The following letter sent to the Minister of Justice for Saskatchewan was motivated by a report that the Government proposes to change the Human Rights system in the province.
The P.S. at the end of the letter introduces the issue, in a democracy, of the use of drugs that cause memory loss. It has been a “chiller” in my mind, ever since the drugs were forcibly imposed on me back in 2005, by injection. Some of you know the story. It appears in abbreviated form in my letter below to Justice Minister Don Morgan.
Patience has a pay-back. In 2006 when I exhausted the avenues of appeal against what had been done, I resolved to let it go, rather than become obsessed with it. But I also believed that opportunity for re-dress would be presented in time, if only because it is an important issue. I did not, of course, imagine that the opportunity would come in this form of proposed changes to the Human Rights process.
It’s a better opportunity than I could have constructed. “The system failure” can be addressed AND there is a forum to start discussion of the very troubling question of the use by “professionals” of drugs that cause amnesia. Is there any role in a democracy for the use of these drugs? . . . (Mind you, I don’t have time to start an “action” item just now! The creation of awareness comes first.)
For the period of time of which I have no memory, any number of things could have been done to me without my knowledge. It sounds over-the-top, but it is what happened.
Some of you know Chad Kister (American) who has travelled and given talks about the effects of climate change in the Arctic, focusing on the polar bears as example. I know Chad from his visit to Saskatoon; he stayed at my place. Chad is an activist who was involved in the WTO demonstrations (1999 – “Battle in Seattle”, he joined the Washington protests.). Chad was awarded a substantial court settlement because of the beating he received at the hands of the police, fortunately caught on video-tape. As I understand Chad’s current situation, he believes that something untoward was done to him.
One tends to dismiss such claims – until you know from your own personal experience how easy it is for a couple of trained people to overwhelm and give you the injection which brings almost instantaneous memory loss. It is sobering, not to mention bizarre, to have it happen to one’s self and to see the ease with which people abuse their position of power. In 2005. In Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.
Personally, I believe that drugs that cause memory loss should be banned. Other alternatives are available. They are a real and substantial threat to personal security. They are in the toolbox of totalitarian regimes; they have no place in a democracy.
= = = = = = == === ==
PLEASE NOTE: This letter focuses on the conclusions drawn from my own experience, I did not attempt to elaborate beyond that.
April 23, 2010
SUBJECT: Support for Human Rights cases (appeals) to be handled in the Courts. Personal experience.
TO: Don Morgan, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Saskatchewan
CC: Frank Quennell (NDP Justice critic), Dr. Stuart Houston
Dear Don Morgan,
RE: Protection of Human Rights in Saskatchewan
My personal experience supports your statement “the Tribunal is “too close” to the Commission”, as reported in the appended CBC news report. There is a problem with the current arrangement that needs to be addressed. Your efforts will hopefully bring my despair with the system to an end!
The idea that human rights complaints should be handled outside the Court system sounds good. By removing the costs of the court system, justice becomes accessible – so the argument goes.
However, my experience with the Human Rights Commission and Tribunal led me to conclude that in Saskatchewan we have only the illusion of a system for the protection of human rights. My real-life experience completely undermined my faith in our institutions. I said to friends, “We are supporting a system that is a sham.”
Not only are the Human Rights Commission and Tribunal “too close”, they also operate in a closed environment. At no time was I able to make a presentation in person. I was not able to ask questions of the Tribunal. They simply decree that it shall be thus. The Justice system is far from perfect, but it is at least transparent.
I have remained troubled by the fact that there was no remedy for me, the citizen, in the situation I found myself in 5 years ago. I suspect that what happened to me is happening to other people who have less ability than I have to deal with it. It seems to me that what you, Don Morgan, are proposing has the potential to move us toward human rights, in reality as opposed to rhetoric.
(But it is a legitimate statement that “access to justice requires significant financial resources which are beyond the reach of most individuals and groups, particularly those most marginalized” (2nd appended article). I do not know if Legal Aid addresses this part of the question.)
A brief explanation of my experience may be helpful to answer the question as a test case: would the outcome have potentially been any different, if your proposed changes had been in place?
Dr. Stuart Houston is from Saskatoon, a retired radiologist and professor, also known for his decades of banding birds and for his authorship of numerous books, in partnership with his wife Mary. I believe Dr. Houston will back-up the central issue in my story: he came to visit me in Hospital and volunteered to provide evidence at a hearing which was subsequently cancelled by Dr. Donna Malcolm before it could be held.
The long and short of my experience: I was injected with a drug that causes complete and permanent loss of memory for a period of time in “the majority” of patients. (The length of time for the amnesia is related to the strength of the dose.) I was then locked up in the Psychiatric Ward of Royal University Hospital (RUH) for one week.
A second signature is required on the admitting form; the young woman who provided the second signature was working on her residency under the supervision of Dr. Malcolm. There was no independent second opinion.
