Tag Archives: MKUltra

Project Artichoke | CIA Quest 4 Mind Control Drugs | Bio-WarFare


Sidney Gottlieb, presided over the Central Intelligence Agency's cold-war efforts to control the human mind. He will always be remembered as the Government chemist who dosed Americans with psychedelics in the name of national security, the man who brought LSD to the C.I.A.

Sidney Gottlieb, presided over the Central Intelligence Agency’s cold-war efforts to control the human mind. He will always be remembered as the Government chemist who dosed Americans with psychedelics in the name of national security, the man who brought LSD to the C.I.A.

Photo: Sidney Gottlieb (Associated Press, 1977)


The CIA’s Quest for a Mind Control Drug and Wendell Johnson’s Monster Study: A
Comparison of Unethical Experiments ~ Courtesy of Adrienne Hunacek. Used with permission.
Adrienne Hunacek
(Answering Question 2)

In The Search for The Manchurian Candidate: The CIA and Mind Control, John
Marks presents a thrilling and gripping story about intelligence agents’ attempts to use
drugs, hypnosis, electroshock therapy, and brainwashing, amongst other techniques, to
try to control other human beings. The disturbing thing about this book is that it is not a
novel, but an entirely factual account of experiments carried out by the Office of Secret
Services (OSS) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
The majority of these experiments were unethical, and many violated just about
every part of the Nuremburg Code. In their search for a drug that would make people
share their secrets, the CIA gave subjects marijuana, LSD, and a variety of other drugs
without their knowledge, completely disregarding the idea of informed consent. Perhaps
the best example of this is the testing Sid Gottlieb did on the scientists who worked at the
Army Chemical Corps’ Special Operations Division in November 1953. These men, who
studied toxic substances that could potentially be used for assassination and other
purposes, thought they were going on a weekend work retreat. Instead, they were given
LSD in their drinks without their knowledge, so the CIA could observe the effects of the
drug. One man, Frank Olsen, became depressed and psychotic, and ended up killing
himself within a week or so. The CIA admitted, although secretly, that LSD had
“triggered” Olsen’s death. Olsen was doing classified research for the government, but
he certainly never consented, explicitly or implicitly, to be a guinea pig in the testing of a
mind control drug.
After the Olsen disaster the CIA and the people involved in the MKULTRA
operation, still led by Sid Gottlieb, needed to find new test subjects, so they “chose ‘the
borderline underworld’- prostitutes, drug addicts, and other small-timers who would be
powerless to seek any sort of revenge if they ever found out what the CIA had done to
them” (Marks 96). The CIA set up “safehouses”, brought the subjects there, gave them
drugs (amongst them LSD and marijuana), and observed what happened to the subjects.
In addition to drugs, the CIA agents tested a variety of intelligence techniques, including
recording devices and two-way mirrors. All of this was done, once again, on unwitting
subjects who had not in any way given consent, much less informed consent. In
addition, the CIA operatives had little concern for the health of the subjects, they were
simply interested in learning about response to the drug and how effective it was at
getting people to share secrets.
At the time of the experiments, the subjects’ health did not cause undue concern. At the safehouse, where most of the testing took place, doctors were seldom present…In addition to LSD, which they knew could cause serious, if not fatal problems, TSS officials gave White even more exotic experimental drugs to test, drugs that other agency contractors may or may not have already used on human subjects (Marks 105).
So if these experiments were so unethical, why were they able to be conducted
without a public outcry? Unlike at a university or academic setting, the CIA’s business is
secrecy, lying, and hiding. Therefore, when things did get out of control (for example, in
the case of Frank Olsen) they were able to keep them covered up. After Olsen’s death,
the CIA was scrupulous about making sure no one found out what had happened.
“Agency officials tried to make sure that no outsider would tie Olsen’s death either to the
CIA or to LSD” (Marks 89).
In addition, the CIA can use the designation “Classified” to prevent people
outside of a select group from knowing about experiments. Whereas someone doing
research sponsored by their university is required to present their work at meetings, and
subject their experiments to peer review and criticism, someone doing classified research
is free from the standards of their colleagues. Describing the involvement of academic
professionals in the kind of unethical research that has been sponsored by the CIA, Marks
Any professional doing the kind of things the agency came to sponsor-holding subjects prisoner, shooting them full of unwanted drugs-probably would have been arrested for kidnapping or aggravated assault. Certainly such a researcher would have been disgraced among his peers. Yet, by performing the same experiment under the CIA’s banner, he had no worry from the law. His colleagues could not censure him because they had no idea what he was doing (Marks 35).
The CIA decided it would be best if their involvement with the universities and
their experiments with LSD were kept secret, to avoid anger on the part of the American
public and interest in LSD on the part of the Russians. To accomplish this they passed
funding for their research through intermediary foundations. “They did not want to spur
the Russians into starting their own LSD program or into devising counter-measures.
The CIA’s secrecy was also clearly aimed at the folks back home….Moreover, the CIA
Inspector General declared that disclosure of certain MKULTRA activities could result in
a ‘severe adverse reaction’ among the American public” (Marks 64).
The CIA furthered this by moving many of the experiments out of the United
States, since there are specific restrictions on their actions within the United States. This
is perhaps one reason why they made such extensive use of Dr. Ewen Cameron, a
Montreal doctor who subjected his patients to a “depatterning” regime, which combined
electroshock therapy with drug cocktails and controlled sleeping patterns. Even after
patients became confused or lost their memory, Cameron continued experimenting on
them, interpreting this as a sign that his depatterning was working. He also pressed
patients to go on with the experiment, including combinations of his psychic conditioning
and LSD treatments, when they told him they wanted to stop. It is widely accepted that
Cameron’s psychic conditioning is complete pseudoscience. “Cameron wrote that
psychic driving provided a way to make ‘direct, controlled changes in personality’,
without having to resolve the subject’s conflicts or make her relieve her past experiences.
As far as is known, no present-day psychologist or psychiatrist accepts his view” (Marks
146). In addition to being scientifically unsound, Cameron’s experiments were clearly
