Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Once Bitten, Twice Shy

Scientists periodically express concerns about a population at large which fails to trust the scientific method and those who practice it. Such dynamics are observable within the medical community and a segment of the public which resists vaccinations, for example. We are often told the blame lies in widely accepted yet irrational conspiracy theories and a general lack of education.

That is certainly accurate to some extent, but not entirely. At least partially to blame is the fact the intelligence community (IC) has a long and well documented history of exploiting the medical field and its unsuspecting patients.

Does that justify the public spreading measles around elementary schools? No, of course not – but that is not the point being offered for consideration.

The argument being put forth is that the environment created by collaborations between the IC, medical doctors and the professional research community propagates distrust and paranoia. The lack of public education has been used by the IC as an advantage at times, it is not always to its detriment, and to cite it as virtually the exclusive reason medical science is questioned is arguably hypocritical and disingenuous. It is true that rumors and inaccurate information fuel the public lack of trust of the scientific community, but it is equally true that the exploitation of the public shares some of the blame. Stick around a few paragraphs and you'll see one of the ways this ties directly to the UFO community.

The late Dr. Ewen Cameron served as president of both the American and Canadian Psychiatric Associations. He also received grant funds originating from the CIA and Project MKULTRA Subproject 68. While directing the Allan Memorial Institute, a psychiatric hospital located at McGill University during the mid 20th century, Cameron conducted some of the most heinous experiments attributed to MKULTRA. Exploited were individuals seeking care for or questionably diagnosed with mental illnesses. Courts awarded financial compensation to dozens of Cameron's victims, and hundreds more were continuing to seek legal judgments as recently as 2004. 

The Bronfman Building of McGill
McGill's history of covert involvement with the powers that be understandably resulted in student advocacy groups monitoring school research contracts, grant awards and related activities. In 2014 Demilitarize McGill uncovered evidence that a study and survey conducted by the psych department and funded by the Canadian military was misrepresented to its research subjects. Concerns of ethics were raised when some 80 Somali Canadians were interviewed about their interests and activities, but researchers failed to inform the subjects the study was funded by the military and designed to assist in profiling terrorists.

Earlier this month Demil McGill obtained documents and records indicating university personnel were involved in a scheme to deflect oversight and public scrutiny from their military-funded weapons research and development. The plan included professors using their home addresses as locations of businesses listed as securing contracts actually carried out at McGill. Those do not seem like the actions we should expect of administrators and researchers who wish to bury indiscretions of the past and prioritize having their work and statements accepted as high in integrity.

Among the more blatant known instances of medical professionals willfully deceiving and harming research subjects was the Tuskegee Study. Hundreds of African American men were allowed to suffer from syphilis in order to study its progression. Many were intentionally infected without informing either them or, obviously, their sex partners. The Center for Disease Control reports the 1932 study was originally projected to last for six months but went on for 40 years. The involuntary and inadequately informed research subjects were lured with promises of free healthcare, among other benefits.

In 1994 the Clinton administration launched an investigation into claims that human research subjects were intentionally and unwittingly exposed to radiation. The Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments concluded that an estimated 11,000 Americans were treated negligently by their federal government during experiments, some of which were fatal. Records showed that, similarly to those exploited during the Tuskegee Study, some of the radiation victims were misled to believe the tests were harmless and they would be rewarded with free healthcare for their participation.

Next time you hear someone carrying on about how ignorant and irrational the populations are in countries that resist international medical aid and vaccinations, you might consider asking them if they are aware the CIA executed a bogus vaccination drive in 2011 in Pakistan. The ruse included recruiting a senior Pakistani doctor who was actually extracting DNA samples from children for intelligence purposes, not vaccinating the juveniles. He was later arrested by Pakistani intelligence services for cooperating with the American intel agency.

It shouldn't be that difficult to figure out that such operations do not foster public trust in the medical community, or that ignorance and paranoia are not the only hurdles to overcome. It's not just a matter of whether or not the public believes in the validity of the review process that approved a vaccination, it's also a matter of trusting the motives of those administering it. Obviously, such concerns are not entirely unfounded, and, even if the occurrences of betrayal are relatively rare, they still contribute to the challenges. The covert operations are part of the origins of the misunderstandings and unsubstantiated rumors. After all, they were intended by design to be misunderstood and exploitative in the first place. That's part of the culture that evolved.