I was not “manic”, I had a case of at-that-time, not-yet-diagnosed tuberculosis. The symptom that took me to hospital was a large volume of fluid on one lung. The x-ray that showed the fluid was in the Hospital file.
While in the Psychiatric Ward, I asked a doctor from Internal Medicine where I should be in order to receive the appropriate medical treatment for my symptoms; he told me I should be in Internal Medicine. I asked him to do what he could to get me moved. As mentioned, Dr. Houston volunteered to present evidence on my behalf at the appeal hearing into my confinement. Donna Malcolm cancelled the hearing before it could take place. I was forcibly locked up for one week.
In a democracy, no one should be able to inject another person with drugs that cause complete amnesia for a period of time. Prior to the injection Donna Malcolm refused to allow me access to a telephone so I could speak with my lawyer. After the injection I apparently talked with the Hospital’s lawyer, but I have absolutely no memory of anything related to that meeting. People talking to you while you are under the influence of the drug view you as being fully conscious. Whereas my experience was one of being totally unconscious as a consequence of the injection of the drug combination.
“Intravenous or intramuscular administration of the recommended dose of 2 mg to 4 mg of lorazepam injection to patients is followed by dose-related effects of sedation (sleepiness or drowsiness), relief of preoperative anxiety, and lack of recall of events related to the day of surgery in the majority of patients. The clinical sedation (sleepiness or drowsiness) thus noted is such that the majority of patients are able to respond to simple instructions whether they give the appearance of being awake or asleep. …”
(INSERT Note: I was not scheduled for surgery. I went to the Hospital to obtain information.)
There was no justification for Donna Malcolm’s actions. The reason she diagnosed me as being “manic” was because I was an informed and therefore questioning person when I went to RUH. I took with me to the Hospital the x-ray that showed the fluid on my lung. One is supposed to be dumb and accepting of everything proposed. Dialogue to reach better understanding and personal decision-making are apparently verboten.
In summary, Donna Malcolm
– Injected me with a drug combination that is known to cause permanent memory loss (amnesia)
– Under her direction, I was forced to take anti-psychotic drugs under threat of another injection if I didn’t take the anti-psychotic drugs. Enforcement was carried out by 2 security guards and 3 other personnel, a team of 5 people.
– Donna Malcolm was responsible for unlawful confinement of me for one week
– She cancelled the appeal hearing at which Dr. Stuart Houston was to testify on my behalf
If that does not constitute an egregious and unacceptable breach of my human rights in a democracy, I don’t know what does! The fact that there was no remedy through the Human Rights process is an indictment of the current process. I was told by the Human Rights Commission that they deal with systemic breaches of human rights. Was this a chronic breach? Am I from a visible minority or disabled?
I appealed to the Human Rights Tribunal. They upheld the decision of the Human Rights Commission to do nothing about the very serious abuse of very basic human rights.
Obviously you have received a number of complaints about the current system or you would not be pursuing change. You will understand why I fully support and appreciate your efforts. A change in the system is badly needed, in my personal experience.
Yours truly,
Sandra Finley
(Contact info)
P.S. Drugs that put you into a state where things can be done to you, without your knowing or being aware belong in a police state, not in a democracy. Lorazepam was used on me. These drugs should be outlawed in Canada. /S
= = = = = =
APPENDED
Sask. Party wants to ‘dissolve’ rights tribunal, NDP says
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2010/04/15/sk-human-rights-1004.html
Last Updated: Thursday, April 15, 2010 | 5:43 PM CT
CBC News
The provincial government says it’s considering a proposal to have human rights cases handled in the courts instead of before the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal.
Justice Minister Don Morgan confirmed in the legislature Thursday he’s holding “negotiations and discussions” with the province’s Human Rights Commission. The agency, which is independent from the Tribunal, investigates human rights complaints and can send them on to the Tribunal for a hearing.
“We have received a recommendation from the chief commissioner that the Human Rights Tribunal matters could better be dealt with in the court of Queen’s Bench,” Morgan said.
He added that there have been some criticisms that the Tribunal is “too close” to the Commission.
“We are looking for ways to try and improve the optics and improve the situation where citizens will go before the Tribunal,” Morgan said.
However, Frank Quennell, the NDP Opposition’s justice critic who raised the issue in the legislature, said if the government intends to “dissolve” the Tribunal, as he thinks it does, it means more people will have to pay for legal help to go to the courts to defend their basic human rights.
Currently, a lawyer from the commission often presents the complainant cases. Quennell said he’s worried that will change.
“Does the government intend to force Saskatchewan people to spend thousands of dollars to defend their human rights — and hire a lawyer to do so — in courts?”
