Archives

All posts for the month January, 2011

UF Public Relations Director, Janine Sikes - cell: (352) 214-6807

Email campaigns can be very effective if large numbers of activists participate.

Hundreds of millions of our taxpayer dollars fill the coffers each year at the University of Florida yet, on December 17, 2010, contrary to Florida Statutes, they refused to disclose public information. In addition, UF has an established pattern of applying for and receiving federal grants to conduct torturous experiments on animals while SIMULTANEOUSLY denying any involvement in such research.

By sending the email that follows, you can help us hold the murderous and deceitful accountable.Thank you to our comrades. -NIO Florida

***************************************

I. CUT & PASTE INTO BODY OF EMAIL

Janine Sikes
Director of Public Affairs University Relations
University of Florida
101 Tigert Hall
Office: 352-846-3903/06

Dear Ms. Sikes:

Earlier this month, activists raised a number of issues with you regarding possible financial fraud at the University of Florida. These allegations are based on your direct quotes as well as the university’s decision to withhold public information.

Your silence is unacceptable and your public relations problems have only just begun.

I am greatly concerned — as all taxpayers should be — that it appears UF is abusing federal funds.

I await your responses to each and every issue regarding Ethical Misconduct and Fraudulent Use of Federal Grants raised in these letters to which you have failed to respond for two weeks:

Thank you in advance for your attention to these serious matters.

DISTRIBUTION

Janine Sikes – Director of Public Relations, University of Florida
Bernie Machen – President, University of Florida
Mingzhou Ding – Researcher, University of Florida
Chancellor – Florida Board of Governors
Local & National Media Outlets (deleted for now)
Camille Marino – NIO Florida

II. PLEASE SEND THIS EMAIL TO JANINE SIKES AT

jysikes@ufl.edu

III. CUT & PASTE THIS EMAIL BLOCK INTO THE CCs

camille@negotiationisover.com, president@ufl.edu, cmachen@ufl.edu, Chancellor@flbog.edu, mzding@ufl.edu

IV. SUBJECT OF EMAIL

UF: ETHICAL MISCONDUCT & FRAUDULENT USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS

Gators Clubs from all over the country began gathering early this morning at Emerson Hall where each representative received literature to take back with them. Informational packets may be viewed HERE.

Members of NIO Florida will be greeting them throughout the day leading up to a grand finale demo planned for this evening’s festivities.

Some activists welcomed the visitors on public streets while others are in attendance inside the events.

You can't hide from the light of day anymore.

Subject:
University of Florida: The Ethics of Deception, Lies, and, quite possibly, Criminal Activity
From:
“Camille Marino” <camille@negotiationisover.com> (Add as Preferred Sender)
Date: Tue, Jan 18, 2011 12:16 am
To: “Janine Sikes” <jysikes@ufl.edu>
Cc: “Bernie Machen” <president@ufl.edu>, “Chris Machen” <cmachen@ufl.edu>, “Board of Governors of the State University System ” <Chancellor@flbog.edu>, “Lisa Grossman” <lgrossman621@gmail.com>, info@wuft.org, radio@wuft.org, tv20news@wcjb.com, editor@insitegainesville.com, joe.adams@jacksonville.com, steve.cotter@jacksonville.com, roger.bull@jacksonville.com, tracy.jones@jacksonville.com, AMarques@MiamiHerald.com, PAndrews@MiamiHerald.com, JWooldridge@MiamiHerald.com, sabrahams@orlandosentinel.com, aacevedo@orlandosentinel.com, insight@orlandosentinel.com, bgabordi@tallahassee.com, hschwarz@tallahassee.com, ncfmrbob@earthlink.net, scoop@huffingtonpost.com, pc@pchouseproductions.com, chip@pchouseproductions.com, brose@entercom.com, crash@windfm.com, efuggetta@alligator.org, jimmy@civicmediacenter.org, outreach@wedu.org, editor@alachuatoday.com, news@sctnews.com, newsdesk@gainesvillegazette.info, record620@aol.com, osteenj@gvillesun.com, editor@alligator.org, tsenter@mygtn.tv, news@foxwofl.com, tjhart@entercom.com, fmnews@wuft.org, mleeps@wuft.org, rdupont@NorthFloridaHerald.com, torres@fcir.org, mschneider@ap.org, newsdesk@cfnews13.com, editor@orlandosentinel.com, wesh2news@gmail.com, news@wftv.com, desk@wkmg.com, eric.barton@browardpalmbeach.com, info@inweekly.net, executive.editor@heraldtribune.com, bfarrington@ap.org, local@sptimes.com, cmarshalsea@4freepress.com, matthew.fry@thevillagesmedia.com, bskoloff@ap.org
Bcc:

