Source: http://hercolano2.blogspot.com/2010_04_26_archive.html
Timestamp: 2017-12-13 22:29:16
Document Index: 775352530

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 4', 'art 5', 'art 6', 'art 5', 'art 7', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 8', 'Art.1', 'art 1']

Hercolano2: 04/26/10
The Trial of President Saddam Hussein
Special Section on the Trial of President Saddam Hussein
On June 12, 2006 after reporting:
BAGHDAD, Iraq -- An American lawyer on Saddam Hussein's defense team lashed out at the court Monday, saying it was not giving defenders enough time and was intimidating witnesses. Curtis Doebbler chided the chief judge for not responding to a series of defense motions, including ones challenging the court's legitimacy and seeking documents. He asked for a break in the proceedings until those issues were resolved.
"We are at a serious disadvantage to the prosecution because of the way we have been treated by the court," Doebbler told chief judge Raouf Abdel-Rahman. "We want to work for justice. But that must start by having a fair trial.
"But under the current circumstances, that doesn't seem possible. We ask that the trial be stopped to allow us adequate time to prepare our defense."
He pointed out that the prosecution took more than five months to present its case, while the court is rushing the defense, which began its arguments in April. Abdel-Rahman has repeatedly demanded the defense present full lists of witnesses.
"The perceived fairness of the trial is a crucial issue, since U.S. and Iraqi officials have hoped that showing justice toward Saddam will help heal the deep Shiite-Sunni divisions that have exploded since his regime's fall."
Today, June 21, 2006, the BBC reports:
One of the main lawyers defending former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein at his trial has been shot dead.
Khamis al-Obeidi's body was found dumped in the capital, Baghdad, hours after he was abducted from his home.
Defence lawyers have frequently complained that they have not been given enough protection, calling the trial's fairness into question.
Two other defence lawyers were murdered last year in the early stages of the trial, which is set to end next month.
Do the United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, the European Union, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the "liberal media" (among others) have anything to say about this peculiar form of "justice"?
Or should we assume that in the New World Order we have accepted the pre-emptive concept of justice: lynching!
Lynching Saddam – Part 2: Juan Cole’s informed comment
Following the murder of one of the main lawyers defending prisoner of war President Saddam Hussein in that lynching circus the US’ government exported to Iraq (even Kafka would have not dared calling that thing a "trial"), one of the most interesting comments comes from Juan Cole.
The favourite of much part of the western anti-war movement spent as many as 111 words to comment:
Another of Saddam's defense attorneys was assassinated. That tribunal, which at one time seemed as though it would be source of good news for the Bush administration, has been handled so badly that it has become nothing short of an embarrassment. Three defense lawyers killed, and one witness alleging that some of the men Saddam is alleged to have had killed at Dujail are still alive. Saddam even emerged after the February bombing of the golden dome at Samarra and the subsequent faith-based massacres between Shiite and Sunni as a voice of national unity. To give the old mass murderer the occasion to grandstand that way. It is incompetence, criminal incompetence. (1)
The former (?) head of state overthrown by a foreign, military, illegal and immoral invasion that’s destroyed the whole state of Iraq and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, is called by Cole’s informed comment"Saddam" for three times and finally "the old mass murderer". Cole's Conclusion: "It is incompetence, criminal incompetence".
This is the same Juan Cole who wrote last November, about the US’ use of White Phosphorous in Fallujah: "This is a public relations issue, not an issue of war crimes". (2)
Maybe Juan Cole should listen to the US National Public Radio more often. American historian and journalist William Blum wrote a few days ago:
National Public Radio foreign correspondent Loren Jenkins, serving in NPR's Baghdad bureau, met earlier this month with a senior Shiite cleric, a man who was described in the NPR report as "a moderate" and as a person trying to lead his Shiite followers into practicing peace and reconciliation. He had been jailed by Saddam Hussein and forced into exile. Jenkins asked him: "What would you think if you had to go back to Saddam Hussein?" The cleric replied that he'd "rather see Iraq under Saddam Hussein than the way it is now." (3)
Besides Cole’s agenda, his followers in the West and the anti-war movement in its whole should remember the words William Blum writes at the end of his report: "And many Iraqis actually supported him [Saddam Hussein]".
Legitimate, respectable different opinions and point of views can and should go together with intellectual honesty and historical truth. That’s the only possible way to build opposition to this vicious and rapacious empire. All the rest is propaganda’s smokescreen we all should be very careful of.
1) Juan Cole, June 22, 2006, Informed Comment
2) Open letter to Juan Cole, Professor of History at the University of Michigan By Gabriele Zamparini
3) The Anti-Empire Report. Some things you need to know before the world ends, William Blum, June 21, 2006
Lynching Saddam – Part 4: the NYT enjoys that bloody show!
The Washington official reactions to the lynching of prisoner of war President Saddam Hussein comes - as usual - from the pages of the New York Times:
No arrests have been made in any of the trial-related assassinations, including those of a judge and his son, also a court employee. Some American officials strongly suspect that members of Mr. Hussein's Baath Party may have played a role with the aim of discrediting the court. Indeed, each killing has been followed by an upsurge of demands, from Western human rights organizations as well as Baathists, for the trial to be moved out of Iraq. (1)
But once again, something doesn't seem right here.
A few days ago the same New York Times wrote:
Iraqi witnesses said that Mr. Obeidi was transported in a convoy of vehicles by people known as belonging to the Mahdi Army, a Shiite militia known to be affiliated with the rebellious anti-American cleric Moktada al-Sadr. Witnesses said they wore flak jackets and shouted "terrorist" at one point. Mr. Obeidi was taken to a spot called Hamidiya, about six miles from his house, according to witnesses. His body was dumped in a place for construction debris, apparently retrieved again, and then dumped in a lot in Sadr City. It was then taken to the Tahtheeb police station there, an area known as a stronghold of the Mahdi Army, riddled with bullets in the head, chest and back. (2)
What did it happen between this first NYT's story published on June 21 and the other NYT's story, published four days later on June 25? Do "some American officials" have new elements to tell the NYT that they "strongly suspect that members of Mr. Hussein's Baath Party may have played a role with the aim of discrediting the court."? And why All The News That's Fit to Print does not ask "some American officials" to demonstrate what they say with facts and evidence instead of publishing undocumented speculations? Does the NYT believe in "conspiracy theories"?
Let's go back to facts.
Two years ago, on 3 July 2004, Al-Jazeera reported:
Shaikh Raid al-Kadhimi, a senior preacher among Iraq's Shia, warned the lawyers, whom he described as "mercenary lawyers", against coming to Iraq.
"I advise the monkeys, those mercenary lawyers, who wish to defend Saddam, not to come to Iraq because Iraqis will be ready to deal with them," he said from the pulpit of Baghdad's Kadhimiyah Shrine.
