it was shaped from his own moral principles. This position was echoed by his closest friend and colleague Dr. Clifford Allen in a "Textbook for Psychosexual Disorders". When published in 1962, it was the first textbook of psychosexual disease. The DSM-II listed sexual deviation as a mental disorder adopted from Dr. Allen's book. Mental Disorder is defined in the DSM-II as:

"...individuals whose sexual interests are directed primarily toward objects other than people of the opposite sex, toward sexual acts not usually associated with coitus, or toward coitus performed under bizarre circumstances as in necrophilia, homosexuality, pedophilia, sexual sadism and fetishism." p.44

Based on these moral and religious views of a few psychiatrists, a sexual deviant is one not practising sexuality for the prupose of procreation, as well-recognized Christian doctrine. Out of this concept, many legislatures enacted practically all of the laws in the United States dealing with sex crimes would be driven by Christian values. Most laws including one in Wisconsin classified under this Christian principle is labelled as Crime Against Sexual Morality. Thus, the Christian religion and cultural practice has dominated every aspect of the American secure life including crime and punishment.

The most frightening aspect in our society today is not the indoctrination of Christian values embedded and consented by our own government into a multicultural and a diverse society nor is it the secret experiments carried out by rogue scientists at academic institutions across the United States. What is rather astonishing is the fact these unethical and immoral researches are being done right now with justification provided by the religious rights and support by the government with the assistance of rogue psychologists from their voodoo science. Human beings are being locked up for research purposes because the legislature determined a whole class of people "mentally ill based" on a state timeline. Mental illness is codified into law as a group of legislature see fits without regard to whether the individual clinical or medically impaired, a standard definition of mental illness. To justify this position the state often hires a psychologist and for a few thousand dollars they would testify in court a person is mentally ill. Their testimony was not based on their training as a psychologist or supported by the DSM-IV but a statutory definition created by law makers. If the state wins the outcome which they often do in that particular psychologist will often be rewarded with a cash bonus, as much as five grants for an average of thirty minutes' testimony. This process is called "civil commitment of sexually violent persons". The title is extremely misleading since it was designed to inflame the jury and sway public opinion due to societal abhorrence against sex offenders. To target this group and label them as mentally ill for the purpose of treatment would not only secure political elections but allowing these conservative fundamentalists a means to cintue with past research without fear of public re-incrimination for past lost cause. Since most courts around the country are stacked with conservative judges in every level of the judiciary system, these laws with its purposes and intents have been upheld constitutionally despite previous rulings to the contrary. Not surprisingly, the conservatives U.S. Supreme Court in a five to four decision upheld the case of Kansas v. Hendricks and sided with the government by stripping its citizens and our constitutional heritage has produced innocent citizens being locked up behind bars without any evidence that these individuals had ever been mentally ill.

The state contends these individuals are mentally ill based on their past conviction(s) for sexual offense(s). They further rationalized that these individuals are dangerous to society and in need of treatment. If this was the case then why state initially had sought prison terms against sex offenders or criminal conducts and then only when they had completed their prison terms then all of a sudden they are mentally ill and in need of treatment. This method though so un-American, raise little or no protest from the public because sex offenders had earned the irk to society and made into scapegoat for social ills. Knowing the public stand, government officials pushed ahead with this communistic and conservative method, no matter how ethicial or unconstitutional, to permit the end to justify the means. The problem with this method is that many individuals who are very dangerous and in fact some are mentally ill got set free while the innocents are punished. If individuals committed crime and had already served their prison sentences then what sense is of locked them up again? The answer lies in "law and order" politics which use this political pundit for personal gain. For these individuals who had completely paid their debts to society then once again was forced to defend themselves in court and not in a hospital which claim they are mentally ill. They are then placed by the state in a specialized prison which is degradable and subject them to various tortures for the purpose of research in behavior modification techniques without any psychiatric treatment whatsoever. Knowing the public would not approve of torture, these politicians names these types of prisons like the one in Mauston, Wisconsin, called Sand Ridge Secure Treatment Center (SRSTC), called the unfortunate prisoners patients and the guards as psychiatric care technicians. These labels might seem fancy and legitimate but there are no psychiatrists or psychologists on hand to deal with residents. Nor had any of the psychiatric care technicians ever been trained in the mental health field. All of them are prison guards who have been transferred to this facility and many still classified as correctional officers. Furthermore, the internal policies are adopted directly from correctional institutions. The main nazi, Steve Schneider, a former correctional officer at double max facility in Portage, Wisconsin where Jeffrey Dahlman once served, oversee SRSTC. Under his regime, there has been the highest rate of death of residents in his bloody hands than any other correctional institutions he had served.