Janine Sikes
Director of Public Affairs University Relations
University of Florida
101 Tigert Hall
Office: 352-846-3903/06
Cell: 352-214-6807
email: jysikes@UFL.EDU

Dear Ms. Sikes:

On October 22, 2010, in accordance with open records statutes in this state (Fla. Stat. Secs. 119.01 to 119.15) that regulate specific activites at the University of Florida, I requested public records concerning 33 primates held captive in 2009. Despite many assurances last month from you, Ms. Sikes, that your colleagues were diligently working to compile the documentation, on December 18, 2010, I was handed an envelope in the university police station containing a refund check and an unsigned letter notifying me that UF had chosen not to comply with the open records laws that are specifically designed to protect public interests. Rather, the anonymous statement on UF letterhead stated that your university opted to invoke a “veterinary-patient” privilege (“Section 474.2165, Fla. Stat”) that was written to afford citizens and their veterinarians rights of privacy. Given the gravity of my concerns surrounding dubious ethics and the abuse (if not fraud) of public funds at UF — questions for which the public anxiously awaits a response — I am unsurprised by the legal contortions being employed to evade public scrutiny. I am inferring that the university intends to argue that the “veterinarian-patient” technicality absolves it of its legal responsibilities. However, you may not simply dispatch and dismiss the public to whom you are accountable. The 5-page package I received, including a refund check and a letter documenting the University of Florida’s refusal to comply with Florida state disclosure laws, may be viewed HERE.

Once again, Ms. Sikes, your resistance, or perhaps inability, to engage in honest dialogue leaves me unclear about a number of issues. I hope that you will welcome this opportunity to explain to me and the greater community why UF vehemently resists transparency and public scrutiny. After all, in 2009 alone, over $338 million in our tax money filled UF’s coffers and lined all of your pockets while most of us struggled to survive the recession. With all due respect, you have deceived the public for far too long and I am committed to making sure that this community remains transfixed on UF until we examine every animal experiment on which every single penny of public money is expended. Your inability to engage the public with any semblance of sincerity has not gone unnoticed.

However, I respectfully request that you address each of my concerns with candor and depth:

1- I am a little confused about our communications throughout December 2010, in which you assured Lisa Grossman and me on several occasions that the records requested were being gathered. Please note that, while I received a phone call on December 17 advising me that my “documents” were ready, the invoice from which my refund check was drawn is dated December 1. Were you unaware that UF had decided to withhold this information? Were you blatantly lying to us? Or do you find informed members of your community a nuisance to be dismissed?

It troubles me to know first-hand that, beyond treating the public with deceit and disrespect, you exhibit a seeming disdain for those whose taxes make you rich.

2- As stated above, the letter I received (unsigned and anonymous) cites a veterinary-patient privilege. If I am understanding you correctly, you contend that this statute allegedly relieves UF of its fiduciary obligations to the public under open records laws.

  • Are the attendant veterinarians in your laboratories employees of the university?
  • If UF and its veterinarians are “records owners” under Section 474.2165, Fla. Stat, who exactly are the “clients”?
  • Or are the vets the “owners” and UF is the “client”?
  • Where does the taxpayer, who it could easily be argued is a 60% owner of the primates — fit into this tailor-made paradigm?
  • Does this “veterinarian-animal” privilege survive death as the standard “doctor-client” privilege generally expires with the patient?