"We demand the execution of Saddam Hussein and we think we represent the opinion of al-Sadr's supporters and most Iraqis," said Shaikh Awad Khafaji, a chief aide of Shia leader Muqtada al-Sadr, during his Friday sermon in a Shia district of Baghdad. (3)
Earlier this year, Reuters reported about the resignation of the chief judge in the trial of Saddam Hussein:
The killings of two defense lawyers have already prompted questions over the U.S.-backed decision to hold the trial in the midst of bitter sectarian and ethnic conflict. (...) A source close to Kurdish judge Rizgar Amin himself told Reuters that tribunal officials were trying to talk him out of his decision but he was reluctant to stay on because Shiite leaders had criticized him for being "soft" on Saddam in court. "He tendered his resignation to the court a few days ago but the court rejected it. Now talks are under way to convince him to go back on his decision," he said on Saturday. "He’s under a lot of pressure, the whole court is under political pressure. "I am not sure if he will go back on his decision," said the source, who is familiar with Amin’s thinking. "He had complaints from the government that he was being too soft in dealing with Saddam. They want things to go faster." The last straw, the source said, was a letter criticizing his handling of the trial from radical Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr, whose movement is part of the ruling Islamist bloc. (4)
Just a few months ago, the Associated Press reported about shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr:
The cleric, speaking from the holy city of Najaf, said Saddam Hussein should not be tried but executed immediately. He criticized what he called American intervention in the trial and causing to take too much time. (5)
It's also interesting to notice that while Gulf News reported:
Shopowners told reporters that three gunmen had dumped the body at a roundabout under a poster of a senior Shiite cleric killed by Saddam's agents in 1999. The cleric is the father of Moqtada Al Sadr, the leader of the Mehdi Army. "They fired into the air and said 'this is the fate of Baathists!'," said a shopkeeper.
Mr Obaidi is the eighth person associated with the court case to be killed. Witnesses described how three masked gunmen threw his corpse under the poster of a prominent Shia cleric executed by Saddam Hussein's regime in 1999 while shouting "This is the fate of all Baathists." Police were unable to confirm reports that his abductors were wearing police uniforms. (6)
I wonder why the Independent didn't report that the cleric in that poster was"the father of Moqtada Al Sadr, the leader of the Mehdi Army."
Once again, I reiterate my questions with the hope that other people will join:
Will the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, the European Union, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the "liberal media" (among others) have the courage and honesty to demand the (American directed) "trial" to be stopped?
1) Hussein Thinks He Will Get Death Penalty but Sees Escape Hatch, His Lawyer Says, EDWARD WONG, NYT, June 25, 2006
2) Third Lawyer in Hussein Trial Is Killed, By JOHN F. BURNS and CHRISTINE HAUSER, NYT, June 21, 2006
3) Saddam's lawyers threatened, By Ahmed Janabi, Al-Jazeera, Saturday 03 July 2004
4) Iraq tries to convince Saddam judge to stay. Amin tenders resignation amid claims of government interference, REUTERS, Jan. 15, 2006
5) Iraqi Shi'ite cleric calls U.S., Britain and Israel a 'Triad of Evil', By The Associated Press, 11/03/2006
6) Saddam's lawyer is tortured and murdered, By Kim Sengupta, The Independent, 22 June 2006
Lynchng Saddam – Part 5: United Nations and Saddam’s Lawyers’ call
The United Nations reported:
A United Nations expert on human rights and legal systems today called on the Iraqi Government to launch an independent investigation into the killing of a lawyer working for the defence team of former President Saddam Hussein. (…) Leandro Despouy, the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers said (…) "This is the third killing of a member of Saddam Hussein's defence team since the trial started in October last year," (…) In that light, the statement said that the Special Rapporteur reiterated his criticisms of the Iraqi High Tribunal, namely, that its jurisdiction is limited to certain groups of individuals, that it was set up in the context of an armed occupation, that it violates the right to be tried by an impartial tribunal and under those conditions is empowered to impose the death penalty. " The Special Rapporteur wishes to reiterate his support for the establishment of an international tribunal to ensure that the entire spectrum of barbaric crimes committed in Iraq are prosecuted in a comprehensive, independent and impartial manner, in full respect of the right to truth of all victims and of the international community at large," the statement said.
The Lawyers for the Defendants had already demanded on 21 December 2005 in the PRELIMINARY SUBMISSION CHALLENGING THE LEGALITY OF THE SPECIAL COURT:
1. Special Court created by special legislation that has been promulgated by a foreign occupying power in violations of its obligations under international and national law can not be sustained as legal and should accept it on illegality in the name of promoting the rule of law in Iraq.
2. Defendants therefore seek that:
3. all further proceedings of the special Court be stayed until such time as a legitimate and legal Court can be established;
4. the establishment of a schedule for oral argument on this preliminary issue; and,
5. the establishment of a schedule for written pleadings to be submitted by both the defense and the prosecution on the issue of the legitimacy of the special Court and its compatibility with both national and international law.
The motion challenging the legitimacy of the court online
I am sure WE ALL in the anti-war and anti-occupation movement WILLsupport the United Nations’ call!
Lynching Saddam – Part 6: The More You Watch the Less You Know
"(…) there can be no doubt that behind all the actions of this court of justice, that is to say in my case, behind my arrest and today's interrogation, there is a great organization at work. An organization which not only employs corrupt warders, oafish Inspectors, and Examining Magistrates of whom the best that can be said is that they recognize their own limitations, but also has at its disposal a judicial hierarchy of high, indeed of the highest rank, with an indispensable and numerous retinue of servants, clerks, police, and other assistants, perhaps even hangmen, I do not shrink from that word. And the significance of this great organization, gentlemen? (…)" - Franz Kafka, The Trial
A few years ago journalist, film-maker and media activist Danny Schechter, wrote a book whose title - The More You Watch the Less You Know - is perfect to summarize the news we get from our mainstream media on the trial of Prisoner of War President Saddam Hussein. (Note: the words "news", "our","mainstream media" and "trial" need to be read in italics).
"The second trial of Saddam Hussein, for genocide against Kurds in northern Iraq in the 1980s, will start on August 21, prosecutors at the Special Tribunal said" (1) Reuters informs us on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 at 8:01 in the morning. After a few hours, same day, late afternoon at 5:24 PM Reuters tells us that "Forensic experts have uncovered identification cards beside alleged victims of Saddam Hussein in mass graves that Iraqi prosecutors hope will offer damning evidence in his trial for genocide against the Kurds."(2) Wait fifty-six minutes and on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 at 6:20 PM Reuters reports:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Executing Saddam Hussein would fuel more sectarian violence in Iraq, a U.S. lawyer for the deposed Iraqi leader said on Tuesday.
"That execution would inflame a country that's already incinerating," former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark said. "I hope the American people can realize that if there is ever a time to call for an end to executions, it is in this case."(…)
Clark, a veteran defender of unpopular high-profile cases, spoke at a news conference to highlight his call for better protection of Saddam's lawyers, three of whom have been killed since the Iraqi trial started in October. The third was killed on Wednesday. (3)
At this point, the media circus has all the news that’s fit to print.
Interestingly though, a particular aspect of the same press conference is not reported by the Reuters above:
(CNSNews.com) - An attorney defending Saddam Hussein in the Iraqi High Criminal Court on Tuesday accused the United States government of intimidating and hampering the efforts of the disposed Iraqi dictator's defense team.
Curtis Doebbler, one of the international lawyers representing Saddam, said there is "an intentional effort ... by the United States government to intimidate us and to try to prevent us from even coming to the trial, much less in providing a defense."
Doebbler joined fellow Saddam defense lawyer Ramsey Clark in a press conference in Washington, D.C., to criticize what they called the Bush administration's failure to provide adequate security for defense lawyers and their families in Iraq. (4)
This blog has already published and passed on to the British liberal media:
- the CONCLUSION from the PRELIMINARY SUBMISSION CHALLENGING THE LEGALITY OF THE SPECIAL COURT presented on 21 December 2005 by the Lawyers for the Defendants’ team; and
- the United Nations’ call with the statements by Leandro Despouy, the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers. (5)
The darkest scandal of our time, the supreme international crime, the invasion-occupation of Iraq, has been hidden behind a thick web of lies and propaganda. The trial of PoW President Saddam Hussein stands at the center of this web and "… there can be no doubt that behind all the actions of this… [trial] … there is a great organization at work. … And the significance of this great organization, gentlemen?"