The experimental research at SRSTC is implemented by a Dr David Thorton, Dr Richard Elwood, and Dr Doren which is similar to the MKULTRA Project. The only difference between the CIA research and SRSTC is that MKULTRA's subjects are in fact highly pyschopathic which are medically recognized as mental illness. Many research subjects at SRSTC, in fact, are noy mentally ill at all. These rogue psychologists claimed their research will find a method of treating sex offenders so that they will now reoffend, however, reoffending is a criminal act not due to mental abnormalities. A person who committed a criminal act is responsible for their behavior because he is responsible for his conduct and choose willing and voluntarily goes against social norms. Such deliberate intent to disregard societal rules for one's own benefit is not a mental disorder or mental defect because of the person's free will. On the other hand, a person with mental illness could not control or act on rational thoughts. Rather, one's mind has taken complete control over reason or rationality. Legitimate psychologists know this and would not diagnose a person mentally ill unless they are highly psychopathic. Instead, the reward of money by the state to rogue psychologists like Dr Anthony Jurek who maintains a private practice in Mequon, Wisconsin, to go against ethical code of conducts is the main motivation. Others like Dr Doren, "simply make up bogus diagnoses to justify commitment," says Dr Thomas Zander, a professor at Marquette University and a world renowned psychologist.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Statistic which published a thirty years study of "Prisoners Release in 1994: concluded sex offenders reoffend at a rate of only 3.5% three years after release and 87% of sex crimes are committed by whites. Yet, over half of the population in Sand Ridge is minority. In fact, practically all know jail-house lawyers are overwhelmingly had been referred for commitment. Yet Doren, Elwood and Thornton continuously pointed to their research theory that sex offenders as a whole posed very high risk to reoffend while ignoring their very research data that contradicted their proposition. Clearly, their interests lie within the political realm of economic incentive and not facts or results. Unfortunately, it is the taxpayers who foot the bills for these fraudulent scams.

When the MKULTRA Projects were ordered closed by congress and executive order, many research institutions conceded that committing a sex crime does not mean a person is mentally ill as per se. Fifty years later it was revived due to a rash of high profile sex cases across the nation. In response to a kidnapping, sexual assaults and murder of two young boys, the Washington legislature passed a "Sexual Predator Act" which committed those those who committed heinous crimes against society. A few states including Kansas, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Florida, California, New Jersey, Illinois, Iowa and a host of other states followed suit. Today, about 20 states have some form of this law designed to protect the public at the same time treating the offenders. However, a few facilities like Minnesota, Florida and Wisconsin intended purposes were not to provide any type of legitimate treatment, rather, the treatment here consisted mostly of physical assaults, sexual humiliation, mental degradation, social deprivation and emotional abuse. All of this in the name of research on the presumption that sex offenders possessed mental disorders despite the fact such theory had been disproved previously.

Wisconsin like the twenty other states decided to incarcerate their citizens not on the basis of the mental illness defined by the medical community but instead the Wisconsin legislature led by Conservative Republicans state senator Alberta Darling (R-River Hills), Jeff Stone (R-Glendale), Mary Lazich (R-New Berlin) and a host of others to create their own version definition of mental disorders as a justification basis to incarcerate citizens for future events based on a belief that individuals who committed crime and served their sentences may again be committed for crimes committed in the future. Darling and her conservative republican colleagues decided to create a legal definition of what is mentally ill or a mental disorder. The definition of "mental disorder" means a congenital or acquired condition that affects the emotional or volitional capacity that predisposed a person to engage in acts of sexual violence. This definition is overly broad and has no validity to any person's mental condition.