And then there's this. If you've never heard of the anti-vax efforts of Retired Major General Albert Stubblebine III and his wife, Dr. Rima Laibow, it's not because they aren't trying to get your attention. The couple operate a nonprofit corporation, the Natural Solutions Foundation, and a closely related website, Dr. Rima Truth Reports. A more unsubstantiated bunch of dire conspiracy theories posted by a retired career intelligence officer on a single website you may never find.

Stubblebine and Laibow inform their following of such news as vaccinations are for the purpose of turning our children into autistic worker drones. Promoted is a stance of no vaccines, ever, under any circumstances. The couple also report that the powers that be are keeping secret an ebola cure, nano silver, because they want us all to die. According to Stubblebine, there is a major plot afoot to exterminate a high percentage of the human race, leaving the elites to enjoy the planet thereafter. And so on.

Before the couple was informing the public of such important news that Laibow claimed resulted in a "serious attempt" on her life, they were high profile members of the UFO community. Laibow, a psychologist, supported the use of hypnosis as an investigative tool for alleged alien abduction and was a speaker in Pensacola at the 1990 annual MUFON shindig when the Gulf Breeze Six came to town.

Stubblebine is one of 'The Men Who Stare at Goats' guys and was credited with the development of Remote Viewing, as well as heading up the CIA-funded exploration of it. More recently he's been raging about everything from 911 to chemtrails. Learn more about the couple and their ufology adventures by searching this blog or, of course, conducting an Internet search.

In March of 2012, Retired Colonel John Alexander was emailed by this writer. He was scheduled to speak at the Ozark UFO Conference, and permission was sought to interview him for a blog post during the event. He replied he would be happy to meet, and suggested to get with him at the conference.

Topics intended for discussion with Alexander, who presents himself as extremely anti-conspiracy, included the actions of Stubblebine, among other items of interest. Unfortunately, when approached at the conference, the colonel expressed that he had changed his mind and was declining to be interviewed. He suggested he felt 'The UFO Trail' was too conspiracy-oriented to entertain its questions.

The opportunity was taken, however, to ask Alexander how he and Stubblebine, a man he worked with directly, could have so many conflicting accounts of what took place. Alexander briefly replied that Stubblebine was his former boss, and added that he does not know why Stubblebine says the things he says. 

The rest of us still don't either, but perhaps some related issues deserve their share of attention. Among them would be the glaringly obvious: There are reasons in addition to ignorance and paranoia that people don't trust authority. If the government and its researchers sincerely desire to be viewed with more integrity, there are steps they can take to improve the situation other than condemning the public for its lack of respect. 


  1. Your article falls in line with the issues described in the documentary, "Bought,' which can be viewed here, for free, until March 6th:


    I am literally viewing this documentary as I type this. I would urge anyone who reads your blog to view it as well. Very powerful, thought provoking...

  2. This is the same John Alexander who recently posted an opinion on Open Minds that the Rendlesham case was genuine?

    Rendlesham is as phony as a two-dollar bill. The fact it's a military installation does not make it immune from critical inspection. The scholarship behind human experimentation on this blog has been first rate.

    John Alexander's magical thinking about Rendlesham isn't.

  3. "Rendlesham is as phony as a two-dollar bill."

    Really? Sources?

    I've read Larry Warren's book - completely - three times over. I've listened to not only Larry's version of events as he recalls them, but I've listened to Peter Robbins' lectures on this subject as well. I've reviewed and listened to, Linda Moulton-Howe's statements/work on this subject, etc., so forth. My conclusion is not that 'the Rendlesham Forest incident(s) is phony.' Quite the contrary...

    SOMETHING happened at Rendlesham. Whatever it was, is open to debate, certainly; nonetheless, to state Rendlesham is 'phony' doesn't quite measure up.

    1. Something did happen. Two dollar bills are real. Alexander's friend, Jacques Vallee, had Rendlesham dead to rights in his book Revelations.

      I dispute defining the event as an alien encounter. And if indeed it was an experiment, some sort of security drill, it was a crime, in my opinion. The soldiers involved should be compensated.

      The list of suspects is short. The burden of proof is extraordinarily high. You can't say it was alien beings, Do you have the being? Any other proof you offer is unsatisfactory. Then it becomes a matter of faith. Any testimony from military sources gets a magic pass. They become magical negroes. This is where believers black out and crumble to the floor, incapable of critical thought.