unethical, yet he was widely regarded as a psychiatrist and was even president of the
American Psychiatric Association for a time.
A common thread throughout many of these CIA experiments is that they took
advantage of people who were unable to fight back. The CIA experiments made use of
prostitutes and other people that they had deemed not valuable.
The men from ARTICHOKE found their most convenient source among the flotsam and jetsam of the international spy trade: ‘individuals of dubious loyalty, suspected agents or plants, subjects having known reasons for deception, etc’…It is fair to say that the CIA operators tended to put less value on the lives of these subjects than they did on those of American college students (Marks 34).
Likewise the Tuskegee experiment used those who were least able to defend
themselves, and thus the researchers were able to get away with treating the subjects very
unjustly. This included lying to them and telling them they were being treated and then
preventing them from getting free treatment, even once Penicillin, a cheap and effective
way of treating syphilis, became available. They deliberately chose an area of Alabama
where the population was poor and uneducated, and was not in any position to question
the researchers, or create an uproar even if they found out they were being lied to. The
fact that the subjects were black, and the racism that was unfortunately prevalent in this
country at that time, also contributed to the fact that the experiment was not widely
condemned. “The experiment was widely reported for 40 years without evoking any
significant protest within the medical community” (Brandt 29).
These experiments and their exploitation of defenseless people remind me of an
experiment that happened in my home state of Iowa in the late 1930s, that recently made
headlines in the Des Moines Register. Dr. Wendell Johnson, who was a well-known
speech pathologist at the University of Iowa, and has a research center there named after
him, conducted experiments to test his “diagnosogenic theory” of stuttering. The basic
idea of the theory is that
All children have trouble with their speech when they are young, often repeating words and syllables. By drawing attention to their speech, he reasoned, overzealous parents would make their children so self-conscious and nervous that the children would repeat more words. In time, the children would become so sensitized to their speech that they would not be able to talk without stuttering (Dyer).
Johnson decided to experiment on the children in the Iowa Soldiers’ Orphans
Home. His graduate student, Mary Tudor Jacobs, was the one who actually met with the
children and conducted the experiments. She identified 10 stutterers and 12 normal
speakers, and divided each group equally into an experimental group and a control group.
The children in the control group, both stutterers and non, received positive speech
therapy, while the children in the experimental group, even the normal speakers, were
interrupted, corrected, and made to feel self-conscious about their speech. Even after
Johnson and Tudor’s involvement was over, the teachers in the orphanage continued
what they believed were lessons that helped improve the children’s speech.
This experiment was clearly an unethical exploitation of powerless people. Not
only did the children not give consent, but they had no parents to give consent and their
teachers were also kept in the dark about the real nature of the study. This is one of the
reasons why Johnson was able to carry out such an experiment on children. Dyer
describes why Johnson was so eager to use the orphanage children. “Moreover, Johnson
didn’t need parental permission – something that probably would have been denied. ‘I
think it’s not coincidental that he chose to do it with a group of parentless kids’, said
Trishia Zebrowski, 45, an assistant professor at the Wendell Johnson Speech and Hearing
Center in Iowa… ‘This was the only way he was going to get the kids’” (Dyer).
Johnson never even published the results of the study, so it provided no benefits,
and in fact harmed society by the damage it did to the orphans. This violates another part
of the Nuremburg Code. After World War II, Johnson’s colleagues warned him that
publishing his theory might draw unfavorable comparisons to the Nazi doctors and ruin
his reputation. Johnson did eventually publish his “diagnosogenic theory” of stuttering,
though without any of the direct evidence he had obtained in what later came to be called
“The Monster Experiment”, even though this evidence overwhelmingly supported his
ideas. Even without any direct evidence, his theory was widely recognized as the leading
one until the 1970s, and although no longer dominant, is still used. The fact that Johnson
was able to gain all this recognition and acclaim without ever publishing the results of his
study indicates that it was not absolutely necessary, and that it did little or nothing to help
society. While it could be argued convincingly that Johnson’s theory and ideas have
helped in the treatment of many other people with stuttering problems, it’s impossible to
claim that the experiment that he did on the children in the orphanage has benefited
people in anyway, and it has certainly proved very damaging to the victims.
Another part of the Nuremberg Code states “The experiment should be conducted
so as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury” (Nuremburg
Code 182). Johnson’s experiment caused a great deal of mental suffering for its subjects,
including people who otherwise would have had a much better life. Many of the normal
speakers in the experiment were made into stutterers, and suffered for the rest of their
lives as a result. Their stuttering made any hope of being adopted or finding a happy
home impossible. Many started ran away from the orphanage or dropped out of school
because of the humiliation and bullying they had to endure from their peers. One
subject, Mary Korlaske Nixon, who was in the “normal” group before the experiment,
suffered for the rest of her life. Tudor, like the other subjects, did not know she had been
part of an experiment, and that her stuttering had been deliberately worsened. After
finding out from the reporter who was investigating the story, she wrote in a letter to
Mary Tudor “’Why experiment on orphans, we have all ready had enough problems and
was unwanted. I have nothing left. You stolen my life away from me” (Dyer).
In conclusion, it is clear that the experiments discussed here, including the CIA
mind control experiments, the Johnson stuttering experiment, and the Tuskegee syphilis
experiment, were all unethical. Each experiment violated some or most of the
Nuremberg Code. Subjects were regularly experimented on without giving informed
consent, by researchers who took little or no regard for their physical or mental health.
These studies were often not necessary and sometimes gave no benefit to society. Yet
they were able to continue, because they took advantage of the people in our society who
least have a voice: prostitutes and other “lowlifes”, poor, uneducated minorities, and
orphaned children. These are the people who most need an advocate, and instead they
were exploited and used for experiments by researchers.