1) Second Saddam trial to start August 21: prosecutor, Reuters, Tuesday, June 27, 2006; 8:01 AM
2) Experts say key evidence against Saddam in graves, Reuters, Tuesday, June 27, 2006; 5:24 PM
3) Saddam death would worsen Iraq violence: lawyer, Reuters, Tuesday, June 27, 2006; 6:20 PM
4) Attorney Says US Intimidating Saddam Hussein's Lawyers, By Nathan Burchfiel, CNSNews.com Staff Writer, June 28, 2006
5) Lynchng Saddam – Part 5: United Nations and Saddam’s Lawyers’ call, By Gabriele Zamparini, The Cat’s Blog, Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Lynching Saddam – Part 7: the Myth of Human Rights
Gabriele Zamparini, The Cat's deam
"We have been trying to train the Iraqis in human rights. We’ve set up conferences for the Iraqis on human rights with all the NGOs. We’ve been trying our very best to get human rights into the Iraqi psyche. We want to help them I think" - Ann Clwyd, UK Prime Minister Blair’s Human Rights Envoy in Iraq, Newsnight, BBC 2, 15 November 2005
Part 1. HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH AND THE INVASION OF IRAQ
These are some excerpts from "War in Iraq: Not a Humanitarian Intervention", written on January 2004 by executive director of Human Rights Watch Kenneth Roth:
"By contrast, the United States-led coalition forces justified the invasion of Iraq on a variety of grounds, only one of which—a comparatively minor one—was humanitarian. The Security Council did not approve the invasion, and the Iraqi government, its existence on the line, violently opposed it. Moreover, while the African interventions were modest affairs, the Iraq war was massive, involving an extensive bombing campaign and some 150,000 ground troops. (…) Human Rights Watch ordinarily takes no position on whether a state should go to war. The issues involved usually extend beyond our mandate, and a position of neutrality maximizes our ability to press all parties to a conflict to avoid harming noncombatants. The sole exception we make is in extreme situations requiringhumanitarian intervention. Because the Iraq war was not mainly about saving the Iraqi people from mass slaughter, and because no such slaughter was then ongoing or imminent, Human Rights Watch at the time took no position for or against the war." (1) [emphasis added]
Besides the HRW’s arguments to justify and when the so-called "humanitarian interventions" (sic!) [in other words when some people would be allowed to kill some people to save some people, if I understand… but maybe I am wrong] it’s interesting to understand HRW’s position regarding the invasion of Iraq:
a) "The Security Council did not approve the invasion"
The meaning of these few words has been highlighted many times already but obviously not enough.
After WWII "THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war… and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights… of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained… AND FOR THESE ENDS to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest…"(2)
On 20 March 2003 the governments of the United States and United Kingdom broke their solemn pledge [as they had also done with 2001 bombing of Afghanistan and the 1999 NATO bombing campaign in the Balkans] with the invasion of the sovereign country of Iraq, "an illegal act that contravened the UN charter" according to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. (3) The darkness that they brought to the Iraqi people has already slaughtered hundreds of thousands of human lives and contaminated that land with nuclear and chemical wastes for thousands of years to come.
The crime perpetrated by the Bush and Blair’s alliance is "the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes [Abu Ghraib, Falluja, Haditha, etc.] in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." (4)
b) "Human Rights Watch ordinarily takes no position on whether a state should go to war… sole exception… humanitarian intervention… Human Rights Watch at the time took no position for or against the war"
In other words, because after careful consideration HRW excluded that the US-led invasion of Iraq could be a "humanitarian intervention", Human Rights Watch "at the time took no position for or against" that "supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes [Abu Ghraib, Falluja, Haditha, etc.] in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
Is this the last fashion for a Human Rights Philosophy for the Brave New World of the "War on Terror" and "Pre-Emptive Wars"? It looks like the XXI will be an interesting Century… maybe the last one?
Part 2. HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH AND SADDAM HUSSEIN
The official position of HRW on the invasion of Iraq must be completed with the official position of Human Rights Watch on Saddam Hussein. "One can only rejoice at the capture of Saddam Hussein. Few people are more deserving of trial and punishment. U.S. forces deserve credit for arresting the deposed dictator so that his crimes can be presented and condemned in a court of law, rather than arranging to kill him in combat." (5) [emphasisadded]
Those U.S. forces that – according to HRW’s Kenneth Roth – "deserve credit" are the same US forces that are responsible, according to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, for "an illegal act that contravened the UN charter", using Nurember’s words "the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes [Abu Ghraib, Falluja, Haditha, etc.] in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
Human Rights Watch Kenneth Roth at the end of his December 2003 article writes: "Governments should encourage Washington to allow an internationally led tribunal to try Saddam Hussein and his henchmen. The people of Iraq deserve no less." (Ibid.)
Human Rights Watch has written extensively about Saddam Hussein’s Trial:
Iraq under the rule of Saddam Hussein witnessed extraordinarily serious human rights crimes. Human Rights Watch has documented genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in its several investigative reports on Iraq over the years. But now that Saddam Hussein has been apprehended, the question has grown more urgent: how will the crimes of the past be prosecuted? Human Rights Watch recommends that a mixed domestic-international tribunal should prosecute Saddam Hussein.
On December 13, U.S. forces in Iraq captured former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. On January 9 the United States officially declared that he was a prisoner-of-war (POW) under the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The decision raises a number of issues under international humanitarian law, also known as the laws of war.
Does Human Rights Watch want Saddam Hussein to be prosecuted?
Absolutely. And not only Saddam Hussein—other senior members of the Ba’ath Party as well. Human Rights Watch spent many years documenting the crimes of Saddam Hussein’s regime. We have called repeatedly over the years for the perpetrators of the massive crimes in Iraq, including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, to be prosecuted. These trials are important not only because their success will influence the future shape of justice in Iraq, but also because this may be the only form of justice that the victims of Saddam Hussein’s regime are likely to have. Given the sheer scale of the atrocities, many relatives of victims may never get answers, may never find the remains of their loved ones. This trial could be the only kind of closure they receive.
BAGHDAD – To ensure justice for hundreds of thousands of Iraqi victims and their families, the trials of Saddam Hussein and other former Iraqi officials must be fair, Human Rights Watch said today as the trials opened in Baghdad.
and finally on June 27, 2006, HRW states: "The brutal murder of Iraqi lawyer Khamis Al-Obeidi, defense counsel for former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, underlines the urgent need for the Iraqi High Tribunal in Baghdad to protect defense lawyers, Human Rights Watch said today. Its failure to do so jeopardizes the tribunal’s capacity to conduct fair trials." Iraq: Court Must Act to Protect Defense Counsel, Iraqi High Tribunal Has Neglected Defense Lawyer Security, HRW, June 27, 2006
Interestingly this HRW’s statement does not mention that on 23 June 2006 Leandro Despouy, the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, had issued a statement that among other things reads:
"The Special Rapporteur wishes to reiterate his support for the establishment of an international tribunal to ensure that the entire spectrum of barbaric crimes committed in Iraq are prosecuted in a comprehensive, independent and impartial manner, in full respect of the right to truth of all victims and of the international community at large". (6) [emphasis added]
I e-mailed HRW on June 27 with the full text of the June 23 UN’s press release "UN rights expert calls for probe into killing of Saddam Hussein’s defence lawyer" and asked if HRW had any comment on this. No reply…
P.S. Just received from Amnesty International:
From: ……. @amnesty.org.uk
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:18:25 +0100
To: "The Cat's Dream"
Dear Gabriele Zamparini
Thank you for your email regarding Amnesty International's comments on the trial of Saddam Hussein.
