[PAGE 1]
TO: Security Officer DATE: 16 February 1953 VIA: Devuty Sccurity Officer
VIA: Chief, Security lesearch Staff, I&S
FROI: Chief, Technical Pranch, SRS, I&S
SJPJECT: Report on ARTICHOKE by Surmary of.
H dated 2 February 1953) I 1. 1
1..
1. The writer has nade a very careful studly and analysis of the e H repot on Lhe ARTICHOKE problem. In Fonoral, the writer agreos A in the ovcrall statements set out by the group but wishos to H point out certain clenents in the report thal are subject to dispute and tend to indicate that the rroup has not boen totally infored as to the natare of ARTICHOKE or the presont status of tlu ARTI-CHokE vork insofar as ne. Eeehaieal-yanch is concorned.

(1) Tho group contimually streuses long-range exporinentation, particularly of a psychological and psychiatric nature. The writor agrces with this,as a gencral premise but. wiile conducting this long-range rescarch it appears "absolutely essential tint wo devsLop,and have ready For instant use,tochniques, cte. that will or at least,wu assist in obtaining infornation in vital cases. Tho uriter holioves that involved,

commlex, and cumbersome rescarch such as carricd on at uill n t be productive (certainly in the iruaodiate future) and is unrcalistic and aill not, bo ol ue to the operations pcople vhen it is needed.

Fifs, 7, 77,1

[PAGE 2]
it is possille that has nover considhred or pdšsibly never hcard of ft some.. ,The writer thhiaves that tnc group is lookinz for a weapon that, will make an individual talk at great length on portinent mal,ters while thore is nothinc in their report to indicato tho cxtrcmc value of a chonical agent if it will producc only ono small bit of verifiable informabion. comentzthat individuals when they realize they are drugged tend to becone taciturn is not accurato. Individuals may bccone tacitumrned under cortain circuastancos if they feel thet they have been drigged or attempted to bo drugqied surrepticiously, hut one. of the established AlrIClOkE techiques is to conccal the factof the drugging behind a nedical cover and then use drugs as a nedical covep trentment in specificcases.

discusses the use of drurs:,:hypnosis, andi brain 11 damaging, orocesses and calìs them elahorato, impructical,. and i unnecessary withort, it appears, going into specific ronsons uhy these procosaes right, be usod. Thoin' comment that cquivalont results could be accomplished by exports usin; uimole techniques of interrogation. The writer does not agrec with this at all and can cite inst-ances where absolutely new infornation was turned up using chemicals that was unabailahlo before thc chenicals werc

-2.

[PAGE 3]
used and whore "cxpert" interroialors hád atternted to obtain infationc

apparently supports tho "textbook theory" that individuals under hypnosis will not act against their will in re-2 a\~li.1 pugnant acts,of violonce and acts of disloyalty. This is a vory A moot quostion and the writer wishes to pfnt oit that therc, e 1六 no tests made that can be rogarded as definative in this matter. i\~ Y The writer wishes to point out that expcrts in the field of 1 hypnosis are not agroed on this point and hetual professos nd not-rtoetors feol thal. thcre is a good chancs that these things can he accoaplished through hypnosis.

writer to be fairly stound sound althouga again tests Lo support these recornendations would take a great deal of timc, nondy, and effort belore anything definative could come of it.

(6) recomiendstions that large extensive studies be made in psychological.effects, human behavior, studies of seduction, persuasion, and persistence. are, undouhtedly, worthy : : progects but would be time consuming anì rosults Sould not -be forthcoming for extroucly long poriods of time.

RECOIRENDATIOUS 1 2. That ifand when, the group evcr meets as a unit that
ATIClOKE Tean nembers be pannitted to talk personally to the
group members and lay before them specific examples and certain itens which
possihlg the members can give pertinent advicc. Thc writer -7- -3.

[PAGE 4]
feels that the | Tgroup has never boen thoroughly briefed or indocrinated in ARTICliOKE'AID TIAT their report quite clearlyreflccts that.

3. The writer cannot agree with the opinion that "little. threat, if any, to Nlational Security exists because or special interrogation it techniques or agents." The writer wvishes to point out that th orly requires one break for the successful compromising dr ne individual to caise extreme damage to a nation. There are mumerous recent classic examples of this.

toss mot lroh upin the mly I literp I meri T mokin indrvede .vivitune

1. ies afficent, eagy, lapfy hi
2. Frgny snniy penely

5.. ie pble tt j wntt ih brdy. rflr clomae have beve asrd