1. Brandt, Allan. “Racism and Research: The Case of the Tuskegee Syphilis
Experiment.” Tuskegee Truths. UNC Press, 2000.
2. Dyer, Jim. “Orphans Scars Linger” The Des Moines Register. June 12, 2001.
3. Dyer, Jim. “Speech Study on Orphans Haunts Researcher” The Des Moines
Register. June 11, 2001.
4. Marks, John. The Search for the “Manchurian Candidate”: The CIA and
Mind Control. New York: W.W. Horton, 1979.
5. Nuremburg Code. Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military
Tribunals. Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 1949.



In the 1950’s and early 1960’s, the agency gave mind-altering drugs to hundreds of unsuspecting Americans in an effort to explore the possibilities of controlling human consciousness. Many of the human guinea pigs were mental patients, prisoners, drug addicts and prostitutes — ”people who could not fight back,” as one agency officer put it. In one case, a mental patient in Kentucky was dosed with LSD continuously for 174 days.

Other experiments involved agency employees, military officers and college students, who had varying degrees of knowledge about the tests. In all, the agency conducted 149 separate mind-control experiments, and as many as 25 involved unwitting subjects. First-hand testimony, fragmentary Government documents and court records show that at least one participant died, others went mad, and still others suffered psychological damage after participating in the project, known as MK Ultra. The experiments were useless, Mr. Gottlieb concluded in 1972, shortly before he retired.

The C.I.A. awarded Mr. Gottlieb the Distinguished Intelligence Medal and deliberately destroyed most of the MKUltra records in 1973.

John Gittinger, a C.I.A. psychologist who vetted Mr. Gottlieb — ”one of the most brilliant men I’ve ever known” — and worked with him for 22 years, said the agency began the tests because it was gripped by ”a great fear” in the cold war. It was afraid that the Soviet Union would corner the market on LSD and use it as a chemical weapon or that China would perfect the black art of brainwashing, Mr. Gittinger said.

The agency and Mr. Gottlieb believed the United States had to fight by any means necessary.

”We were in a World War II mode,” Mr. Gittinger said. ”The war never really ended for us.”

John Marks, author of the definitive book on the experiments, ”The Search for the ‘Manchurian Candidate’ ” (Times Books, 1979) said Mr. Gottlieb was ”unquestionably a patriot, a man of great ingenuity.”

”Gottlieb never did what he did for inhumane reasons,” Mr. Marks said. ”He thought he was doing exactly what was needed. And in the context of the time, who would argue? But with his experiments on unwitting subjects, he clearly violated the Nuremburg standards — the standards under which, after World War II, we executed Nazi doctors for crimes against humanity.”

Sidney Gottlieb was born in New York City on Aug. 3, 1918, the son of immigrants from Hungary. His parents were orthodox Jews, but he did not embrace the faith. Mr. Gottlieb ”had had a real problem to find a spiritual focus, having gone away from Jewishness,” Mr. Gittinger said, and he experimented with everything from agnosticism to Zen Buddhism all his life.

He left the City College of New York, first for the Arkansas Polytechnic Institute, then for the University of Wisconsin, where he graduated, magna cum laude, with a chemistry degree in 1940. He earned a doctorate in biochemistry from the California Institute of Technology, where in 1942 he married Margaret Moore, the daughter of Presbyterian missionaries who served in India, where she was born. A clubfoot kept him from military service in World War II, and he was always bitter that he missed the war, Mr. Gittinger said.

Mr. Gottlieb joined the C.I.A. in 1951, although not before telling Mr. Gittinger, his interviewer, that he had been a socialist in his youth.

Two years later, the agency established MKUltra and Mr. Gottlieb was running it. As chief of the agency’s technical services division, he served two decades as the senior scientist presiding over some of the C.I.A.’s darkest secrets.

The first of these were the LSD experiments. Mr. Gottlieb was fascinated by the drug, and, a family friend said, he took it hundreds of times.

”He was the most curious man I ever knew,” Mr. Gittinger said. ”He was willing to try anything to discover something.”

Mr. Gottlieb was also involved in the C.I.A.’s assassination plots. In the Eisenhower and Kennedy Administrations, Mr. Gottlieb, always under orders from the Director of Central Intelligence or his chief spymaster, developed a poison handkerchief to kill an Iraqi colonel, an array of toxic gifts to be delivered to Fidel Castro, and a poison dart to kill a leftist leader in the Congo. None of the plans succeeded.

After he left the C.I.A., Mr. Gottlieb and his wife went to India, where he ran a leper hospital for 18 months. A lifelong stutterer, he pursued a master’s degree in speech therapy. He bought land with an old log cabin outside a small Virginia town, Boston, where he practiced two of his lifelong hobbies, folk dancing and herding goats.

”He bought that old house and the land with the idea of setting up a communal home, with several families living together,” said Mr. Gittinger, a lifelong friend. At least one other couple stayed for years.

Mr. Gottlieb spent his last years in Washington, Va., a pretty village in the foothills of the Blue Ridge mountains, working in a hospice, tending to the dying.

He is survived by his wife and four children, Penny Gottlieb Chesluk, Rachel Gottlieb Samoff, Peter Gottlieb and Steven Gottlieb. Cleaving to old habits of secrecy, his wife declined to disclose the cause of Mr. Gottlieb’s death.

Photo: Sidney Gottlieb (Associated Press, 1977)

Ritual Abuse, Ritual Crime, and Healing| DE-Classified MKUltra Documents ~ LIST




CLICK HERE For PDF File about List of MKULTRA Unclassified Documents (including subprojects) regarding Ritual Abuse, Ritual Crime and Healing, if you want to Download and Save.  Otherwise, the List of MKUltra Unclassified Documents re Ritual Abuse, Ritual Crime and Healing are listed below


This information was transcribed from faxes and brochures which are available from the National Security Archive.
Please note that the documents listed are only those requested by John Marks for research purposes. Some of the information in the released documents has been verified, other information has not. Also please note that there have been some transciption errors.
About the Archive Library
The National Security Archive Gelman Library, The George Washington University 2130 H Street, N.W., Suite 701 Washington, D.C. 20037 Phone: 202/994-7000 Fax: 202/994-7005 nsarchiv@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu http//www.seas.gwu.edu/nsarchive. html
The National Security Archive is a non-governmental research institute and library that collects and publishes declassified documents obtained through the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, a public interest law firm defending and expanding public access to government information through the FOIA, and an indexer and publisher of the documents in books, microfische, and electronic formats.