Everything humans engaged in will be affected emotionally in some way(s). That is called human emotion. Darling wants any emotional reponse a person exhibits to become the first element of a mental disorder. To predict a person predisposed of committing future crime(s), she then created law which allows the rogue scientists like Dr Anthony Jurek of Mequon or Lakshmi Subramanian of Madison, to testify that certain individuals will pose a danger to the public by committing more crimes without any medical basis. When a person who committed a crime, therefore, possible could reoffend, a concept can be applied to everything in life based on the law of probability. However, no one can be certain which particular individual will commit future crimes and which one does not. It's like saying that if a group of smokers quit smoking then some of them might pick it up again. It is reasonable enough but no one could predict with absolute certainty that a certain ex-smoker will smoke again. This is what Alberta Darling tried to do. By creating her own definition of mental illness and method of prediction, she directed state officials to lock people up based not on the crimes they had committed but based purely on prediction of future dangerousness.

The Wisconsin's court stacked by conservatives are exercising judicial fiat by allowing the government to maintain this law. The court led by conservative justice Janine Geske, currently employs as a professor at Marquette University in Milwaukee, upheld the constitutionality of incarcerating people even after they had completely served their times despite the fact similar laws in the past has been struck down by federal courts in the same district. Conservatives always rally the cry of respecting the constitution certainly did not rule this way. In fact, this is one of the greatest assaults on individuals' liberty and constitutional rights of the people in this state. This is not Janine Geske's only assault on the constitution. She and her Federalist Society members have consistently took down the principle of liberty for many years including a case in which she required all defendants to stake all constitutional errors within the first year of incarceration or forfeit the right to petition the court for redress even if he claims innocent. It is no wonder innocent people only get exonerated at an average 26 years in confinement. For people like Geske and her conservative cohorts, liberty and freedom is less important than the idea of justice and equality.

Thus, the idea of locing someone up as future danger to the state was not new or shocking to these constitutional killers. It was invented by the Nazis and Communists. The Nazi concentration camps did not means only for the Jews exclusively. Many of society's undesirable elements considered by the Third Reich such as political dissenters, human activists, religious figures, homosexuals and felons were also placed in concentration camps. Darling just basically carried on the torch of the latter exposing that sex offenders will be dangerous to the state in the future. the Communists in the Soviet era created "Education Camps" based on the same philosophy. And during World War II, the United States shamefully erected "Internment Camps" for the Japanese Americans.

Alberta Darling and many un-American ideas suppress and undesirable element of society to further their selfish political gain. The dangerous problem is not the ends justify the means as far as public protection is concerned but big brother is not only watching the person's wrongful misconduct. And when this concept is applied in a prison context, eventually, it will spread to the general public as well. When that day comes, the general public can no longer decree this horrible practice when they had assented to such immoral practice by silence. The siren of alert then will be too late when they too will be encased behind a government created concentration camp BASED ON NOT WHAT THEY DID but on what the government thinks they might do in the future.

Favorite

Replies (3) Replies feed

MarcellousWalker Posted 4 years, 6 months ago. ✓ Mailed 4 years, 6 months ago   Favorite
Good job... finally got to see the website. Keep up the good work.

M.W.

LisaHeard Posted 4 years, 4 months ago. ✓ Mailed 4 years, 3 months ago   Favorite
Thanks for writing! I worked on the transcription for your post.

LisaHeard Posted 4 years, 3 months ago. ✓ Mailed 4 years, 3 months ago   Favorite
Thanks for writing! I finished the transcription for your post.

We will print and mail your reply by . Guidelines

Other posts by this author

Subscribe

Get notifications when new letters or replies are posted!

Posts by Hung Nam Tran: RSS email me
Comments on “America in Peril: The dangerous practice of incarcerating citizens based on future events (Part I)”: RSS email me
Featured posts: RSS email me
All Between the Bars posts: RSS