      We like to pretend that military sources are impervious to undue influence. They're not. The possibility humans were experimenting on humans in Rendlesham has historical precedent as Jack has documented. I find the prospect that such occurred here to be completely manipulative and offensive. So offensive that, like some scenes in Dawn of the Dead or the Abu Ghraib photographs, you have to turn your head. So people do. They're not strong enough to do otherwise.

      It doesn't matter if no law at present exists preventing the Military or foreign allies from conducting experiments on U.S. troops. Such a law should exist. And if the military insists it was not conducting an experiment, and some of them contend it was alien beings, there is only one thing they can do: Disclose. And I don't mean disclose what you said under hypnotic improvisation.

      It would be well to remind Alexander that the contention Rendlesham was an alien visitation is itself a "conspiracy theory."

      The sources you cite are career UFO entertainers. They're in the Biz.

      Maybe the Rendlesham sales people should contact Ray Santilli. There's a man whose gifts are being wasted.

    2. I heard this one young soldier actually committed suicide over the incident and it's aftermath. Apparently there was no psychological follow up after the incident

  4. Since the above mentioned article mentions so-called anti-vaxxers' statements re vaccines, here's something perhaps some of your readers are now aware of, Jack:



    "August 27, 2014 Press Release, “Statement of William W. Thompson, Ph.D., Regarding the 2004 Article Examining the Possibility of a Relationship Between MMR Vaccine and Autism”



    My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and

    Prevention, where I have worked since 1998.

    I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed..."

    For the record, our son was vaccine damaged as an infant; his reactions were duly noted in his medical/pediatric file. Also for the record - it was our then pediatric group who informed us our son was experiencing these reactions, not the two of us proclaiming he'd suffered these reactions, because we honestly didn't understand what was happening to our son post-vaccination (prolonged somnolence, high-pitched screaming, petit mal seizures).

    I would respectfully state, Jack, that if you are one of those of whom does not believe that vaccines can and have caused severe damage and/or death to many, I would urge great caution in speaking same. There is a plethora of (albeit somewhat suppressed) documentation stating as such, including info. contained in peer reviewed medical journals dating back to the late 1930's/early 1940's, for example, which fully documents known vaccine reactivity in several children post vaccination with the whole cell pertussis DPT vaccine. Further, after my husband and I further researched this issue, we found these vaccine reactions are not as 'rare' as we've been told.

    This is not the forum within which to discuss this issue, admittedly, but every time I read something such as the article above, my blood does boil just a bit. We almost LOST our son to vaccines, vaccines which we were told he needed to save his life. Quite the opposite almost occurred. We are profoundly grateful to have discovered via our own research, those physicians who recognize these adverse events DO occur; in fact, some of those same physicians helped us regain our son's health after years of heartache. He is now doing well and in college.

    1. > For the record, our son was vaccine damaged as an infant
      > We almost LOST our son to vaccines

      I don't want to disrespect your family's situation (I am close to a child with an autism diagnosis), but there are problems with your arguments.

      You cite one 2004 paper that omitted autism data, but these are findings which are not substantiated by the vast body of later studies. And as you know, the Wakefield study that first proposed vaccine-autism causation was based on fabricated data. That is why science tries not to make broad assertions based on one study or one case alone -- to check for error, bias, iatrogenic effects, etc.

      For instance, you don't state exactly what harm came to your son. I presume then that it was not autism. As presented, your personal anecdote is too vague to convince us of vaccine causation. Even so, it is well-established that a very small number of people will have a bad reaction to any thoroughly vetted, humane medical treatment, reactions not shared by the vast majority of patients (see Guillain-Barré syndrome and the flu shot). It is unfortunate when treatments cause harm, but if these same medical procedures prevent exponentially more injuries and deaths, patients will always demand them.

      Unfortunately, your argument contains a lot of red flags I recognise from past fringe claims: strawmen arguments (falsely stating vaccine proponents believe no harm whatsoever can come from vaccines), citing very old and outdated studies (a favourite of creationists), citing isolated recent studies not backed by meta-analysis of the same research topic (that 2004 paper), ignoring fraud committed by researchers who support your position (Wakefield), vague personal claims that ignore the experience of billions of people worldwide who have benefitted from the same types of treatment for over two centuries (starting with Edward Jenner in the last 1700s).

      I don't know what happened to your son and I am glad he turned out okay (I have the same hope for my boy), but I think it only fair to point out that you also don't know what happened to your son. I say that from the evidence and logic you have presented here: speaking plainly, you are really bad at making your case. It has all the problems of advocacy without the virtues of education or persuasion.