The National Security Archive was founded in 1985 by a group of journalists and scholars who had obtained documentation under the FOIA and sought a centralized repository for these materials. Over the past twelve years, the Archive has become the world’s largest non-governmental library of declassified documents.
This is the inventory list of donated materials in the National Security Archive’s collection, from John Marks’ FOIA request results which he used to do research for his book The Search For The Manchurian Candidate: The CIA and Mind Control, The Secret History of the Behavioral Sciences. (1979) W. W. Norton, published as Norton paperback in 1991, ISBN 0-393-30794-8).
INVENTORY: CIA Behavior Experiments Collection (John Marks Donation)
Date Range: 1940s-1970s
Box #1 – Artichoke Documents–MKULTRA DOCS 1-57
Burch, Dr. Neil/LSD and the Air Force: Smithsonian: Index and Institutional Notifications Subproject 1: MKULTRA: Plants Isolation and Characterization of Rivea Corymbosa Subproject 2: MKULTRA: Drugs Subproject 3: MKULTRA: Testing Subproject 4: MKULTRA: Mulholland’s Manual Subproject 5a: MKULTRA Subproject 5b: MKULTRA: Denver University Hypnosis Subproject 6: MKULTRA: Testing of Plants by HEF Subproject 7: MKULTRA: Funding; ONR Probably Abramson Subproject 8: MKULTRA: Boston Psychopathic Hospital Subproject 9: MKULTRA: Depressants, Schizophrenics, Alcoholics Subproject 10: MKULTRA: Personality Assessment Subproject 11: MKULTRA: Botanicals Popkin (Documents and articles on Luis Angel Castillo) Subproject 12: MKULTRA: Financial Records Subproject 13: MKULTRA: CIA Support to Fort Detrick Subproject 14: MKULTRA: Paying Bureau of Narcotics for White Subproject 15: MKULTRA: Magic Support; Mulholland Supplement Subproject 16: MKULTRA: Testing Apartment Rental

RA: MKULTRA de-classified documents Subproject 17: MKULTRA: LSD Studies of [excised] University Subproject 19: MKULTRA: Magic Manual Subproject 20: MKULTRA: Synthesis Derivative of Yohimbine Hydrochloride Subproject 21: MKULTRA: Defector Study: originally Drug Study Subproject 22: MKULTRA: William Cook and Co. Research: Amanita Muscaria, Rivea Corymbosa Subproject 26: MKULTRA: Pfeiffer, Finances Subproject 27: MKULTRA: ONR Funding, LSD Research Subproject 28: MKULTRA: Pfeiffer Subproject 30: MKULTRA: Fort Detrick (1) Subproject 30: MKULTRA: Fort Detrick (2) Subproject 30: MKULTRA: Fort Detrick (3) Subproject 31: MKULTRA: Manufacture of Drugs by Pellow Wease Chemical Co. Subproject 32: MKULTRA: Collection of Plants Subproject 33: MKULTRA: Collection of 400 for SUBPR #27 Subproject 34: MKULTRA: More Support to Magic Subproject 35: MKULTRA: Georgetown Hospital: Geschichter Subproject 36: MKULTRA: Cuba Chapter Conference, Consultant, Subproject involving getting a man on a diverted freighter Subproject 37: MKULTRA: Collection of Botanicals Subproject 38: MKULTRA Subproject 39: MKULTRA: Iowa State Hospital (and Ionia) Subproject 40: MKULTRA: Funding, Probably Abrams LSD Research
Box #2
Subproject 42: MKULTRA: Safehouse Chapter 7: MKULTRA Interview Notes White, George Hunter Dope Traffickers’ Nemesis Subproject 43: MKULTRA: Combination drug, Hypnosis, Sensory Deprivation Subproject 44: MKULTRA: Testing of Aromatic Amines at University of Illinois Subproject 45: MKULTRA: Knockout, Stress, Cancer Subproject 46: MKULTRA: Rochester LSD Drugs Subproject 47: MKULTRA: Pfeiffer Atlanta Subproject 47: MKULTRA: (1) Pfeiffer Atlanta/Bordertown Subproject 48: MKULTRA: HEF Cornell Relationship: Artichoke Team Proposals and Reports Subproject 49: MKULTRA: Hypnosis at [excised] University Subproject 50: MKULTRA: CIA Imprest Fund for $500 Subproject 51: MKULTRA: (1) Moore Collecting Botanicals Subproject 52: MKULTRA: (2) Moore Collecting Botanicals Subproject 53: MKULTRA: (3) Moore Collecting Botanicals

RA: MKULTRA de-classified documents Subproject 53: MKULTRA: Review Pharmacological lit. Subproject 54: MKULTRA: Brain Concussion Subproject 55: MKULTRA: Unwitting Drug Tests at [excised] University Subproject 56: MKULTRA: Studies on Alcohol, Stanford Medical school Subproject 57: MKULTRA: Sleep and Insomnia at GW: MKULTRA: Lloyd Gould Subproject 57: MKULTRA: Sleep
Box # 3
C-30 Project MUDHEN Jack Anderson MKULTRA –To File: Massachusetts (Bibliographic Citations, articles on mind control experiments in Massachusetts): John Jacobs’ Kentucky Subproject 58: MKULTRA: J. P. Morgan and Co. (see Wasson file) Agency Policy and Conferences Subproject 59: MKULTRA: Unwitting Drug Tests at University of Maryland Subproject 60: MKULTRA: Human Ecology Subproject 61: MKULTRA Subproject 62: MKULTRA: Consulting Work in Isolation/Electric Shock/CNS Drugs Subproject 63: MKULTRA: (1) Drugs and Alcohol (Butler) Subproject 64: MKULTRA: Drugs Subproject 65: MKULTRA: Hungarian Refugees Subproject 66: MKULTRA: Alcohol and Drug Study Subproject 67: MKULTRA: CIA Use of Institutes Facilities — University of Indiana Subproject 69: MKULTRA: Rutgers Subproject 70: MKULTRA: “Knockout” Subproject 71: MKULTRA: Dr. Wallace Chan at Stanford University Testing Drugs Subproject 72: MKULTRA: Testing Drugs for Effects on Central Nervous System Subproject 73: MKULTRA: University of Kentucky: Narcotics Farms, Narco-Hypnosis Subproject 74: MKULTRA: Small HEF Subproject (1) Subproject 74: MKULTRA: Small HEF Subproject (2) Subproject 75: MKULTRA: Mass. Mental Health (by Project number of master list) Subproject 77: MKULTRA: Biological Lab (1) Subproject 78: MKULTRA: Biological Lab (2) Subproject 78: MKULTRA: Biological Lab (3) Subproject 78: MKULTRA: Biological Lab (4) Subproject 78: MKULTRA: Biological Lab (5) Subproject 78: MKULTRA: Biological Lab (6)