We do not currently have a most recent statement with reference to the trial, however we are monitoring the trial and any information and updated comments will be available in our library section on our website. I have attached a link for your information: (link)
Here you will find an archive of most reports, news releases and urgent actions published from 1996 to date.
From: The Cat's Dream
Date: 27/06/2006 13:51
I would like to ask if Amnesty has any comment to make on the recent developments in Saddam Hussein’s trial and the following call coming from Leandro Despouy, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers (please, see below).
1) War in Iraq: Not a Humanitarian Intervention, By Ken Roth, Human Rights Watch, January 2004
2) Charter of the United Nations – Preamble
3) "Iraq war illegal, says Annan", BBC News website, Thursday, 16 September, 2004
4) Judgment of the International Military Tribunal for the Trial of German Major War Criminals, Nuremberg, Germany 1946
5) Try Saddam in an international court, Kenneth Roth, International Herald Tribune, December 15, 2003
6) UN rights expert calls for probe into killing of Saddam Hussein’s defence lawyer, UN News Centre, 23 June 2006
Lynching Saddam – Part 8: “just after the court ruling”
The man chose by New Iraq’s Founding Fathers Bloody George and Bloody Tony to lead the New Democracy just welcomed by the International Community of hyenas and vultures (1), Puppet Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, recently said that the so-called "trial" of Saddam Hussein "will not take longer and his execution for the crimes he committed will come soon just after the court ruling." (2)
Showing respect for that notorious Democratic Process wanted by hisprincipals "Maliki stressed that if Iraqi President Jalal Talabani refused to sign the death sentence, his two deputies will do the job"
This is the so-called Iraqi government (sic!) that according to the UN and major Western human rights NGOs should investigate on the kidnapping, torture and brutal killing of three Saddam Hussein’s lawyers and provide security to the survivors in Saddam Hussein’s defence team.
Green Zone’s Puppet Prime Minister Maliki may know just a couple of minutes in advance when and how presidents and prime ministers flying from abroad appear in front of him but he certainly has no doubts that "There is no resistance in Iraq, but political terrorism led by the Baath party which possesses money, experience and can mobilize extremists and use them... There is also the terrorism of gangs who are hired for stealing and killing".
Maliki, his thugs and his principals can count on the omertà and complicity of that International Community (sic!) that plundered Iraq in the most savage, ruthless and barbarian invasion of our times.
However, in this dark panorama of planetary wilderness, it’s also sad to see much part of the Western anti-war movement lost after this and that particular war crime but completely indifferent to the destiny of Iraq and its legitimate president. Whatever motivation lies behind personal and political opinions on his regime, Saddam Hussein and his barbarian lynching are at the very centre of this international scandal, the "war of aggression [invasion and occupation of Iraq, that] constitutes a crime against the peace, for which there is responsibility under international law." (3)
This "war of aggression" is a POISONED TREE and ALL ITS FRUITS must be rejected, according to Art.1 of the UN Charter:
Instead of patronizing and perpetuating colonialism, we must finally apply the principles of international Law to ourselves as a cure against our endemic racism. IT’S UPON THE IRAQI PEOPLE to decide the destiny of THEIR OWN COUNTRY together with the destiny of THEIR OWN PRESIDENT Saddam Hussein. This can only be accomplished once the Iraqi People take THEIR OWN COUNTRY back from the foreign invaders that committed the "crime against the peace", the "war of aggression" against Iraq. The IRAQI RESISTANCE is recognized by international Law and it’s the only subject that can legitimately exercise the SOVEREIGNTY OF IRAQ. We all in the Anti-war and Anti-occupation movement must SUPPORT the IRAQI PEOPLE’S JUST STRUGGLE for freedom and independence AGAINST the US-led illegal invasion-occupation of a Member State of OUR Community and bring those responsible for this "crime against the peace" to Justice.
In this frame, the lynching of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is going on surrounded by a deafening, guilty silence.
1) The International Community of hyenas and vultures. On the so-called "Iraq war" according to international Law, By Gabriele Zamparini, The Cat’s Blog, 7 July 2006
2) Maliki: Saddam's execution is imminent, UPI, 5 July 2006
3) United Nations General Assembly RESOLUTION 2625 (XXV), 24 October 1970
Posted by ΓΕΩΡΓΙΟΣ ΓΕΩΡΓΙΑΔΗΣ at 4:22 PM No comments:
HELMUT SCHMIDT-The Strange Properties of Psychokinesis*
Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 103-1 18, 1987
Pergamon Press plc Printed in the USA. 0892-33 10187 $3.00+.00 0 1988 Society for Scientific Exploration
Abstract-This paper discusses evidence for a psychokinetic effect acting on
chance events. Emphasis is laid on psychokinetic action on pre-recorded
random processes and its interpretation in terms of two general hypotheses,
the weak violation hypothesis, and the equivalence hypothesis. These hy-
potheses imply that psychokinesis can act on the outcome of indeterministic
quantum events only, and that, basically, all such events are affected to the
Most of this paper will emphasize the interesting, challenging aspects of para-
psychology, pointing out how a study of psychic effects may lead to a more
fundamental understanding of nature, and perhaps of quantum theory. Indeed,
parapsychology appears as a dynamically progressing field of research. Good
statistical methods for observing the effects in the laboratory have been de-
veloped. Modern electronics has been utilized to gather data efficiently and
reliably, and even though there is not yet a final theory, there are theoretical
models to provide a lively interaction between ongoing experiments and theo-
, retical ideas.
And yet, there are a number of disquieting questions, ranging from very
practical matters to basic conceptual issues. Most perplexing for the experi-
menter is the elusive nature of the phenomena. Although the results are too
persistent and statistically too significant to be seen as mere flukes of chance,
it is often difficult to replicate previous results on demand (Edge, Morris,
Palmer, & Rush, 1986).
One may argue that psychic performance, like creativity, depends on subtle
psychological factors that are difficult to identify and to control; and one may
expect progress from ongoing experiments using motivational techniques,
meditation methods or electronic feedback devices to help the subject's mental
On the other hand, the replicability problem may be deeply rooted in the
exotic nature of the psychic mechanism. The experiments to be discussed will
use the psychokinetic effect (PK) as an example to emphasize these concep-
tually perplexing features.
* This is an expanded version of a paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for
Scientific Exploration in 1985.
104 H. Schmidt
The psychokinesis experiments to be discussed developed out of Rhine's
experiments with dice (Rhine, 1970; Rhine & Rhine, 1943). Rhine reported
that some people could mentally influence the outcome of dice falls even
when they had no physical contact with the dice. In this context, it does not
matter whether Rhine's experiments were good or bad. What matters is that
subsequent work with improved methods and new ideas has confirmed the
existence of PK.
A great surprise of the early work was that PK affected only rolling dice,
but could not be measured as a force acting on a stationary die on a sensitive
scale. PK seemed to act only where chance processes were involved. This
suggested that PK could not be considered as a force, comparable to electric
or magnetic forces.
At the early stages of psychical research it seemed appropriate to introduce
labels like telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition and psychokinesis to distin-
guish different psychic "mechanisms." Today, such a clear distinction between
different psychic mechanisms seems impossible, experimentally as well as
conceptually, because all our naive intuitive notions about the underlying
mechanism seem misleading. It is still convenient to use some labels to specify
experimental test arrangements. We will use the term psychokinesis, for ex-
ample, to describe a setting where a subject mentally tries to affect the outcome
of some random process. If there is an anomalous, persistent correlation be-
tween the subject's effort and the random events, then we will call this a PK
effect. But it might be meaningless to argue whether the observed correlation
was "really" produced by psychokinesis or some other psychic mechanism.