In the legislature, Morgan didn’t answer the question about lawyers, but said whatever the government ends up doing, protecting the rights of citizens will be its priority.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2010/04/15/sk-human-rights-1004.html#ixzz0lDhqK6tr
= = = = =
Harper’s hitlist: Human rights taken out of commission
BY MURRAY DOBBIN
APRIL 14, 2010
rabble.ca columnist Murray Dobbin details the harm Prime Minister Stephen Harper is doing to the political and social fabric of Canada in a new essay commissioned by The Council of Canadians. This article is an excerpt taken from the essay, the eighth in a 10-part series on Harper’s assault on democracy.
(Link no longer valid http://rabble.ca/news/2010/04/harper’s-hitlist-human-rights-taken-out-commission)
The attack on human rights
On Jan. 11, 1999, while he was on leave from formal politics and running the National Citizen’s Coalition, Stephen Harper told the rightwing BC Report newsmagazine that: “Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society… It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.”*
With this extremist view on human rights it should come as no surprise that in the first year in power Harper eliminated one of the most effective and innovative programs promoting and facilitating human rights — the Court Challenges Program.
The CCP, established in 1978, provided funding for individuals challenging government legislation that was discriminatory (it expanded its program after the Charter came into existence in 1982).
Here is what the Community Social Planning Council of Toronto said of the program: “The rationale behind the program lies in the fact that access to justice requires significant financial resources which are beyond the reach of most individuals and groups, particularly those most marginalized. Without financial support to test the constitutionality of questionable laws, constitutional rights are only protected for the wealthy that have the resources to access the courts.”
= = = = = = = = = == == = = = = = = =
Roger writes, in response:
Enforced psychiatric treatment – maybe interesting background:
A lot more common than we think…………….
- One of the most extreme 1950s experiments that the CIA sponsored was conducted at a McGill University hospital in Montreal, where the world-renowned psychiatrist Dr. Ewen Cameron had been pioneering a technique he called “psychic driving.”
- Dr. Cameron was widely considered the most able psychiatrist in Canada, and patients were referred to him from all over. A disaffected housewife, a rebellious youth, a struggling starlet and the wife of a Member of Parliament were a few of the patients who became nonconsenting experimental subjects. Many were diagnosed as schizophrenic (a diagnosis since contested in many of the cases).
- Cameron’s goal was to wipe out the stable “self,” eliminating deep-seated psychological problems in order to rebuild it. The CIA wanted to know what his experiments suggested about interrogating people with the help of sensory deprivation and psychic disorientation.
- SEE http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=71a9b280-2bdb-472d-a46e-f8b6fb4933c5
- See CIA and MK Ultra – Cathy O’Brian and “Project Monarch”: severe and prolonged sexual abuse. Refer: David Icke’s book Global Conspiracy, Oct 2007, page circa 478.
- Much evidence to suggest that Obama (Barry Soetoro) is MKUltra’ed. As was Timothy McVeigh (Murrah Building bombing.) As was the guy who tried to blow his testicles off on the Christmas Day flight into Detroit from Amsterdam.
= = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = =
The McGill mind behind ‘soft torture’
In 1949, Cardinal Joszef Mindszenty appeared before the world’s cameras to mumble his confession to crimes against the Hungarian church and state. For resisting communism, the Second World War hero had been subjected for 39 days to sleep deprivation, alternating with long hours of interrogation, by Russian-trained Hungarian police. His staged confession riveted the Central Intelligence Agency, which theorized that Soviet-trained experts were controlling Mindszenty by “some unknown force.” If the Communists had interrogation weapons that were more subtle and effective than brute physical torture, the CIA decided, then it needed such weapons, too.
In 1949, Cardinal Joszef Mindszenty appeared before the world’s cameras to mumble his confession to crimes against the Hungarian church and state. For resisting communism, the Second World War hero had been subjected for 39 days to sleep deprivation, alternating with long hours of interrogation, by Russian-trained Hungarian police. His staged confession riveted the Central Intelligence Agency, which theorized that Soviet-trained experts were controlling Mindszenty by “some unknown force.” If the Communists had interrogation weapons that were more subtle and effective than brute physical torture, the CIA decided, then it needed such weapons, too.
Months later, the agency began a program to explore “avenues to the control of human behaviour.” During the next decade and a half, CIA experts honed the use of “chemical and biological materials capable of producing human behaviour,” according to a retrospective CIA catalogue written in 1963. And thus soft torture in the United States was born.
In short order, CIA experts attempted to induce Mindszenty-like effects. An interrogation team consisting of a psychiatrist, a lie-detector expert, and a hypnotist went to work using combinations of the depressant Sodium Amytal and certain stimulants. Tests on four suspected double agents in Tokyo in July 1950 and on 25 North Korean prisoners of war three months later yielded noteworthy results. (Relevant CIA documents do not specify exactly what, but reports later claimed that the special interrogation teams could hold a subject in a “controlled state” for a long period.) Meanwhile, the CIA opened the door to pre-emptive psychosurgery: In a doctor’s office in Washington, D.C., one unfortunate man was lobotomized against his will during an interrogation. By the mid-to-late 1950s, experiments using “black techniques,” as the agency called them, moved to prisons, hospitals and other field-testing sites with funding from the CIA’s Science and Technology Directorate.