RA: MKULTRA de-classified documents Box # 4
Document Indexes, Abstracts, and Documents Subproject 79: MKULTRA: Cutout for Funding Research of a “sensible nature” Subproject 80: MKULTRA Subproject 81: MKULTRA: Cornell–Extension of Hinkle–Wolf Subproject 82: MKULTRA: Hungarian Refugees Subproject 83: MKULTRA: Graphology Journal and Cover Subproject 84: MKULTRA: Hypnosis Work Subproject 85: MKULTRA: Stanford Medical School Subproject 86: MKULTRA: Stanford Medical School: Telecontrol Subproject 87: MKULTRA: Hyper -Allergic Substances Subproject 88: MKULTRA: Cultural Appraisal Subproject 89: MKULTRA: Hungarian Repatriation Subproject 90: MKULTRA: MIT–A. J. Wiener Subproject 91: MKULTRA: Drug Testing and Screening of Animals Subproject 92: MKULTRA: Teaching Machine for Foreign Languages Subproject 93: MKULTRA: Toxin Study–Cuba Chapter Subproject 94: MKULTRA Subproject 95: MKULTRA: Osgood Subproject 96: MKULTRA: George Kelly Subproject 97: MKULTRA: Schizophrenics Psychotherapy Subproject 98: MKULTRA: Mass Conversion Study: Queens College Subproject 99: MKULTRA: Optics mixed with Biological Warfare–Cuba Chapter Subproject 100: MKULTRA: CBW Penn State Subproject 101: MKULTRA: Biophysics of Central Nervous System Subproject 102: MKULTRA: Adolescent Gangs Subproject 103: MKULTRA: Children’s Summer Camps Subproject 104: MKULTRA: Sabotage of Petroleum Subproject 105: MKULTRA: CBW, Disease Subproject 106: MKULTRA: Electrodes, Russian Study Subproject 109: MKULTRA: Drugs-CBW Testing Subproject 110: MKULTRA: CBW MKNAOMI Subproject 112: MKULTRA: Vocational Studies in Children Subproject 113: MKULTRA: Gas Sprays and Aerosols Subproject 114: MKULTRA: Alcohol Study Subproject 115: MKULTRA: Mentally Disturbed and Environment Subproject 116: MKULTRA: Lab Subproject 117: MKULTRA: Cultural Influences on Children Subproject 118: MKULTRA: Microbiology–Penn State Subproject 119: MKULTRA: Telecontrol–Texas Christian Subproject 120: MKULTRA Drug Research Subproject 121: MKULTRA: Witch Doctor study-Dr. Raymond Prince– McGill

RA: MKULTRA de-classified documents University Subproject 122: MKULTRA: Study of Neurokinin Subproject 123: MKULTRA: African Attitude Study Subproject 124: MKULTRA: African Attitude Study Subproject 125: MKULTRA: CO2 and Acid Base Research Subproject 126: MKULTRA: Work on Placebos and Drugs Subproject 127: MKULTRA: Disaster/Stress Study Subproject 128: MKULTRA: Rapid Hypnotic Induction Subproject 130: MKULTRA: Personality Theory, David Saunders/William Thetford; Columbia Univ.
Box # 5
Subproject 131: MKULTRA Subproject 132: MKULTRA: Safe House — Not San Francisco Subproject 133: MKULTRA: Safe House — Not San Francisco Subproject 134: MKULTRA: Correlation Of Physique and Personality done by Haronian in New Jersey — Human Ecology Subproject 135: MKULTRA: Testing on Volunteers Subproject 136: MKULTRA: ESP Research Subproject 137: MKULTRA: Handwriting Analysis, Dr. Klare G Toman-HEF Subproject 139: MKULTRA: Bird Disease Studies at Penn State Subproject 140: MKULTRA: human Voluntary Drug Testing Subproject 141: MKULTRA: Unknown Subproject 142: MKULTRA: Unknown Subproject 143: MKULTRA CBW/Bacteria University of Houston Subproject 144: MKULTRA Subproject 145: MKULTRA Subproject 146: MKULTRA Subproject 147: MKULTRA: Psychometric Drugs THC Subproject 148: MKULTRA: (1) Marijuana Research Subproject 148: MKULTRA: (2) Marijuana Research Subproject 149: MKULTRA: George White and Federal Bureau of Narcotics MKULTRA APE A and B–Funding Mechanisms for MKULTRA ARTICHOKE Docs 38-461 (2) ARTICHOKE Docs 156-199 ARTICHOKE Docs 200-310 (1) ARTICHOKE Docs 200-310 (2) ARTICHOKE Docs 200-310 (1) ARTICHOKE Docs 200-310 (2) ARTICHOKE Docs 311-340

RA: MKULTRA de-classified documents ARTICHOKE Docs 362-388 ARTICHOKE Docs 388-461 MKSEARCH 7 MKSEARCH 6 (continuation of MKULTRA 62) MKSEARCH 2 (continues BW Lab, MKULTRA 78) MKSEARCH Docs S-2 (BW Lab) MKSEARCH Docs S-8 (Phase out of work done on schizophrenics probably by Pfeiffer) MKSEARCH Docs S-7 MKSEARCH Basic Documents Unlabeled Accordion File–primarily MKULTRA: Subproject 42 Unlabeled Accordion File–Financial records, checks
Box # 6
MKSEARCH 6 Discontinuation of Geschichter Fund for Medical Research MKSEARCH 2 MKSEARCH 5 MKSEARCH S-14 MKSEARCH 6 – MKACTION MKSEARCH 4 – Bureau of Narcotics Safehouse MKSEARCH 3 – Testing at Vacaville, Hamilton MKSEARCH S-3 Vacaville (1) MKSEARCH S-3 Vacaville (2) Lexington: Air Force: Alcohol: Amnesia: Animals: David Anthony:ARPA Subproject 107: MKULTRA: American Psychological Association: Army Testing: Assassination: Raymond A. Bauer: Berlin Poison Case: Biometric Lab: Biophysical Measurements: Beecher (Henry K.): Brainwashing ARTICHOKE Docs 59-155: Bordentown New Jersey Reformatory: Boston Psychopathic (Hyde-Massachusetts Mental Hospital): Brain Studies: Brainwashing (1): Brainwashing (2): Project Calling Card: John Marks Chapter 6 Conclusions: Chadwell, W.H.: CBW Work File: Dr. Wallace Chan: Cold War Late 1953-1955 (1): Cold War Late 1953-1955 (2): Communist Control Techniques VII: Cold War Docs (1) (Project Artichoke, Bluebird): Cold War Docs (2): Control of Behavior –General: Cybernetics: Defectors: University of Denver: Destruction of Files: Diseases: Drug Research and Operations Diseases: Drug Research and Operations: Drugs: Documents ARTICHOKE: Drugs: ARTICHOKE: Drugs: ARTICHOKE (2): Drugs: Subprojects
Box # 7