With PK acting on the outcome of dice falls, it seemed natural to explore
PK action on other chance events, and in particular on the outcome of in-
deterministic quantum jumps.
Beloff and Evans (1 96 1) were the first to look for a PK effect on radioactive
decays, without success. But a few years later Chauvin and Genthon (1 965)
reported success in a similar experiment, where the participants tried to speed
up or slow down the counting rate of a Geiger tube.
Subsequently, a more stable and more convenient PK test arrangement
came into use (Schmidt, 1970), based on a digital random generator. To
obtain such an "electronic coinflipper," we can program a computer to count
upward at a high rate of 100,000 or more steps per second, and make an
arrangement such that the counting process is stopped whenever a signal from
a Geiger tube is registered. With these signals arriving at truly random times,
there is an equal probability for the computer counter to stop at an even or
an odd number. Therefore, we obtain a truly random decision for evenlodd
or headltail. This and similar devices have been used in much of the recent
PK work.
Psychokinesis 105
Figure 1 shows the setup for a typical PK experiment. The box at the left
contains the basic electronic coinflipper in combination with counters for the
heads and tails. When a pushbutton is pressed, the system generates 128
binary decisions at the rate of one per second. The decisions are internally
counted and transmitted through two output lines to an external recorder. A
most simple display can be provided by a red and a green lamp, indicating
the generated heads and tails respectively.
For a PK test, one instructs the subjects to concentrate, for example, on
the red lamp, trying to make this lamp flash more often than the green one.
This goal corresponds to an increased generation rate of heads. At the end,
one can assess the success from the two counters and from the detailed external
For my own experiments, I found it inefficient to gather data from a very
large number of unselected people, because the poor scores of the majority
tend to dilute the effect of the successful performers. Therefore, I pre-selected
promising subjects, and then used these subjects immediately in a subsequent
formal experiment with a previously specified number of trials. Unfortunately,
the process of locating and pre-selecting promising subjects is time consuming
and often frustrating.
Table 1 shows the result of my first experiment (Schmidt, 1971) with a
group of 15 selected subjects. We see that 50.9% of the electronic coinflips
went in the expected direction. With the large number of binary decisions
involved, this small effect is statistically significant with odds against chance
of 1000: 1.
For my second experiment, I had found two unusually promising perform-
ers. The subsequent formal experiment could confirm their strange ability.
With a scoring rate of 52.4% hits, the result is statistically significant with
odds against chance of 10 million to one.
These results confirm the existence of PK as a weak but real effect. More
m Displa
Recorder rrl
Fig. I. Test arrangement for a psychokinesis experiment.
PK tests with binary random generators
First experiment (Schmidt, 197 1)
50.9% success on the 32768 bits in 256 runs of 128 decisions each z = 3.3 (1000: 1)
Second experiment (Schmidt, 197 1 )
52.4% success on the 12800 bits in 100 runs of 128 decisions each = 5.3 (lo7:l)
Total for 27 other researchers (Radin et al., 1985)
Dean Radin at Bell Labs (Radin, 198 1)
Princeton Group (Nelson et al., 1984)
details, including the precautions taken against errors are described in the
So far, 27 other researchers at many different institutions have published
PK studies with binary random generators (Radin, May, & Thomson, 1985).
The overall significance of these data appears high, but there may be a bias
insofar as researchers with negative results might be less likely to publish their
findings. Two of the studies may appear particularly interesting because they
were conducted at well known laboratories.
Dean Radin (1 98 1) at Bell Labs reported highly significant PK effects, using
my equipment, which he had re-tested for randomness and reliability.
A large scale approach to PK was started by Robert Jahn at Princeton
University (Nelson, Dunne, & Jahn, 1984). Working with a limited number
of unselected subjects, his group studies personal patterns in PK performance.
The overall positive results suggest that, with psychologically skilled experi-
menters and sufficient patience, PK can be produced in a routine manner.
These results and the results to be discussed later leave, I think, no doubt
that a PK effect exists, in discord to currently accepted laws of physics.
Certainly, the observed effects are disappointingly weak, so that it still takes
many man-hours to merely confirm the existence of PK.
This makes precise quantitative comparisons often impractical. If we want
to compare, for example, the PK action in two different settings, then the
number N of trials required to establish the existence of PK under one con-
dition is already unpleasantly large. But if there were only a small, say 1096,
difference in the PK action on the two systems, then we would need about
100 times N trials to establish this difference.
It remains to be seen whether, with increased research effort and growing
theoretical understanding, the PK effects could be raised to a practically use-
For the moment, it seems best to postpone some detailed questions. If we
find, for example, that PK works approximately equally well over large and
short distances, we might bypass the enormous effort required for a high
precision comparison and tentatively assume the simple hypothesis that PK
is distance independent.
Psychokinesis 107
Similarly, I will introduce in the following two hypotheses that, so far, seem
consistent with experimental results, but are open to future scrutiny by more
precise measurements. These hypotheses stand out through their conceptual
simplicity and their far reaching implications.
The "Weak Violation" Hypothesis
Laboratory experiments suggest that PK might violate the conventional
laws of physics only in the weak sense, in that only the outcome of chance
processes is affected, whereas the non-statistical laws of physics like the con-
servation laws for energy, momentum, symmetry, etc. are upheld.
This hypothesis of such a weak violation of conventional physics has great
intellectual appeal; and it is a practically fruitful working hypothesis in stim-
ulating new experiments.
If our world were governed by classical physics, with the motion of all
atoms ruled by deterministic laws, then an element of randomness, and with
it psychic effects, might enter only through the statistical initial conditions.
We will not pursue this possibility, however, because, in the real world, quan-
tum effects provide a new source of randomness. In the framework of quantum
theory, the weak violation hypothesis can be interpreted in the sense that PK
affect only the outcome of the random quantum jumps for which quantum
theory makes no unique prediction. Such a hypothesis provides a specific link
between PK effects and quantum theory, and leads to rather exotic impli-
Consider as example a situation, often discussed in connection with the
Einstein-Podolski-Rosen experiment, where we have two systems A and B
that are quantum-correlated but spatially far apart. In the framework of quan-
tum theory, the correlation between observations at A and B can not be used
for information transmission. Assuming, however, that we have a PK subject
at A, able to bias the outcomes of the A measurement on demand, the situation
changes. According to the weak violation hypothesis, the correlation between
the observations at A and B (which is given by a conservation law rather than
a statistical law) is not affected by PK. Therefore, a PK induced bias in the
events at A is instantly observable in a corresponding bias of the events at B.
If the PK subject could still perform in such a setting, we would have an
instant telegraph.
The beauty and also the technical difficulties of an EPR experiment lie in
the fact that, before the measurement, the branches at A and B are still simply
correlated (if we want, we can still observe interference effects). Barring non-
local interactions, this supports the interpretation that the decision for the
outcome of the A-measurement occurs only at the time of the observation,
when the subject makes the PK effort.
One might wonder, however, whether the full EPR arrangement is necessary
for PK success. If we need only quantum correlated and spatially far separated
108 H. Schmidt
systems, we can provide that very easily. Consider the following nearly triv-
ial case:
Let a quantum mechanical random generator make a decision to light a
red or a green lamp, and let an automatic polaroid camera take two (identical)
pictures of the resulting color. Without looking, insert the pictures into two
envelopes to be mailed to distant locations A and B. Then the pictures at A
and B are correlated: they both show a red or a green lamp.
