Non Informed Consent

A Targeted Person
 
Uninformed
human testing
 
Left undeterred, unchecked, by constitutional, ethical law,
with free reign on an unknowing population, —- —- —
human subject testing,
without informed consent, can and in the past, has become inhuman and dangerous.
 
Look at our past abuses.
 
 
Hitler’s doctors and their inhumane abuse of vulnerable camp subjects, are another prime example of this.
The human subject testing which was performed, without informed consent at Fort Dietrich, Maryland, United States, is another such group of inhuman experiments, which occurred without informed consent of the human subject.
The Nuremberg Code was formed to stop these activities from ever occurring again in societies, we consider civilized.
 
Please read. Lynn Weed, Kelb, Inc.
 
The 1953 Wilson Directive, a true copy of which is attached to the claim, as Exhibit C hereto, initially was classified as “top secret” and provided in relevant part that:
 
a. “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential,” and that
“the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior forms of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision,”
[which requires that he know]
 
“the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconvenience and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment” (Exh.C…)
 
Memo to Lynn Weed from Gordon Erspamer, Esq.
 
To: lynnandmarie@live.com
Subject: Msg from Gordon Erspamer
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 12:36:57 -0500
Subject: RE: Merry Christmas and Congratulations
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:03:28 -0800
From: GErspamer@mofo.com
 
To: lynnandmarie@live.com
 
also, we are this week looking for MKULTRA activities that took place in California, such as the “safehouse” operated as part of Operation Midnight Climax. If you know of anything that occurred here (we already know about serratia marsescans), please let me know. Thanks.
Gordon P. Erspamer
Morrison & Foerster LLP
 
I worked with Attorney Erspamer on the Fort Dietrich case.
 
After the claim was filed,
and was proceeding, it went to class action and I believe over 20,000 affected veterans joined and benefited from the findings for the plaintiffs, in the judge’s decision.
Lynn Weed
 
##########
 
Fort Dietrich, Maryland Court Case on Non-Consensual Human Experimentations—
Found for the vets.
 
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 5 sf-256453
 
In this class action, the Plaintiff class sought declaratory and injunctive relief to redress decades of the U.S. Government’s use of them as human test subjects in chemical and biological agent testing experiments, followed by decades of neglect:
• Test subjects have been released from oaths of secrecy.
• On November 19, 2013, the Court ordered the Army to provide Notice: “the Army has an ongoing duty to warn members of the class about newly acquired information that may affect their well-being now and in the future as it becomes available,” including “effects upon their health which may possibly come from such participation”
• On April 4, 2017, the Court ordered the Army to provide Medical Care: “the Army has an ongoing duty to provide medical care to the members of the class for any injury or disease that is the proximate result of their participation in Defendant’s chemical or biological substance testing programs”.
 
Editor’s note: These were some of the conditions in which human experimentation without informed consent occurred in the United States.
 
Case:
 
“1. This action chronicles a chilling tale of human experimentation, covert military operations, and heretofore unchecked abuses of power by our own government. Ironically, one of the main facilitating events for this debacle was action by a court. In 1950, during the height of the Cold War, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in the Feres case, which in effect ruled that the government is immune from damages claims brought by Armed Forces personnel arising from DEFENDANTS’ own torts.
 
The Supreme Court’s decision to absolve DEFENDANTS of legal responsibility for damages caused by the tortious acts committed by the government upon our nation’s military personnel quickly led DEFENDANTS to undertake an expansive, multifaceted program of secret experimentation on human subjects, diverting our own troops from military assignments for use as test subjects. In vi virtually all cases, troops served in the same capacity as laboratory rats or guinea pigs.
 
DEFENDANTS were able to capitalize on the inherently coercive relationship of a soldier’s commanding officers to their soldiers, as military orders can be enforced by a strong set of formal and informal sanctions. 2. In 1942, the War Department — the present day Department of Defense (“DOD”) — authorized the first experiment on military personnel, and beginning in the early 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”) and United States Army planned, organized and executed an extensive series of chemical and biological experiments.
The CIA also sponsored human drug experimentation by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (“FBN”), now the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”). This vast program of human experimentation — shrouded in secrecy — was centered at the Army’s compounds at Edgewood Arsenal and Fort Detrick, Maryland.
The human experimentation was conducted without the informed consent of its subjects and in direct contravention of applicable legal standards and principles of international law. Representatives of DEFENDANTS had also, on many occasions, promised the test participants (“volunteers”) that they would receive medals for volunteering, as well as health care, but they instead abandoned Plaintiffs and the other participants, hiding behind the insulating walls of government bureaucracies and security classifications.
Indeed, DEFENDANTS actively concealed the existence of the human experimentation tests and the test results from the outside world, and destroyed most of the documentation of the tests once their existence began to leak.
As a result, Plaintiffs and the other service personnel, many of whom are debilitated, have been left to fight their demons alone for decades without health monitoring, follow-up, or medical treatment from DEFENDANTS. Instead, DEFENDANTS’ tactic and strategy have been to ignore the victims and delay action with the expectation that their problems will disappear disappear as the victim population ages and dies.
Lynn Weed, Kelb, Inc.
“This is our work product, Kelb, Inc., Keep The Ethical Light Burning, site: keepkelb.
Any resemblance noted, to other works is coincidental. This Kelb Work product may not be copied in any form, reproduced, or copied, computer or social network copied and shared with any individual, nor any entity, unless with written permission from Lynn Weed, Director, Kelb. It is Kelb Workproduct.
This document and all future documents, edits, revisions, are not to be used for personal advocacy or any purpose, other than the specific purpose, which Kelb, intends. Here, it is commentary on the current virus problem. No portions are to be included i nor any actions, documents or movements, other than this project and this document. Thank you.”