RA: MKULTRA de-classified documents
Ethics: Federal Penitentiary — Atlanta: Fisher Scientific Company: Flickering Lights: FOIA Important Documents (FOIA correspondence and Court DocumeRnts for suit against the CIA):Freedom of Info Act requests (1): Freedom of Info Act requests (2): Foreign Countries: Heath: Foreign Liaison: Friends of McGill University, Inc.: Ft. Detrick: Joan Gavin: Genetics: George Washington University: Geschichter Fund: Unlabeled File –MKULTRA Subprojects: Government Agencies: Graduate students: Grifford: Handwriting Hardenberg: Hearings: Hinkle: History: Hospitals: Hungarian Projects: (Defectors, Refugees): Edward Hunter: Hypnosis 50-53: Hypnosis, Cold War period: Hypnosis – Literature: Hypnosis Hypnosis – C I:: Hypnosis Documents (1): Subproject ARTICHOKE: Hypnosis Documents (2): Subproject ARTICHOKE: Hypospray: Inspector General: University of Illinois: Internal Revenue Service: Iowa State Hospital, Ionia State Hospital, Michigan: Ittleson Foundation: IVY Research Lab: Johns Hopkins University: Juicy Quotes: Lyman Kirkpatrick: John Lilly: Lovell Chemical Company: Lovell: Lowinger: LSD – Counterculture: LSD – (Old Sandoz File): LSD (1): LSD (2)
Box # 8
Magic: Mulholland: George Merck: University of Minnesota: Miscellaneous: MKDELTA: ARTICHOKE Docs/Clips: MKDELTA Subprojects: James A. Moore: MKNOOM: Mulholland: Mushrooms — Chapter 8: Naval Research, Military Side — Chapter 14: Oatis Case: Often/Chickwit: Ohio State University: Operation Paperclip: Organizational Structure: ORD: World War II: Martin Orne: Parapsychology (Limited discussion on EMR research also): The Application of Tesla’s Technology in Today’s World
Box # 9
(Original Box 13– not copied as of 7/2/93) Press Conferences (Excerpts from documents): Pfeiffer Subproject 47: Penn State (clippings): Placebos: Pfeiffer, Carl C.: Pharmaceutical Houses: Polygraph: POW: Prince– Witch Doctor Study: Prisoners — Documents Prisoners-Mental Patients (clippings): Private Company: Programming: Prouty: Psychological Assessment: Research and Development Study by Edgewood Arsenal: Personality Assessment — OSS (Clippings, Book Chapters, Interview Notes): Psychical Research Foundation: Psycho-Pharmacology: Psychosurgery: Psychosurgery (2) (clippings): Max Rinkel: Public Health Service: Puerto Rican Study: Recent Agency Policy on Experimentation: Recent Events in Defense Department (Includes document from Siemmer): Project Revere: RHIC-Edom Files (Clippings): Chapter 7 — Safehouse

RA: MKULTRA de-classified documents (draft manuscript?): Safehouse Working File (personal notes): Safehouses (Documents): Schein (clipping): Schultes (clippings, notes): Sensory Deprivation (primary clippings): Schultes (clippings, notes): Chapter 7 — Safehouses– clippings
Box # 10
CIA Behavior Modification Reports: Side Tone Delay Device II: Incapacitation — NonLethal: 4 Assessment: Sleep Knockout Drug (clippings): Alexander H. Smith (clippings): Soil Microbiology: Sonics: Stanford: Team Exp. 1: Technical Assistance: ARTICHOKE: Technologies: Toxic Psychic States: Ultra Sonics/Sonics: Tradecraft: Universities (clippings): Wasson, Robert Gordon (notes, clippings): Wendt: White TD Docs: Harold Wolff (clippings): Documents to File (miscellaneous topics)
Box # 11
Sleep Learning: Interrogation: Electric Fish and Animal Radar 1/3: Electric Fish and Animal Radar 2/3: Electric Fish and Animal Radar 3/3: Plants, Sleep Machine, ESB and Sleep, Biocommunications and Bioelectronics: History of Program: Animal ESB: Toxicity in mice 1/4: Toxicity in mice 2/4: Toxicity in mice 3/4: Toxicity in mice 4/4
Box # 12
Index Cards
To make a comment or suggestion, write rahome@ra-info.org.