The vital difference to the EPR situation is that, with the outcome of the
random event macroscopically recorded on film, we can no longer observe
an interference between the red and the green state. The previous argument
that nature decides for the outcome only at the observation at A is no longer
valid. But neither do we have solid support for the counter hypothesis that
the decision for red or green is made before the human observation. If, there-
fore, we instruct a subject at A to open the envelope while wishing for a red
color, this PK effort might still succeed. This kind of PK test, being technically
much simpler, seemed as a reasonable beginning. Before going into specific
experiments, however, let me present a different approach that leads to the
Experiments with different types of "electronic coinflippers" as well as ex-
periments with dice report PK effects of the same order of magnitude. In
particular, nobody has been able to produce a random generator that is no-
ticeably more sensitive to mental efforts than other generators.
For a systematic comparison of PK action on different random generators,
one has to present the generators so that the subject and the experimenter
cannot tell them apart, because we want the comparison made under psy-
chologically identical conditions. Such studies (Schmidt, 1974) suggest (within
the limited power of comparison tests mentioned earlier) that the nature of
the random generator does not affect the PK scores. (Psychological factors
like the subject's motivation, the form of display, and the rate at which the
random events are presented may make a great difference for the scores.)
This leads us, tentatively, to the following "Equivalence Hypothesis":
If we have two truly random binary generators, operating such that the generators are
from the outside physically indistinguishable, then a PK effort affects the systems to
the same degree, i.e., the systems are also undistinguishable in their response to a PK
This hypothesis appears particularly appealing because, like the earlier hy-
pothesis about the weak violation of physics, it is very simple and universal.
And no matter whether or not these hypotheses will finally turn out to be
quite correct, they can stimulate novel and provocative experiments.
Psychokinesis 109
Most participants in PK experiments use, subjectively, a goal oriented ap-
proach, focusing on the desired outcome like the lighting of a red lamp rather
than on the internal operation of the random generator. The finding that the
success rate is rather independent of the physical structure of the generator,
furthermore, suggests that goal orientation may be a feature of the underlying
mechanism rather than a matter of mere psychological attitude. It appears as
if the subject, by concentrating on the final outcome, could induce nature to
let the previous random events properly fall into place such as to lead to the
desired outcome. This suggests an element of non-causality in the sense that
the subject's present mental effort could affect the previous decisions of the
To study this explicitly, consider the two "black boxes" in Figure 2. The
boxes contain similar internal random generators, producing continuous
streams of binary decisions. The difference is that the left system displays
these decisions immediately, whereas the right system displays each decision
only after a 24-hour delay.
Both boxes with their continuously randomly flashing lights being physically
undistinguishable from the outside, the equivalence hypothesis implies that
a PK effort should affect the right box as well as the left one. This is, indeed,
confirmed by the experiments to be discussed below. But success of a PK
effort on the right box seems to violate our common concept of causality.
We feel that the subject's effort at the time of the display, 24 hours after the
random events, comes too late to be effective.
On the other hand, physicists have toyed occasionally with non-causal sys-
tems (Schmidt, 1966, 198 1 ; Wheeler & Feynman, 1945) and shown that cau-
sality is not a logical necessity. Perhaps, physicists were just lucky in that
Direct Display Delayed Display
Fig. 2. PK effect on pre-recorded random events. Each of these "black boxes" displays two lamps,
flashing in random sequence. For the physicist, the boxes are from the outside indistin-
guishable. The equivalence hypothesis requires that the two systems are also undistinguish-
able in their response to PK efforts.
110 H. Schmidt
most of this world can be described in terms of causal mechanisms so that
the conceptual and mathematical complexities of non-causal systems could
be avoided. And perhaps non-causality is the feature that makes psychic effects
appear so intuitively implausible and "unphysical."
Let us look next at the experimental evidence that PK efforts can still
succeed in a setting similar to the right side of Figure 2, where the random
events are generated and recorded long before the subject makes a PK effort.
PK Effects with Pre-Recorded Random Events
Consider the following test arrangement (Schmidt, 1976). A binary generator
produces blocks of 20 1 random decisions. These are recorded simultaneously
on two cassette tapes, with the heads and tails as signals in the right or left
stereo channels respectively. At the generation speed of 20 signals per second,
the tapes can hold typically 140 data blocks, with 20 second pauses between
When the recording is completed, one of the identical tapes is placed into
a safe, while the other tape is used in the PK sessions. During these sessions,
the subject listens through headphones to the tape, perceiving the signals as
clicks in the right or left ear. The subject's PK goal is an increased rate of
clicks in the right ear, corresponding to an excess of generated heads. Whenever
the subject gets tired, he can stop at any of the 20 second pauses on the tape
and adjourn the test.
For the experiment, six tape pairs were pre-recorded in this manner, with
a total of 832 blocks of 20 1 signals each. After the subject had worked on all
tapes, the tapes were evaluated to see whether there was, indeed, a bias towards
heads as aimed for by the subject. The simple but reliable evaluation method
counted the number of successful blocks with more heads than tails and the
number of unsuccessful blocks. The result showed that 54.6% of the 832
blocks were successful. This is statistically significant with odds against chance
of 100:l.
A series of subsequent similar experiments (Schmidt 1976; Schmidt, Morris,
& Rudolph, 1986) confirmed the PK effect with pre-recorded events, at high
levels of statistical significance (2-value of 3.1, 4.2, 2.0, and 2.7).
To complete our discussion, remember that the initially generated random
events were identically recorded on two cassette tapes, with one tape given
to the subject and the other one kept locked in a safe. The correspondence
of the two tape copies was guaranteed by a macroscopic recording process
not subject to chance factors. According to our weak violation hypothesis,
the PK effort should not alter the correspondence between the two records.
This was, indeed, verified: the two records still agreed at the end, both showing
the same bias towards heads.
Thus, the results suggest a non-local interaction in the sense that a PK
effort on one tape is observable on the other tape also. This may remind us
of the quantum correlations between far separated systems as discussed in
Psychokinesis 111
connection with the Eistein-Podolski-Rosen paradox. But there is the vital
difference that the quantum correlation alone, no matter how puzzling and
exotic it may appear, cannot be practically used for information transmission.
The exotic features of PK, on the other hand, can be made practically
useful. As a side benefit, we can make PK testing particularly convenient and
safe. We can let the subject work with the tape unsupervised at his home. We
do not have to worry about the possibility of fraud, because we can evaluate
the experiment from the tape in the safe, which never was near the subject.
We can carry this one step further and make the experiment safe even
against errors and fraud by the experimenter, by channeling first hand evidence
for psychic effects to an outsider, as follows.
First, we prepare a pair of tapes with identical sequences of random num-
bers. Next, we give one sealed tape copy to the outsider, letting the outsider
decide whether he wants an excess of signals in the right or the left tape
channel. We communicate this target assignment to the subject, who can now
start the test sessions, playing the tape back while trying to get more signals
in the specified channel. At the end, the outsider counts the numbers of right
and left signals on his tape. And if the PK subject was successful, the outsider
finds that, indeed, there are more signals in the channel he specified. If we
repeat this procedure with a sufficient number of tapes, the outsider cannot
but acknowledge the anomalous correlation between what he specified and
what he later found on his tape.
We have used this basic method, with minor modifications, for an actual
experiment, with myself as the experimenter and Bob Morris and Lu Rudolph
at Syracuse University in the role of outsiders (Schmidt et al., 1986). Morris
is an active parapsychology researcher and Rudolph a professor in commu-
nication engineering. Both felt rather skeptical with regard to PK effects on
pre-recorded events. We used two outside observers supervising each other,
because we also wanted to minimize the possibility of fraud by the outsiders.
