Article 15822 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part VI, Doctors Secretly Inject Cancer Cells Into Patients
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1992 15:40:48 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Sep17.154048.3589@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: shades of Dr. Mengele, human medical experimentation
Lines: 180


        I made the following transcript from a tape recording 
        of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
               WBAI-FM (99.5)
               505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
               New York, NY 10018       (212) 279-0707

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
                        (continuation)
GARY NULL:
Discussing the potential malpractice suits which could result from
adverse reactions to the test patients, Siegel asked Leichter if he
thought Doctor Mandell, who authorized the experiment, could lose
his license as a result. Doctor Leichter said that he could not
answer that with certainty, but said, quote: "It was a serious
matter."

Doctor Siegel and the hospital administration were facing big
trouble. Not only were key members of the hospital staff disgruntled
over the experiments, but rumors were also starting to spread
outside of the hospital. According to Doctor Hyman Strauss, an
attending physician in the Gynecology Department at Jewish Chronic
Disease Hospital, quote:
                                                                   
   "An abundance of rumors found their way into medical circles.
    My first knowledge of this affair about cancer experimentation
    on patients known to be free of malignant disease, without their
    fully informed written consent, came from conversations at two
    other hospitals in this borough. I next heard from a professor 
    at The State University of New York, and finally from a top-
    ranking investigator at Sloan-Kettering. A man with an 
    international reputation discussed this with me on the phone.
    I have also been questioned by laymen and clergymen not 
    connected with our hospital."

By the way, that's a letter from Doctor Hyman Strauss to the medical
board of the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital, sent to the Division 
of Professional Conduct, The New York State Education Department,
[expressing] concern about the gossip surrounding the hospital with
which he was affiliated. Then he approached Leichter and Siegel to
see if the rumors were valid. According to Strauss, Siegel refused
to make any statement one way or the other, but asked Strauss what
he had heard. Strauss said that he would not do so until Siegel
either confirmed or denied the experiment. Then Strauss said, quote:

   "Since he [Siegel] refused to make such a statement, I left his 
    office with the feeling that nothing could be gained, and that
    the conspiracy of silence was continuing."

It turned out that Strauss's feelings were well-founded. A veil of
secrecy descended upon the hospital, and concerted efforts were made
to cover up the whole thing. According to Doctor Rosenfeld, toward
the end of the summer, he was approached and advised that he was
scheduling a meeting of inquiry for the following day. But that was
just the beginning of what would be an effort to downplay it and to
turn everything away from public or professional criticism. The
people who refused to participate in the experiment, ironically,
were people who were later judged harshly. That meeting, quote:

   "was a sham from the outset. First of all, the chairman of the
    committee was not even present, since he had only been informed
    on the preceding day that the meeting would be held, and was 
    unable to attend on such short notice. The rest of the attendees
    were hand-picked, and excluded were all those who had expressed
    any opposition to the project, even though the resignations of
    Doctors Cagan, Fresko and Leichter were one of the only two
    items up for debate at the meeting. And these resignations were
    directly related to the other item. They too were excluded.
    Instead, the meeting focused on the testimony of Doctor Siegel,
    which essentially trivialized any concern over the experiment,
    and made those who were concerned appear to be alarmists and
    trouble-makers. For instance, rather than inviting Doctor
    Rosenfeld, whose patients were being experimented on, whose
    pavilion it was where they were being conducted, who had never
    been informed, who was opposed to the whole thing ... instead of
    inviting him to testify as to his feelings about the experiment
    and any actions he may have taken in that regard, the Grievance
    Committee minutes, citing Siegel, read, quote: `Mr. Siegel told
    Doctor Rosenfeld he intended to interview all the persons named,
    and advised him that Doctor Mandell was on vacation, and that he
    [Siegel] did not feel that any conclusions could be drawn 
    without discussion of the problem with Doctor Mandell.'"

Anyhow, it's a long investigation. It's a long report. I'm not even
one-half of the way through it. I'll just summarize.

Over a period of months, nothing came from this. People began
denying any responsibility. They denied any problems. They talked
about their very important contribution to the knowledge of cancer.
One spokesperson for the hospital publicly said the tests showed
that, quote:

   "Like normally healthy persons, the chronically ill who do not 
    have cancer have a rejection mechanism that throws off planted
    cancer cells."

There were charges and allegations back and forth, but the general
public was kept out of the issue. And later on -- irony of ironies 
-- some of the people who opposed this were the ones who were 
challenged at the State Medical Board.

I want to get into some great depth about this whole issue of state
medical boards and how they frequently are used to attack any doctor
who uses any therapy that is not considered proven; and how, as 
I've mentioned before, there is a very small elitist group that
controls most of what occurs in science and in funding of projects.
And they seem to be untouchable. But those people who CHALLENGE them
are frequently the ones who get thumped. As if it's an unspoken rule:

   Once you belong to the club and you give us your loyalty and
   you play by our insider rules, we'll protect you. We can control
   the Press. We certainly control the Judicial System. We know 
   which judges are bought. We can control prosecutors. Don't worry
   about that. They're political. We know which ones we own. We can
   control everything. And we'll see to it, financially, that no one
   ever has a problem. We're recession-proof. We're depression-proof.
   BUT, you've got to keep your mouth shut. Once inside, like the
   Mob, you can't get out; like selling your soul.

And the attraction is very real. There are a lot of things that
these people gain. And over the years, of these investigations, the
people who instigate these operations continue to ALWAYS stay above
it. They are NEVER brought down. They go from one institution or
from one place to another. They never seem to lack for financial or
political resources. But whistle-blowers, on the other hand, are
frequently denigrated, fired, ridiculed and shipped off to remote
locations.

That's the system. And, quite frankly, no one -- and I mean no one
-- in political office is capable of changing it; nor do I know of
anyone who would even try. When a person tried to reform the IRS,
he was hounded, audited, and, needless to say, he was found guilty
of a violation of the tax rules. As one man said: "In New York State,
they can indict a ham sandwich."   They have it on their side. 

For years and years, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover sent out a message
-- and it was a very powerful message: 

   "Get on my wrong side, and you'll never have a right side."

And every legislator knew that. The people who dared to challenge
him, the two Kennedy brothers, suffered substantially for that. 
As powerful as they were, they weren't as powerful as he. There is
a standing Establishment, and it is in every area: media,
manufacturing, banking; it is certainly in all of the farming
industry, all of the bio-technologies. Now I want to make it clear
-- this is not the same as stating that these industries, per se,
or everyone associated with them, per se, has some nefarious
activity going on. That is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that 
the policy-makers and the people who control industries control
institutional policy. These people all belong to the same club. 
It doesn't matter if they're separate network people or separate
anchors. They're all still members of the same network. That will
not change. When you control everything, who is to challenge you?
With one phone call, they can discredit or destroy any person 
who tries.

Just to let you know.  And for the people who called in yesterday,
including the two who were SO SURE that no real institution of any
respect could allow anything to go on that wasn't completely ethical
..... I just cited you the affidavits which were sworn under oath.
And I have over sixteen hundred papers from the state hearings that
I went to, plus personal interviews. It took almost two years to
pull together this investigation.

And this was an event that happened many years ago. But as you will
hear, these events are happening today in our institutions. They
don't change their ground rules just because we're in another decade.

I'm Gary Null. 
                           (end of report)
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

      If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
      please assist in its dissemination by posting it to other
      bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
      both on and off campus.

      John DiNardo