I have documented proof of at least seven monkeys that were killed last year. Late last summer, a monkey named Louis was executed by UF rather than allow him to be retired to a sanctuary. I understand that his body was so badly broken that it would have caused public relations issues had the public seen what UF “researchers” had done to him. And taxpayers are currently funding Dr. Salemi with $700,000 to infect 24 monkeys with simian AIDS. I understand that he never stated that his experiments had any relevance for humans and that he is simply curious about how simian AIDS progresses in nonhuman primates. He has published papers explaining how he killed six monkeys last year during various stages in their torture after he had infected them.

  • So when exactly does this “veterinary-animal” privilege expire?
  • If the privilege extends beyond the death of the animal, it follows that UF could never be compelled to release any public records going forward.
  • Or, if the “privilege” expires upon the death of the animal, according to the defense you raised, should you not have released veterinary records for at least the 7 monkeys that UF employees murdered last year?
  • I would appreciate your thoughts (or your counsel’s) concerning the university’s decision to invoke this technicality. If this is the arrangement, one might easily conclude that you are deliberately trying to avoid public scrutiny while using hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for said “research.”

3- Everyone needs to understand that, by releasing veterinary records in the past, the university has acknowledged and ratified that veterinary records are indeed public domain. Upon request, UF has routinely furnished veterinary records — the precise public information that I requested and for which I paid. I would like an explanation as to how you determine which segments of the community are eligible of having their statutory rights recognized by UF while others, such as myself, are summarily dismissed from consideration. For the record, I would like to present a sample veterinary record that UF furnished to a colleague in response to an identical request for public information: please click HERE.

Ms. Sikes, do you understand that a fundamental principle upon which our entire system of American jurisprudence rests is that one law applies to all? The law does not allow us to apply one standard for a tall man and another for short woman. It seems equally corrupt for UF to apply one set of legal guidelines to Person A and another to Person B based on your personal feelings. You may not arbitrarily apply a statute-of-the-week in identical circumstances. You and the University of Florida are not the arbiters of statutory mandates.

You have not only attempted to deny me my rights under Florida’s “sunshine laws,” but you deliberately violated my civil rights as an America and denied the public of information that morally and legally belongs in the public domain. The law makes no exceptions about furnishing public records only to members of the public of whom you approve. Please explain this blatant refusal to uphold your legal obligations.

Should you fail to offer satisfactory and comprehensive responses to each and every issue addressed, I am fully prepared to pursue this in the courts, the media, and within the arena of public opinion.

Sincerely,

Camille Marino
(352) 396-4132

Subject:
PI: Dr. Ding – Project Number: R01MH079388-04: $259,528 (FY 2010)
From:
“Camille Marino” <camille@negotiationisover.com> (Add as Preferred Sender)
Date: Sat, Jan 15, 2011 4:55 pm
To: “Janine Sikes” <jysikes@ufl.edu>
Cc: “Lisa Grossman” <lgrossman621@gmail.com>, mzding@ufl.edu, Nathan.Crabbe@gvillesun.com

Janine Sikes
Director of Public Affairs University Relations
University of Florida
101 Tigert Hall
Office: 352-846-3903/06
Cell: 352-214-6807
email: jysikes@UFL.EDU

Dear Ms. Sikes:

I am copying Dr. Ding in this communication and welcome his input on this very serious issue that directly concerns him.

I am also copying Gainesville Sun Reporter Nathan Crabbe since we have each spoken to him separately about the nature of Dr. Ding’s research.

Given that you just denied to furnish public records per my request in accordance with this state’s open records law, Fla. Stat. Secs. 119.01 to 119.15, it seems prudent that our communications going forward be subject to a degree of public scrutiny.

Last year, I reported that Dr. Ding, a researcher employed by the University of Florida, applied for and received $260,070 in federal grants to do barbaric brain-mapping experiments in monkeys.

You denounced this finding in various media including the Gainesville Sun. Your position was documented by another news source on October 12, 2010 as follows:

“But according to UF Public Affairs director Janine Sikes, the experiments were not done at UF and the data were public domain.

‘Organizations such as this [Negotiation Is Over] use mischaracterizations and inaccuracies to make an argument, and they falsely alleged things about this individual who just analyzed the data,’ Sikes said.”