      Good luck.

  5. @Terry the Censor:

    WE did NOT diagnose our son's vaccine reactions. His pediatric staff not only told us (my husband is an attorney/I'm a former legal researcher) that our son had experienced vaccine reactions to his whole cell pertussis DPT vaccine. Meaning no disrespect, but do you understand? We did not know what happened to our son. Our son went into complete somnolence immediately post-vaccination. Somnolence as in almost comatose. This child could not be awakened for two entire days/nights for a changing and/or for a feeding. And this was a child who did NOT sleep well immediately after birth. His nurses at Denver's Rose Medical Center warned us that our son didn't sleep (I stayed at Rose Medical for two whole days/nights after his birth). Our son would not sleep for longer than 15 minutes at a time, an indication we now realize had something to do with his medical issues. So there was a complete CHANGE in him post-vaccination, sleep wise, which indicated something going on with his brain. Then, immediately upon awakening from his somnolence, he started this high pitched scream for over three hours, and would bang his forehead against my husband's chest and/or he would pound his fists into his head. This indicated, we found out later, brain inflammation, or is pronounced in medical literature as the 'encephalitic cry.' This high pitched screaming - again earmarked in peer reviewed medical journals,' is associated with encephalitis. When my attorney husband and I researched vaccine safety issues, etc., in my husband's legal library, we found that the U.S. medical establishment had known about the whole cell pertussis component in the DPT vaccine (commonly referred to as the whole cell DPT vaccine), was KNOWN to cause the precise reactions our son experienced. Also, at the time our son was experiencing this high pitched screaming episode, our pediatrician asked me to hold out the phone so he could hear our son's cries. When I got back on the phone, he said in a very hushed/somber tone that our son was experiencing a reaction to his vaccines and to give him Tylenol to help our son with the pain (hence why the head banging/fist banging on his forehead). Kind of like a migraine, if you will, only he didn't have the verbal skills as a four month old, to state this, obviously. Later, during the six month well baby visit, I asked just what the hell had happened to our son. Our pediatrician frankly stated that we would more or less most likely see learning issues starting at the age of Kindergarten, which is what we did. Our son was diagnosed at Children's Oakland Hospital as having severe/profound dysgraphia, a higher order speech/language disorder and a true inability to understand principles behind math concepts. So YES, we DO know what happened to our son. Further, the whole cell DPT vaccine, the one in which they claimed our son reacted to (never mind the bolus doses of other vaccines given to him at the same time) was later phased out and replaced with the acellular so-called less reactive DTap vaccine, The Dtap vaccine, however, is still highly reactive. I've performed intensive research into the vaccine issue for a little over 20 years, plus, now. This is a vastly complex issue, one in which takes time and arduous study. Many physicicans have now spoken out as to their own concerns about vaccine safety. Why on Earth anyone would feel that vaccines do not cause harm/risk is beyond me. Vaccines are DRUGS and as such, can and have caused much harm to many children and adults around the world. That FACT is documented in peer reviewed medical research, dating as far back as the late 1930's.

  6. Here's one example of a vaccine injury recently compensated by the U.S. Vaccine Court:


    ..."On June 22, 2011, Carolyn Schutte went to the Clay County Public Health Center in Liberty for a round of shots. She was preparing for a trip to Africa and received vaccinations for various diseases, including tetanus, Hepatitis A and B, and typhoid. Two days later, she was debilitated with permanent brain damage caused by encephalopathy.

    "The active lifestyle that we had before is over," said Jim Schutte, Carolyn Schutte's husband and now her guardian. "It's gone. We just have to make due with what's left."

    The couple were once avid travelers.

    Now, Jim Schutte is homebound, assisting with his wife's around-the-clock care..."

    A colleague of mine states the following:

    "I do not tell anyone what risks to take and never will. The right and responsibility for making a risk decision belongs to the person taking the risk. When you become informed and think rationally about a risk you or your child will take - and then follow your conscience - you own that decision. And when you own a decision, you can defend it. And once you can defend it, you will be ready to do whatever it takes to fight for your freedom to make it, no matter who tries to prevent you from doing that."

    Each one of us is born with different genes and a unique microbiome influenced by epigenetics that affects how we respond to the environments we live in. We do not all respond the same way to infectious diseases and we do not all respond the same way to pharmaceutical products like vaccines. Public health laws that fail to respect biodiversity and force everyone to be treated the same are unethical and dangerous.