COLONEL SIXX: THIS WAS SUBMITTED AS A COMMENT TO THE POST:
“Trust Betrayed: Sexual Assault in the Military Gives Rise to Increased Levels of PTSD”
On May 23, 2011 was the U.S. Supreme, Court Brown v. Plata (09-1233) decision that crowded prisons are in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment no cruel and unusual punishments.
In 2011, still not Eighth Amendment addressed are the “military research” “experiments that were designed to harm”!
This is 1994 documented by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and U.S. Senate.[2 & 3]
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 1950 Feres Doctrine  was used to ignore the Eight Amendment in the U.S. Supreme Court’s Stanley case . The Department of Defense (DOD) “to harm” experiment was classified as an “incident to service”!
These DOD experiments were conducted on “hundreds of thousands” , under the ongoing secrecy cover of our ‘national interests’, e.g., WWII, Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War, Iraq and Afghanistan. Shouldn’t U.S. Service Personnel and Veterans get back those Constitutional Amendment 8 Rights that they die for and convicted rapists and murderers keep?
Please hold your members in the U.S. Congress accountable!
The 2002 U.S. Senate Hearing on the Feres Doctrine  is 127 pages of 19 Testimonials and Submissions for the Record that ignored the previously documented:
1. Fact that convicted rapists and murderers receive U.S. Constitutional Amendment 8 experimentation protection
 that U.S. Service Personnel DO NOT!! 2
GAO  and U.S. Senate  1994 Reports that recorded “hundreds of thousands” of in-service personnel injured by non-consensual, experiments.
The Senate 1994 Report’s noted withheld needed for treatment but experiment identifying evidence  and the 1994 Court of Veterans Appeals (COVA) related “may not review”  were overlooked.
3. The U.S. Supreme Courts 1987 STANLEY case was a Feres Doctrine based approval of a 1958 injurious non-consensual, military experiment. Disobeyed was the 1953 DOD order  and for military personnel lost was the U.S. Constitution, Amendment 8 protection given to U.S. Prisoners ! 4. Not 2002 recognized was that many experiments were in direct disobedience of the DOD Secretary’s 1953 NO non-consensual experiments.
OVERSIGHTS: Starting on page 64 of the 2002 Senate Hearing PDF version,  the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE stated that in the 1950 U.S. Supreme Court’s Feres Doctrine decision , “The Court relied upon three principal reasons in coming to its decision:
(1) The existence and availability of a separate, uniform, comprehensive, no-fault compensation scheme for injured military personnel;….” Answering this issue are the millions of service records that were destroyed in a 1973 National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) fire.
Followed by Congress’s 1974 Privacy Act that censored experiment verifying witnesses from any surviving and future records and the withheld experimentation evidence of the 1994 U.S. Senate Report.[
2] The Report noted, “The Feres Doctrine should not be applied for military personnel who are harmed by inappropriate human experimentation when informed consent has not been given.”
Then, “During the last 50 years, hundreds of thousands of military personnel” were subjected to “experiments that were designed to harm”, e.g., their reported biological and chemical agents, radiation exposure, hallucinogenic and investigational drugs, experimental vaccines and behavior modification projects.
Overlooked is the “Basic Rights of Prisoners.” with its “Nonconsensual experimentation is illegal”
! In 2011 still ignored is this and the Senate Report’s past and present, “III. Findings and conclusions”, “K. DOD and DVA have repeatedly failed to provide information and medical followup to those who participate in military research…” and “N. Participation in military research is rarely included in military medical records, making it impossible to support a veteran’s claim for service-connected disabilities from military research.”, i.e., the withheld needed for treatment but “experiments that were designed to harm” evidence.
In 1994 COVA’s Chief Judge stated the related evidence restricting, “The court may not review the schedule of ratings for disabilities or the policies underlying the schedule.” Based on the Senate’s, “the last 50 years” back to 1944, doesn’t the now 67 years of “underlying” policy mean the continuing use of deceived U.S. Service Personnel as guinea pigs in deliberate injury experiments?
In the “three principal reasons” continuation, the Dept. of Justice reported the Supreme Court’s, “….
(2) The effect upon military order, discipline, and effectiveness if service member were permitted to sue the government or each other; and,
(3) The distinctly federal relationship between the government and members of its armed services, and the corresponding unfairness of permitting service-connected claims to be determined by nonuniform law.” , i.e., the “unfairness” of applying the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, Amendment 8 to U.S. Citizens and Prisoners but NOT to U.S. Service Personnel?
U.S. PRISONERS PROTECTED OVERSIGHT: In 1992 the U.S. Senate signed the United Nation, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). with its “.. Article 7 – Freedom from Torture, or Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.”
It gives convicted U.S. rapists and murderers protection from experiments by the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, Amendment 8. Under, “Basic Rights of Prisoners.” is, “Written policy and practice prohibit the use of inmates for medical…experiments.” and “Nonconsensual experimentation is illegal”! Nineteen (19) times cited is the U.S. Constitution plus its 8th Amendment’s no cruel and unusual punishment.
U.S. CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION? Overlooked by many in Congress is their Oath of Office to defend the U.S. Constitution, their “Pledge of Allegiance” “with liberty and justice for all” checks and balances function, their U.S. Constitution 8th Amendment protection of convicted rapists and murderers (but NOT U.S. Service Personnel) with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ignored, carved in stone over its entrance, “EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW”!
In 2011 shouldn’t U.S. Service Personnel have the same U.S. Constitutional Rights that rapists and murderers keep?
 “THE FERES DOCTRINE: AN EXAMINATION OF THIS MILITARY EXCEPTION TO THE FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT OCTOBER 8, 2002.” http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/pdf/107hrg/88833.pdf
 December 8, 1994 REPORT 103-97 “Is Military Research Hazardous to Veterans’ Health? Lessons Spanning Half a Century.” Hearings Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 103rd Congress 2nd Session.
 GAO September 28, 1994 “Human Experimentation Overview on Co1d War Era Programs” T-NSIAD-94-266 archive.gao.gov/t2pbat2/152601.pdf
 U.S. State Dept., “U.S. Report under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights July 1994, Article 7 – Freedom from Torture, or Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.”
 “STATE OF COURT, CHIEF JUDGE FRANK Q. NEBEKER, STATE OF THE COURT, FOR PRESENTATION TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF VETERANS APPEALS THIRD JUDICIAL CONFERENCE, OCTOBER 17-18, 1994
 U.S. SUPREME COURT, JUNE 25, 1987, U.S. V. STANLEY , 107 S. CT.. 3054 (VOLUME 483 U.S., SECTION 669, PAGES 699 TO 710). http://supreme.justia.com/ us/483/669/ case.html
 Pgs. 343-345: “The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code; Human Rights in Human Experimentation” George J. Annas and Michael A. Grodin (N. Y.: Oxford University Press, 1992).
 Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 146 (1950).