REPORT ON ARTICHOKE BY (DELETED), SUMMARY OF, (DELETED) DATED 2 FEBRUARY 1953

• Document Type: SPECIALCOLLECTION
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 00144661
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: September 25, 2024
• Document Release Date: January 15, 1983
• Publication Date: February 16, 1953

rp, 7, 77, /
TO: Security Officer
VIA: Deuuty Security Officer
VIA: Chief, Security Research Staff, IS
FRON: Chief, Technical Pranch, SRS, I('SzS
5U7JECT: Retort. on ARTICPGKE by , Surimary of,-
dated 2 February 1953)
DATE: 16 February 1953
1. The writer haa made a very careful study and analysis of the'
e
repon_t on the ARTICHOKE problem. In r:encral, the writer agrees
in the overall statements set out by the
point out certain elements in the
dispute and tend to indicate that the
r:reap but wishes to
report that are subject to
1.;roup has not 1-ecn totally
informed as to the nature of ARTICHOKE or the pr,F!sent status of the.
,../ 4 �� � J., 14
017,01'. work insofar as t'ne_TeGI-Ini-el-Q.neh is concerned.
O.) The r:roup continually stre:)sen ion;-raw:e e:7peri-
mentation, particularly of a psycholor;ical and psychiatric-
-
nature. The writer Woes with this,as a .gcneral premise ,but.*
while condactinq this lonr!-ranr,e research it apr,ears-absolutely
essential that wo develop, and have ready for instant use tech-
nique.' l-ctc. that will or at least ,1 assist in obtaining in-
..
formation in vital cases. The writer beleves LiviL inizolvad,
� �
corarlmz, and curtheroome rose' arch such a3 carried on at
ii t, be nroductive (certainly in tho immiate
fu Lure) and 3.:; unrealistic and will not 1(-: or �L:.,
operations people when it is needed.
Le 1,11,-
���.M. y �-�
� .
I
AP,
. - -
(2) Thb discses th- -13C of:nrio;!s
While in a general sense Is accurate, it does not specifically
ret to the core of the problem. The writer as.T.mns that the
gro-ip is familiar with most the.techniquc..-s but
\
it is possible that has never cons:IA:red or pbsf;i- t
� .�..:,.....�
bly never heard of it some.. The writer -tLias that the
'group is looking for a weapon that will nakc an
t'
individual talk at great lenrth on pertinent matters while
there is nothing in their report to indicate thn extreme value
of a chemical agent if it will produce only one small bit of
verifiable information. -7-7--.�.comment, that individuals
When they r,oili7e they ar2 drugged tend to become tac-i-turn--
is not accurate. Individuals may beccyle taciturn under
certain circumstances if they feel th7.t they have been dru7;ed
or attempted to be drurgued surrepticiously, but :riti..of the
estalilished AKTICKOKE tectrliques i3 to conceal the fact of the
drugging behind a medical cover and then nse drurs as a medical
0,* � �- �
ttottgt treatment in sTetatic eases.
(3) . discusses the use of drIlr,3:: hypnosis ,..and brain
damaring processes and calls them elaborate, imt)i-tIctic?".:).,. and
unnecessary without, it appears, roing i.nLcT specific re7lsons
- -
:lily these proce.�)......, ilight be used. Thep' comment that equivalent
- �
results could be :Accomplished by expert:; usinr, immole techniques
of interrogation. The writer does not agree with this at all and
-.-can cite instances where absolutely new information was turned up
usirw chemicals that was unabrailable before the chemicals were
-
1 4 I L
used and whore "cxnert" interroaLors iIicl aLtemnfs.c to' obtain
'
(4) '7777 apparently supports the "textbook theory" that ih-
dividuals under hypnosis will not act ttainst their will in re-
t.
pugnant acts 95 violence and acts of disloyalty. This is a very
It
u I. �
moot question and the writer wish's to p6nt out Uhat t1iere0�-,e
j. ;
no tests made that can be regarded as-definative in this matter.
The writer wishes to point out that experts in th..2. field of ,
A
0; t � 4:d � P "
hypnosis arc not agreed on this point ancitcl,..71 pllees50=�And
noti-4.m,tors feel that there is a good chance that these thim7s
can he accomplished throur!it hypnosis.
(5) .The
group comments on methods of coml-aLirr, the ... L
, �
k.� '1 technique,and their recommendations in r:eneral a.ppedri to the
writer to be fairly thoitnd sound althour:b a7,ain tests to support
(6)
these recommendations would take a great deal of time, melley, and
effort before authinedefinative could come of it.'
� - �
roc oru tenth, Lions that lru-ge extensiveS tuaies be
made in psycholo7.ical:01fects, human behavior, studies of se-
duction, persuasion, and persistence. are. undoubtedly, worthy
prodects but would be time consuming and results .*rAld not, be
forthcominr, for extremely long periods of time.
2. That .1,4--42.id when the
A
P.ECOI iiIDATIOiIS
�
,rroun ever meets as a unit that
;VTICHOKE Team members be permitted to talk personally to the
group members and lay before them specific examples and certaLn items whinh
p03.1i111 the
members can give pertinent advice. The writer-
�A,. ����1 �*"- :-
J-n� �
. .
.��� � � � . �
� .
,
,� �
this.
s
.1. � �
����
: ���
,)
o'
feels that the 1 Itroup has never been thoroughly briefed or
indocrinated in ARTICHOKE'AjD THAT their report quite clearly reflects that.
lb � �
3. The writer cannot agree with thel opinion that "little.
threat, if any, to National Security bxists because of special interrogat/ipn
it
techniques or agents." .Tha writer wishes .to point out that th* or*
requires one break for the successful compromisinglf ina individual to cause
� �
extreme damade to a nation. There are numerous recant classic examples of �
�
�
� 1' (1,. � 1.� V."1/ �
�
-.4
A...4 - it
'. � I
;
,
3 �
&LC.
9
,
04
-1.,����'"I'"'"1"."7
----2.--����-�
�.. �
. '�
(1., ,,,,,L, . (.�..� � ��.../ 111.44."7,r.7.10. ������
. ---
7 1-71 1/1.1����11r- � ( ,--;�,����," ;I ,...q.....-44....-?!. .4.. ....-4 ........-4i'�7 ,Itt"..L.: '''11....--�
...
�� r .
.. � j ;N., .. : .../ )
"' .! .� .'�-:.7 ,:- . f" . .
��";� 7- ��-�-0--C C- -Z-.1.7- � .1-1.-41---i-t..%_ 4---1."-r"--?-4(..-- � ........---.) - ..� �
. . . /
A , i
,
.1
-
f..����:// -1.���\
�
I
. ���-�7
� .
(-774. *7
ir
�
.
L'
�
� /
0
.
a