1977 Senate Hearing on MKULTRA





Project MKULTRA, The CIA’s Program Of Research In Behavioral Modification
AUGUST 3, 1977
At least one death, that of Dr. Olson, resulted from these activities. The
Agency itself acknowledged that these tests made little scientific sense.
The agents doing the monitoring were not qualified scientific observers.
The tests subjects were seldom accessible beyond the first hours of the
test. In a number of instances, the test subject became ill for hours or days,
and effective followup was impossible.
Other experiments were equally offensive. For example, heroin addicts
were enticed into participating in LSD experiments in order to get a
reward — heroin.
Perhaps most disturbing of all was the fact that the extent of
experimentation on human subjects was unknown. The records of all these
activities were destroyed in January 1973, at the instruction of then CIA
Director Richard Helms. In spite of persistent inquiries by both the Health
Subcommittee and the Intelligence Committee, no additional records or
information were forthcoming. And no one — no single individual — could
be found who remembered the details, not the Director of the CIA, who
ordered the documents destroyed, not the official responsible for the
program, nor any of his associates
We believed that the record, incomplete as it was, was as complete as it
was going to be. Then one individual, through a Freedom of Information
request, accomplished what two U.S. Senate committees could not. He
spurred the agency into finding additional records pertaining to the CIA’s
program of experimentation with human subjects. These new records were
discovered by the agency in March. Their existence was not made known
to the Congress until July.
The records reveal a far more extensive series of experiments than had
previously been thought. Eighty-six universities or institutions were
involved. New instances of unethical behavior were revealed.
The intelligence community of this Nation, which requires a shroud of
secrecy in order to operate, has a very sacred trust from the American
people. The CIA’s program of human experimentation of the fifties and
sixties violated that trust. It was violated again on the day the bulk of the
agency’s records were destroyed in 1973. It is violated each time a
responsible official refuses to recollect the details of the program. The best
safeguard against abuses in the future is a complete public accounting of
the abuses of the past.
I think this is illustrated, as Chairman Inouye pointed out. These are
issues, are questions that happened in the fifties and sixties, and go back
some 15, 20 years ago, but they are front page news today, as we see in
the major newspapers and on the television and in the media of this
country; and the reason they are, I think, is because it just continuously
begins to trickle out, sort of, month after month, and the best way to put
this period behind us, obviously, is to have the full information, and I
think that is the desire of Admiral Turner and of the members of this
The Central Intelligence Agency drugged American citizens without their
knowledge or consent. It used university facilities and personnel without
their knowledge. It funded leading researchers, often without their
These institutes, these individuals, have a right to know who they are and
how and when they were used. As of today, the Agency itself refuses to
declassify the names of those institutions and individuals, quite
appropriately, I might say, with regard to the individuals under the Privacy
Act. It seems to me to be a fundamental responsibility to notify those
individuals or institutions, rather. I think many of them were caught up in
an unwitting manner to do research for the Agency. Many researchers,
distinguished researchers, some of our most outstanding members of our
scientific community, involved in this network, now really do not know whether they were involved or not,and it seems to me that the whole health and climate in terms of our
university and our scientific and health facilities are entitled to that
So, I intend to do all I can to persuade the Agency to, at the very least,
officially inform those institutions and individuals involved.
Two years ago, when these abuses were first revealed, I introduced
legislation, with Senator Schweiker and Senator Javits, designed to
minimize the potential for any similar abuses in the future. That legislation
expanded the jurisdiction of the National Commission on Human Subjects
of Biomedical and Behavioral Research to cover all federally funded
research involving human subjects. The research initially was just directed
toward HEW activities, but this legislation covered DOD as well as the
This Nation has a biomedical and behavioral research capability second to
none. It has had for subjects of HEW funded research for the past 3 years a
system for the protection of human subjects of biomedical research second
to none, and the Human Experimentation Commission has proven its
value. Today’s hearings and the record already established underscore the
need to expand its jurisdiction.
The CIA supported that legislation in 1975, and it passed the Senate
unanimously last year. I believe it is needed in order to assure all our
people that they will have the degree of protection in human
experimentation that they deserve and have every right to expect.
Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much. Now we will proceed with the
hearings. Admiral Turner?
[The prepared statement of Admiral Turner follows.]
Project MKULTRA, The CIA’s Program
Of Research In Behavioral Modification
Prepared Statement of Admiral Stansfield Turner,
Director of Central Intelligence
Mr. Chairman: In my letter to you of July 15, 1977, I reported our recent
discovery of seven boxes of documents related to Project MKULTRA, a
closely held CIA project conducted from 1953-1964. As you may recall,
MKULTRA was an “umbrella project” under which certain sensitive
subprojects were funded, involving among other things research on drugs
and behavioral modification. During the Rockefeller Commission and
Church Committee investigations in 1975, the cryptonym became publicly
known when details of the drug-related death of Dr. Frank Olsen were
publicized. In 1953 Dr. Olsen, a civilian employee of the Army at Fort
Detrick, leaped to his death from a hotel room window in New York City
about a week after having unwittingly consumed LSD administered to him
as an experiment at a meeting of LSD researchers called by CIA.
Most of what was known about the Agency’s involvement with behavioral
drugs during the investigations in 1975 was contained in a report on
Project MKULTRA prepared by the Inspector General’s office in 1963. As
a result of that report’s recommendations, unwitting testing of drugs on
U.S. citizens was subsequently discontinued. The MKULTRA-related
report was made available to the Church Committee investigators and to
the staff of Senator Kennedy’s Subcommittee on Health. Until the recent
discovery, it was believed that all of the MKULTRA files dealing with
behavioral modification had been destroyed in 1973 on the orders of the
then retiring Chief of the Office of Technical Service, with the
authorization of the DCI, as has been previously reported. Almost all of
the people who had had any connection with the aspects of the project
which interested Senate investigators in 1975 were no longer with the
Agency at that time. Thus, there was little detailed knowledge of the
MKULTRA subprojects available to CIA during the Church Committee
investigations. This lack of available details, moreover, was probably not
wholly attributable to the destruction of MKULTRA files in 1973; the 1963 report on MKULTRA
by the Inspector General notes on page 14: “Present practice is to maintain
no records of the planning and approval of test programs.”
When I reported to you last on this matter, my staff had not yet had an
opportunity to review the newly located material in depth. This has now
been accomplished, and I am in a position to give you a description of the
contents of the recovered material. I believe you will be most interested in
the following aspects of the recent discovery:
How the material was discovered and why it was not previously found;
The nature of this recently located material;
How much new information there is in the material which may not
have been previously known and reported to Senate investigators; and
What we believe the most significant aspects of this find to be.
To begin, as to how we discovered these materials. The material had been
sent to our Retired Records Center outside of Washington and was
discovered sent to our Retired Records Center outside of Washington and
was discovered there as a result of the extensive search efforts of an
employee charged with responsibility for maintaining our holdings on
behavioral drugs and for responding to Freedom of Information Act
requests on this subject. During the Church Committee investigation in
1975, searches for MKULTRA-related material were made by examining
both the active and retired records of all branches of CIA considered at all
likely to have had association with MKULTRA documents. The retired
records of the Budget and Fiscal Section of the Branch responsible for
such work were not searched, however. This was because financial papers
associated with sensitive projects such s MKULTRA were normally
