Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

Fwd: Political Integrity? ( Update On Project Shad - Project 112 )

Rate this question


Guest allan

Question

Fwd: Political Integrity? ( UPDATE ON PROJECT SHAD - PROJECT 112 )

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:01:28 -0800 (PST)

From: Dave M <dhm2828@...>

Subject: Political Integrity?

To: vetvoice@...

Subject: Oversight and Accountability? 1/8/07.
Continued in 2007 is the advancement of the DOD’s SHAD Research & Development (R&D) lessons learned. A proven Department Of Defense (DOD) Project 112 chemical and biological experiment.[2] This is under the civilian "NATIONAL SECURITY MISSIONS" of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA).[5] BARDA also lacks the MILITARY, Shipboard Hazard and Defense (SHAD) oversight and accountability for their biological contamination. BARDA too, as most conducted on the DOD’s "hundreds of thousands" in the U.S. Senate Report [4], will be under the cover of our nation’s wars!
Documented by the 13 years ago 1994 U.S. Senate Report is a study of from 1944, 50 years of DOD "experiments that were designed to harm"![4] Its NOTES (No.’s 168 & 170) cite, "The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code, Human Rights in Human Experimentation". Not addressed is their own Report’s proven dereliction of duty, i.e., by the many conducted in direct disobedience of the DOD Secretary’s 1953 order in pages 343-345 of the "The Nazi Doctors".[1]
The 12 July 1973 National Personnel Records Center fire destroyed "designed to harm" military service records. Congress’s 1974 Privacy Act
censored the names of all witnesses from surviving and future records.
In 2007 is the H. R. 4259 "To establish the Veterans' Right to Know Commission."[6] A proposal to study the
DOD’s SHAD lack of oversight and
"Right to Know"
accountability?
CRUCIAL TO THE "RIGHT TO KNOW" IS: The U.S. Senate’s DOD military experiments demonstrate R&D protocol by all, i.e., the scheduled, conducted on "hundreds of thousands" and in-the-record U.S. Senate Report’s many "experiments that were designed to harm".[4] First, all prior R&D is reviewed. The resulting Scope of Work defines what each military and civilian research program is to accomplish. The where, how, when and who is involved is spelled out. Each "to harm" project’s cause and effects are very closely followed and recorded. The subjects are observed during the project and the end results are the basis for subsequent actions. Then the needed from "to harm" protections are developed with applicable treatment for experienced injuries. This CRUCIAL experiment revealing evidence is not part of a subject’s medical history. Therefore, unavailable for a past, present and future victim’s diagnosis and treatment by Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) Physicians’, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Physicians’ or for use during any VA and Judicial Branch processes!
THEREBY, THE VICTIM NEVER THE WISER BECOMES! WITH THE VERY REAL DANGER OF AN AFTER MILITARY SERVICE AND CIVILIAN
"NATIONAL SECURITY MISSIONS"
MISSED MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS. CREATED ARE INCREASED SERIOUS AND CHRONIC INJURIES
!
The 1987 U.S. SUPREME COURT in the 1953 disobedience STANLEY Case makes very clear that UNLESS CONGRESS CHANGES IT, BY REASON OF MILITARY SERVICE AFTERWARDS VETERAN’S LOST ARE PRIOR TO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.[3] The Senate Report documents many more"
experiments that were designed to harm".[4] Most were also in direct disobedience of the
DOD
Secretary’s 1953 order. Noted was that rights be restored. This still has not been done!! All for the greater good, end justifies the means! The excuse for an in 2007 from 1944 ongoing 63 years of "hundreds of thousands" [4]
JUSTICE AND TREATMENT DENIED
! By BARDA "national security missions" to-date continued.[5] Requested is your support by contacting your members in the U.S. Congress. Please have them return to Veterans’ their Constitutional Rights with oversight and accountability for all! Thank you.
REFERENCES: [1] DOD Secretary’s 26 February 1953 NO non-consensual, human experiments Memo pages 343-345. George J. Annas and Michael A. Grodin,
The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code; Human Rights in Human Experimentation
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). In REF. 3 as NOTES 168 & 170. [2] Starting in 1962 chemical and biological experiments. Project 112 (Including Project SHAD) Home; www1.va.gov/shad/ [3] 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). [4] 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. [5] Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), Bill S. 3678 2006. [6]
H. R. 4259 "To establish the Veterans' Right to Know Commission."
__________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

Thomas W. Trefts

Disabled USAF Gulf War Era Veteran

A-10 Jet Engine Mechanic, Flight Line Refueling

10th Component Repair Squadron : RAF Alconbury, 1989-1991 B.S. Business Administration : Ashland College ( University ), Ohio 1984

Assoc. In Applied Jet Engine Technology,

Community College of the Air Force 1991 Director of The Unified Veterans Coalition

http://xsorbit27.com/users5/unifiedveteranscoalition/index.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Popular Days

0 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

There have been no answers to this question yet

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • Troy Spurlock went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • KMac1181 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • jERRYMCK earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • KMac1181 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Lebro earned a badge
      First Post
  • Our picks

    • I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 3 replies
    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
    • Welcome to hadit!  

          There are certain rules about community care reimbursement, and I have no idea if you met them or not.  Try reading this:

      https://www.va.gov/resources/getting-emergency-care-at-non-va-facilities/

         However, (and I have no idea of knowing whether or not you would likely succeed) Im unsure of why you seem to be so adamant against getting an increase in disability compensation.  

         When I buy stuff, say at Kroger, or pay bills, I have never had anyone say, "Wait!  Is this money from disability compensation, or did you earn it working at a regular job?"  Not once.  Thus, if you did get an increase, likely you would have no trouble paying this with the increase compensation.  

          However, there are many false rumors out there that suggest if you apply for an increase, the VA will reduce your benefits instead.  

      That rumor is false but I do hear people tell Veterans that a lot.  There are strict rules VA has to reduce you and, NOT ONE of those rules have anything to do with applying for an increase.  

      Yes, the VA can reduce your benefits, but generally only when your condition has "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life.  

          Unless you contacted the VA within 72 hours of your medical treatment, you may not be eligible for reimbursement, or at least that is how I read the link, I posted above. Here are SOME of the rules the VA must comply with in order to reduce your compensation benefits:

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.344

       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use