The whole experiment was structured into ten sections, with each section
to be evaluated by its z-value (the observed deviation in units of one standard
deviation), positive values indicating success and negative values indicating
failure. Figure 3 shows that only one of the ten sections gave a negative score.
The total result, as seen by the outsiders, is significant with odds against chance
of 100:l (z = 2.7).
Psychic phenomena being at odds with current physics as well as with naive
intuition, we cannot explain the effects in terms of more familiar concepts.
For the theorist, the ultimate "explanation" might consist of an abstract for-
malism that, like the formalisms of quantum theory or relativity theory, de-
scribes the observed phenomena consistently, teaching us to adjust our in-
tuition accordingly. For the more practically inclined experimenter, "under-
112 H. Schmidt
CHANNELING PK TO OUTSIDERS
The figure plots the Z-scores for the ten
sections of the experiment. Positive values
indicate scoring in the desired direction.
Fig. 3. Results of an experiment in channeling PK to outsiders. The figure plots the z-score
obtained for the ten sections of the experiment. Positive values indicate scoring in the
desired direction. Under the chance hypothesis, positive and negative z-values are equally
standing" might be equivalent to sufficient hand's on experience and full
information on what psychic mechanisms can and can not do.
The two hypothesis we have introduced might, if confirmed, serve as step-
ping stones for a future theory. The results of the experiments with pre-recorded
random events were consistent with the hypotheses. But there are details that
one might want to check more thoroughly.
The most basic question is whether it was really the subject in his time
delayed PK effort that produced the effects. Let us consider some alternatives.
In view of the goal oriented operation of PK, the experimenter might have
sensed the outsider's future target assignments and might have (unwittingly)
activated his PK powers accordingly, at the time the random events were
generated. While such a possibility cannot yet be ruled out completely, earlier
experiments (Schmidt, 1976) in which subjects selected by their high success
in regular PK experiment performed also particularly well in tests with pre-
recorded PK targets point strongly to the subject as the PK source.
More information on this question of whether the subject's effort, indeed,
is the source of the PK effect might come from experiments comparing the
subject's mental state (during the PK session) with the resulting scores.
Another possibility to consider is that the outsider who generated the ran-
dom target assignments could have been the source of the success. The outsider
might have sensed the previously generated random numbers and influenced
the generator for the random assignments accordingly. This argument would
apply, however, only to the last experiment, because the earlier tests with pre-
recorded targets did not involve such an outsider.
The weak violation hypothesis and the equivalence hypothesis agree in
suggesting that PK tests with pre-recorded events should work as well as other
PK tests. The weak violation hypothesis with its specific reference to quantum
theory, however, introduces an additional element that we should discuss in
Quantum theory brought changes in our view of physical reality and the
role of the observer in physics. These changes may be relevant for the inter-
pretation of PK tests with pre-recorded events.
The reality problem appears most directly at the microscopic level. Con-
sidering an electron or a photon, for example, we can measure the position
of the particle, but we must not conclude that the particle always has a well
specified position. Otherwise we get into conflict with the results of interference
experiments. Thus, the location of a particle before a measurement does not
have the kind of absolute physical reality that we customarily assign to the
outside world. With quantum theory making no basic distinction between
large and small systems, however, a reality question arises also for the mac-
roscopic realm. This has been emphasized by recent experimental work related
to Bell's theorem and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox (d'Espagnat,
Consider, for example, the case where a decision from a binary random
generator is recorded as a signal in the right or left channel of a cassette
recorder. Then, prior to any observation of the outcome, quantum theory
represents the state vector of the system as a superposition
of two macroscopically different physical states, where I R-STATE) corre-
sponds to a situation with a "head" generated and signals recorded in the
right channels of each tape, while I L-STATE) corresponds to the other pos-
sibility that a "tail" was generated and signals were recorded in the left channels
of the two tapes.
Intuitively, we feel that nature, at this stage, must have decided on one or
the other outcome. But the formalism of quantum theory contains no param-
eter which could tell us when such a decision is "really" made. Rather, the
formalism suggests that the appearance of a head or a tail remains as unreal
as the position of a particle until the outcome has been observed.
114 H. Schmidt
This leaves the question of the nature of the mechanism that transforms
the ISTATE) of equation (1) into either one of the macroscopically un-
ambiguous states, I L-STATE) or I R-STATE).
Conventional quantum theory answers this question very simply by inter-
preting the state vector not as a measure for some absolute physical reality
but only as a measure of the observer's information about the system. Then
the macroscopically ambiguous state of equation (I) reflects only the observers
ignorance. And the sudden change of the observer's knowledge during a mea-
surement is naturally accompanied by a sudden jump of the state vector (the
collapse of the state vector) into the I L-STATE) or the I R-STATE).
The mathematical elegance and logical consistency of quantum theory in
this interpretation has suggested to many physicists that quantum theory has
universal validity, giving the best possible description of nature, for small and
large systems, and even for systems that include human subjects.
From the described experiments we can conclude, however, that such an
universality claim must be wrong. Systems that contain a human subject can
show features, like the discussed anomalous correlation between the subject's
wish and an external random event, that are inconsistent with quantum theory.
Independent of the results of parapsychology, the early pioneers of quantum
theory had already felt uneasy about this theory which admits reality only
with regard to an observer, but does not explain if or in which respect the
human observer is special (London & Bauer, 1939; von Neumann, 1932/
1955; Wigner, 1962). This has led to many attempts at modifying or re-in-
terpreting quantum theory. Let me mention only a few of these attempts, not
because they should be taken particularly seriously, but because they might
stimulate PK experimenters.
Eugene Wigner suggested that current quantum theory is not quite complete,
that it lacks a specific description of the role of the experimenter. Wigner
proposes that in the absence of an observer the state vector follows Schroe-
dinger's equation, but that in the act of observation, some still unknown
mechanism takes over, transforming the state of Eq. (I) into either the I R-
STATE) or the I L-STATE). Thus, the collapse of the state vector assumes
some physical reality of its own.
The active role played the observer in collapsing the state vector might
provide an opening for PK effects to enter. This possibility and its experimental
implications have been pursued by the author (Schmidt, 198 l), and a specific
model for the underlying mechanism, based on a hidden variable model by
Bohm and Bub, has been studied by Mattuck and Walker (1979). Walker
has also proposed several other interesting original ideas on the relationship
between parapsychology and quantum theory. (Walker, 1 979).
Wigner's model provides for minimal modifications quantum theory; only
at the last stage where the observer (with his elusive element of consciousness)
enters. In this model, there can still occur macroscopically ambiguous states
like the one of Eq. (I), such as if physical reality before an observation could
consist of two branches of reality, with nature still undecided.
Psychokinesis 115
As an alternative, one could consider modifications of quantum theory
that provide for an automatic reduction of the state vector at some lower
level, such that macroscopically ambiguous states could not arise. Such a
model could still be consistent with all obtainable laboratory evidence, and,
nevertheless, permit the concept of a macroscopically absolutely real world
in which the observer is not basically different from other recording and com-
puting equipment.
A New Look at PK Tests with Pre-Recorded Events
In our previous discussion of PK tests with pre-recorded events, we had
implicitly assumed that macroscopic phenomena have an absolute reality,
independent of any observation. From this viewpoint, nature made a final
decision on the outcome of a random event, the event "really" happened,
when the outcome was recorded on the cassette tapes. This led us to talk
about causality violation in the sense that the subject's later mental effort
affected the outcome of a previous random event.