maintained by the Branch itself under the project file, not by the Budget
and Fiscal Section. In the case at hand, however, the newly located
material was sent to the Retired Records Center in 1970 by the Budget and
Fiscal Section as part of its own retired holdings. The reason for this
departure from normal procedure is not known. As a result of it, however,
the material escaped retrieval and destruction in 1973 by the then-retiring
Director of the Office as well as discovery in 1975 by CIA officials
responding to Senate investigators.
The employee who located this material did so by leaving no stone
unturned in his efforts to respond to FOIA requests. He reviewed all
listings of material of this Branch stored at the Retired Records Center,
including those of the Budget and Fiscal Section and, thus, discovered the
MKULTRA-related documents which had been missed in the previous
searches. In sum, the Agency failed to uncover these particular documents
in 1973 in the process of attempting to destroy them; it similarly failed to.
$11,000 was involved during this period 1953-1960: 3 subprojects.
Single subprojects in such areas as effects of electro-shock, harassment
techniques for offensive use, analysis of extrasensory perception, gas
propelled sprays and aerosols, and four subprojects involving crop and
material sabotage.
One or two subprojects on each of the following:
“Blood Grouping” research, controlling the activity of animals, energy
storage and transfer in organic systems; and
stimulus and response in biological systems.
Three subprojects canceled before any work was done on them having
to do with laboratory drug screening, research on brain concussion, and
research on biologically active materials to be tested through the skin on
human volunteers.
Now, as to how much new the recovered material adds to what has
previously been reported to the Church Committee and to Senator
Kennedy’s Subcommittee on Health on these topics, the answer is
additional detail, for the most part: e.g., the names of previously
unidentified researchers and institutions associated on either a witting or
unwitting basis with MKULTRA activities, and the names of CIA officials
who approved or monitored the various subprojects. Some new
substantive material is also present: e.g., details concerning proposals for
experimentation and clinical testing associated with various research
projects, and a possibly improper contribution by CIA to a private
institution. However, the principal types of activities included have, for
the most part, either been outlined to some extent or generally described in
what was previously available to CIA in the way of documentation and
was supplied by CIA to Senate investigators. For example:
Financial disbursement records for the period 1960-1964 for 76 of the 149
numbered MKULTRA subprojects had been recovered from the Office of
Finance by CIA and were made available to the Church Committee
investigators in August or September 1975.
The 1963 Inspector General report on MKULTRA made available to both
the Church Committee and Senator Kennedy’s Subcommittee mentions
electro-shock and harassment substances (pp. 4, 16); covert testing on unwitting U.S.
citizens (pp. 7, 10-12); the search for new materials through arrangements
with specialists in universities, pharmaceutical houses, hospitals, state and
federal institutions, and private research organizations (pp. 7, 9); and the
fact that the Technical Service Division of CIA had initiated 144
subprojects related to the control of human behavior between 1953-1963
(p. 21).
The relevant section of a 1957 Inspector General report on the Technical
Service Division was also made available to the Church Committee staff.
That report discusses techniques for human assessment and unorthodox
methods of communication (p. 201); discrediting and disabling materials
which can be covertly administered (pp. 201-202); studies on magicians’
arts as applied to covert operations (p. 202); specific funding mechanisms
for research performed outside of CIA (pp. 202-203, 205); research being
done on “K” (knockout) material, alcohol tolerance, and hypnotism (p.
203); research on LSD (p. 204); anti-personnel harassment and
assassination delivery systems including aerosol generators and other
spray devices (pp. 206-208); the role of Fort Detrick in support of CIA’s
Biological/Chemical Warfare capability (p. 208); and material sabotage
research (p. 209). Much of this material is reflected in the Church
Committee Report, Book I, pp. 385-422. (See Appendix A, pp. 65-102).
The most significant new data discovered are, first, the names of
researchers and institutions who participated in the MKULTRA project
and, secondly, a possibly improper contribution by CIA to a private
institution. We are now in possession of the names of 185 non-government
researchers and assistants who are identified in the recovered material
dealing with the 149 subprojects. The names of 80 institutions where work
was done or with which these people were affiliated are also mentioned.
The institutions include 44 colleges or universities, 15 research
foundations or chemical or pharmaceutical companies and the like, 12
hospitals or clinics (in addition to those associated with universities), and
3 penal institutions. While the identities of some of these people and
institutions were known previously, the discovery of the new identities
adds to our knowledge of MKULTRA.
The facts as they pertain to the possibly improper contribution are as
follows: One project involves a contribution of $375,000 to a building
fund of a private medical institution. The fact that a contribution was made
was previously known; indeed it was mentioned in a 1957 Inspector
General report on the Technical Service Division of CIA, pertinent
portions of which had been reviewed by the Church Committee staff.
newly discovered material, however, makes it clear that this contribution
was made through an intermediary, which made it appear to be a private
donation. As a private donation, the contribution was then matched by
federal funds. The institution was not made aware of the true source of the
gift. This project was approved by the then DCI, and concurred in by
CIA’s top management at the time, including the then General Counsel
who wrote an opinion supporting the legality of the contribution.
The recently discovered documents give a greater insight into the scope of
the unwitting drug testing but contribute little more than that. We now
have collaborating information that some of the unwitting drug testing was
carried on in safehouses in San Francisco and New York City, and we
have identified that three individuals were involved in this undertaking as
opposed to the previously reported one person. We also know now that
some unwitting testing took place on criminal sexual psychopaths
confined at a State hospital and that, additionally, research was done on
knock-out or “K” drug in parallel with research to develop pain killers for
cancer patients.
These, then are the principal findings identified to date in our review of
the recovered material. As noted earlier, we believe the detail on the
identities of researchers and institutions involved in CIA’s sponsorship of
drugs and behavioral modification is a new element and one which poses a
considerable problem. Most of the people and institutions involved are not
aware of Agency sponsorship. We should certainly assume that the
researchers and institutions which cooperate with CIA on a witting basis
acted in good faith and in the belief that they were aiding their government
in a legitimate and proper purpose. I believe we all have a moral
obligation to these researchers and institutions to protect them from any
unjustified embarrassment or damage to their reputations which revelation
of their identities might bring. In addition, I have a legal obligation under
the Privacy Act not to publicly disclose the names of the individual
researchers without their consent. This is especially true, of course, for
those researchers and institutions which were unwitting participants in
CIA-sponsored activities.
Nevertheless, recognizing the right and the need of both the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Subcommittee on Health to
investigate the circumstances of these activities in whatever detail they
consider necessary. I am providing your Committee with all of the names
on a classified basis. I hope that this will facilitate your investigation while
protecting the individuals and institutions involved. Let me emphasize that
the MKULTRA events are 12 to 25 years in the past. I assure you that the
CIA is in no way engaged in either witting or unwitting testing of drugs
Finally, I am working closely with the Attorney General and with the
Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare on this matter. We are making
available to the Attorney General whatever materials he may deem
necessary to any investigation he may elect to undertake. We are working
with both the Attorney General and the Secretary of Health, Education and
Welfare to determine whether it is practicable from this new evidence to
attempt to identify any of the persons to whom drugs may have been
administered unwittingly. No such names are part of these records, but we
are working to determine if there are adequate clues to lead to their
identification; and if so, how to go about fulfilling the Government’s
responsibilities in the matter