One of the most extreme 1950s experiments that the CIA sponsored was conducted at a McGill University hospital in Montreal, where the world-renowned psychiatrist Dr. Ewen Cameron had been pioneering a technique he called “psychic driving.”
Dr. Cameron was widely considered the most able psychiatrist in Canada, and patients were referred to him from all over. A disaffected housewife, a rebellious youth, a struggling starlet and the wife of a Member of Parliament were a few of the patients who became nonconsenting experimental subjects. Many were diagnosed as schizophrenic (a diagnosis since contested in many of the cases).
Cameron’s goal was to wipe out the stable “self,” eliminating deep-seated psychological problems in order to rebuild it. The CIA wanted to know what his experiments suggested about interrogating people with the help of sensory deprivation and psychic disorientation.
Cameron’s technique was to expose a patient to tape-recorded messages or sounds that were played back for long periods. The goal was a condition Cameron dubbed “penetration”: The patient experienced an escalating state of distress that often caused him or her to reveal long-buried past experiences. At that point, the doctor would offer “healing” suggestions. Frequently, his patients didn’t want to listen and would attack their analyst or try to leave the room.
In a 1956 American Journal of Psychiatry article, Cameron explained that he broke down their resistance by continually repeating his message using “pillow and ceiling microphones” and different voices; by imposing periods of prolonged sleep and by giving patients drugs like Sodium Amytal, Desoxyn and LSD-25, which “disorganized” thought patterns.
To further disorganize his patients, Cameron isolated them in a sensory deprivation chamber. In a dark room, a patient would sit in silence with his eyes covered with goggles, prevented “from touching his body — thus interfering with his self image.” Finally, “attempts were made to cut down on his expressive output” — he was restrained or bandaged so he could not scream. Cameron combined these tactics with extended periods of forced listening to taped messages for up to 20 hours per day, for 10 or 15 days at a stretch.
In 1958 and 1959, Cameron went further. With new CIA money behind him, he tried to completely “depattern” 53 patients by combining psychic driving with electroshock therapy and a long-term, drug-induced coma. At the most intensive stage of the treatment, many subjects were no longer able to perform even basic functions. They needed training to eat, use the toilet, or speak. Once the doctor allowed the drugs to wear off, patients slowly relearned how to take care of themselves — and their pretreatment symptoms were said to have disappeared.
So had much of their personalities. Patients emerged from Cameron’s ward walking differently, talking differently, acting differently. Wives were more docile, daughters less inclined to histrionics, sons better-behaved. Most had no memory of their treatment or of their previous lives. Sometimes, they forgot they had children. At first, they were grateful to their doctor for his help. Several Cameron patients, however, later said they had severe recurrences of their pretreatment problems and traumatic memories of the treatment itself and together sued the doctor as well as the U.S. and Canadian governments. Their case was quietly settled out of court.
By the late 1950s and early 1960s, CIA experts thought they understood the techniques necessary for “breaking” a person. Under a strict regime of behavioural conditioning, “the possibility of resistance over a very long period may be vanishingly small,” researchers concluded in an analysis used in the CIA’s 1963 manual Counterintelligence Interrogation.
At the agency, pressure increased to field-test coercive interrogation tools. As part of the now notorious MK-ULTRA program, the CIA set up a safe house in San Francisco where agents could observe the effects of various drug combinations. They were in search of a “truth serum,” and thought LSD might be it. Prostitutes were hired to bring unwitting johns back to the house, where the women slipped acid and other strong psychoactive substances into the men’s drinks. From behind a one-way mirror, investigators watched, notebooks and martinis in hand.
At least officially, the CIA ended its behavioural science program in the mid-1960s, before scientists and operatives achieved total control over a subject. “All experiments beyond a certain point always failed,” an operative veteran of the program said, “because the subject jerked himself back for some reason or the subject got amnesiac or catatonic.”
In other words, you could create a vegetable or a zombie, but not a robot who would obey you against his will. Still, the CIA had gained reliable information about how to disorient a person who was reluctant to co-operate. An enemy could quickly be made into a desperate human being.
Since 9/11, the CIA’s experimental approach to coercive interrogation has been revived. This month, as the Washington Post revealed the existence of secret CIA-run prisons — “black sites” — in eastern Europe, U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney continued to campaign to ensure that the agency will not be prevented from using “cruel, inhumane and degrading” methods to elicit intelligence from detainees.
The operatives of the 1940s would approve.