Quantum theory, in the conventional form or in Wigner's version, however,
permits a different interpretation: With the outcome of the random decision
not observed before the PK session, nature had made no previous decision
yet. The PK subject encountered a physical reality composed of two equally
real potential branches. Therefore, the subject's PK effort did not have to
reach into the past. Rather, the subject's observation transformed the still
ambiguous reality into one of the macroscopically unique branches; and in
this process of state vector collapse the subject also produced a PK effect, a
slight change in the conventional transition probabilities.
From this viewpoint, the PK mechanism should no longer work if the
outcome of the random decisions were observed by someone else before the
subject made the PK effort. The previous observation should collapse the
state vector, forcing nature into a final decision, so that there would be nothing
left to change for the PK subject.
The only experiment in this direction done so far (Schmidt, 1985), indicates,
indeed, such an inhibition of the PK effect by previous observation.
For this experiment, 80 sequences of 128 random bits were initially pre-
recorded. Each bit sequence could be displayed in a one minute test run by
a pendulum swinging at a computer screen with slowly varying amplitude.
(Basically a "1" in the bit sequence increased and a "0" decreased the am-
plitude of the next cycle).
At the start of each run, according to a fixed schedule, the subject was
instructed either to aim for a high or a low pendulum amplitude. The resulting
score measured the deviation (from chance expectancy) of the average am-
plitude in the specified direction.
Each sequence was displayed subsequently to two subjects, a test subject
with a record of good PK performance, and a control subject with no de-
monstrable PK ability.
116 H. Schmidt
The sessions were timed such that in half of the runs the PK subject was
the first to make the PK effort and in the other half the control subject.
Furthermore, for each condition, the subjects aimed in half of the runs in the
same and in the other half in opposite directions. The subjects were kept
ignorant of these conditions.
Figure 4 shows that the PK test subject was successful only when being the
first to see the random events in a run (2 = 3.1), whereas the previous ob-
servation by the control subject brought the score of the PK test subjects close
to chance (2 = -0.7). The control subject did not show a significant PK
effect, even when acting as the first observer.
With only one experiment of this kind available, one might not want to
draw a final conclusion but rather wait for future confirmations. And if, indeed,
an initial human observation can block a subsequent PK effort, then we would
want to know whether observation by a cat or even some lower animal might
have the same effect. We might even be able to operationally define a "con-
scious observation" in terms of its effect on a subsequent PK effort.
Fig. 4. Result of an experiment in which a PK subject (with a history of PK success) and a control
subject (with no apparent PK ability) made consecutive PK efforts on the same pre-recorded
events. In the half of the runs where the PK subject made the first effort, his cumulative
score (upper curve) reached a significant level. But in the other half of the runs, where the
control subject had seen the outcome of the random events first, the PK subject's effort
was no longer successful (lower curve).
Psychokinesis 117
Quantum theory has raised some still puzzling questions with regard to the
role of the observer and the nature of reality. At the same time, the mathe-
matical elegance and the logical consistency of quantum theory has suggested
that the theory may have universal validity, being applicable even to systems
that include human subjects. And with conventional quantum theory appar-
ently experimentally correct, there seemed little demand for modifications
with their inherent mathematical complications.
The results of parapsychology, on the other hand, indicate that quantum
theory can be experimentally wrong when applied to systems that include a
human subject. Experiments like the reported ones, point to specific links
between the quantum formalism and psychic effects, suggesting a wealth of
further interesting experiments. It remains to be seen whether the results will
lead to a new quantum theory that includes psychic effects within its math-
ematical formalism, or whether they will merely outline some final limitation
Beloff, J., & Evans, L. (1961). A radioactivity test for PK. Journal of the Society for Psychical
Research, 41, 4 1-46.
Bohm, D., & Bub, J. (1966). A proposed solution of the measurement problem in quantum
mechanics by a hidden variable theory. Reviews ofModern Physics, 38, 453.
Chauvin, R., & Genthon, J. (1965). Psychokinetische experimente mit uranium und geigerzahler.
Zeitschr. f: Parapsychol. und Grenzgebiete der Psychol., 8, 140- 147.
Edge, H. L., Monis, R. L., Palmer, J., & Rush, J. H. (1986). Foundations of parapsychology.
d'Espagnat, B. ( 1976). Conceptual foundation of quantum mechanics. Reading, MA: Benjamin,
d'Espagnat, B. (1979, November). The quantum theory and reality. Scient$c American, pp. 158-
London, F., & Bauer, E. (1939). La thkorie de lbbservation en mkchanique quantique. Paris:
Mattuck, R. D., & Walker, E. H. (1979). The action of consciousness on matter. In The Iceland
Papers (pp. 1 1 1- 159). Amherst, WI: Essentia Research Associates.
Nelson, R. D., Dunne, B. J., & Jahn, R. G. (1984). An REG Experiment with large data base
capability, III (Technical Note PEAR 84003). Princeton, NJ: School of Engineering, Princeton
von Neumann, J. (1955). Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics (Robert T. Beyer,
Trans.). (Chapter 6). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Radin, D. L. ( 198 1 ). Mental influence on machine-generated random events: Six experiments.
Research in parapsychology (pp. 14 1 - 142). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press. A detailed report
may be obtained from the author (AT&T Bell Laboratories, 6200 East Broad St. Columbus,
OH 432 13).
Radin, D. I., May, E. C., & Thomson, M. J. (1985). Psi experiments with random number
generators. Meta-analysis Part 1. Proceedings of the Parapsychology Association Convention.
(For a copy, contact D. Radin, see preceding reference.)
Rhine, L. E. (1970). Mind over marter. New York: Macmillan.
Rhine, L. E., & Rhine, J. B. (1943). The Psychokinetic Effect. Journal of Parapsychology, 7, 20-
Schmidt, H. (1 966). Model of an oscillating cosmos which rejuvenates during contraction. Journal
of Mathematical Physics, 7, 494.
118 H. Schmidt
Schmidt, H. ( 1970). Quantum-mechanical random-number generator. Journal of Applied Physics,
41, 462-468.
Schmidt, H. (1 97 1, June). Mental influence on random events. New Scientist and Science Journal,
Schmidt, H. (1974). Comparison of PK on two different random number generators. Journal of
Parapsychology, 38, 47-55.
Schmidt, H. (1 976). PK effect on pre-recorded targets. Journal of the American Society for Psychical
Research, 70, 267-29 1.
Schmidt, H. (198 1). Can an effect precede its cause? Foundations of Physics, 8, 463-480.
Schmidt, H. (1982). Collapse of the state vector and psychokinetic effect. Foundations ofPhysics,
12, 565-581.
Schmidt, H. (1985). Addition effect for PK on pre-recorded targets. Juurnal of Parapsychology,
49, 229-244.
Schmidt, H., Morris, R., & Rudolph, L. (1986). Channeling evidence for a psychokinetic effect
to independent observers. Journal of Parapsychology, 50, 1 - 15.
Walker, E. 1-1. (1 979). The quantum theory of psi phenomena. Psychoenergetic Systems, 3, 259-
Wheeler, J. A,, & Feynman, R. P. (1945). Interaction with the absorber as the mechanism of
radiation. Reviews of Modern Physics, 7, 157.
Wigner, E. P. (1962). Remark on the mind body problem. In I. J. Good (Ed.), The Scientist
speculates (pp. 284-302). New York: Basic Books Inc.
Posted by ΓΕΩΡΓΙΟΣ ΓΕΩΡΓΙΑΔΗΣ at 2:38 PM No comments:
HELMUT SCHMIDT-The Strange Properties of Psychokin...