Yet again, in 2010, Dr. Ding applied for and received another $259,528 to conduct the exact same experiments in which you denied his involvement. Why is he applying for money to assess information that you said is available in the public domain? This sounds less-than-ethical.

According to data available through the NIH, we can glean a fair amount of information about Dr. Ding’s agenda. The abstract doesn’t go into the specifics since he is focusing on establishing a way to measure monkeys’ brainwave output and analyze it. But the procedure is the same as before and, based on his proposal, what is physically done to the monkeys — brain-mapping “research” — is implicit in his grant request. He makes no reference to the data being provided by a third party. The proposal implies that his project will generate the output data that he will then analyze. Perhaps Dr. Ding is unaware that this data is already publicly available.

Contrary to your published statements about me, I do not wish to mischaracterize anyone. Dr. Ding and UF are receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to conduct brain-mapping experiments when you are on record portraying him as a disinterested third party simply availing himself of public data.

Please help your community and me understand:

1. Is Dr. Ding physically performing invasive experiments on captive primates?
2. If these experiments were done in New York, why was UF the beneficiary of taxpayer-funded federal grants?
3. If the data that Dr. Ding manipulates is already in the public domain, why is he applying for federal grants?
4. If the information is not already in the public domain as you purported, are the brain-mapping experiments being performed by others at his behest?
5. Are these other parties also receiving federal grants for the identical experiments for which Dr. Ding does?
6. Is Dr. Ding responsible for the cruel neurological experiments performed on monkeys? Yes or No?
7. Is Dr. Ding receiving federal money to analyze data that is already freely available to the public? If so, why?
8. Is Dr. Ding receiving taxpayer-funded federal grants fraudulently?

Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Camille Marino
(352) 396-4132

Subject:

PI: Dr. Ding – Project Number: R01MH079388-04: $259,528 (FY 2010)
From:

“Camille Marino” <camille@negotiationisover.com> (Add as Preferred Sender)
Date: Sat, Jan 15, 2011 4:55 pm
To: “Janine Sikes” <jysikes@ufl.edu>
Cc: “Lisa Grossman” <lgrossman621@gmail.com>, mzding@ufl.edu, Nathan.Crabbe@gvillesun.com

Janine Sikes
Director of Public Affairs University Relations
University of Florida
101 Tigert Hall
Office: 352-846-3903/06
Cell: 352-214-6807
email: jysikes@UFL.EDU

Dear Ms. Sikes:

I am copying Dr. Ding in this communication and welcome his input on this very serious issue that directly concerns him.

I am also copying Gainesville Sun Reporter Nathan Crabbe since we have each spoken to him separately about the nature of Dr. Ding’s research.

Given that you just denied to furnish me with public records per my request in accordance with this state’s open records law, Fla. Stat. Secs. 119.01 to 119.15, it seems prudent that our communications going forward be subject to a degree of public scrutiny.

Last year, I reported that Dr. Ding, a researcher employed by the University of Florida, applied for and received $260,070 in federal grants to do barbaric brain-mapping experiments in monkeys.

You denounced this finding in various media including the Gainesville Sun. Your position was documented by another news source on October 12, 2010 as follows:

“But according to UF Public Affairs director Janine Sikes, the experiments were not done at UF and the data were public domain.
‘Organizations such as this [Negotiation Is Over] use mischaracterizations and inaccuracies to make an argument, and they falsely alleged things about this individual who just analyzed the data,’ Sikes said.”

Yet again, in 2010, Dr. Ding applied for and received another $259,528 to conduct the exact same experiments in which you denied his involvement. Why is he applying for money to assess information that you said is available in the public domain? This sounds less-than-ethical.

According to data available through the NIH, we can glean a fair amount of information about Dr. Ding’s agenda. The abstract doesn’t go into the specifics since he is focusing on establishing a way to measure monkeys’ brainwave output and analyze it. But the procedure is the same as before and, based on his proposal, what is physically done to the monkeys — brain-mapping “research” — is implicit in his grant request. He makes no reference to the data being provided by a third party. The proposal implies that his project will generate the output data that he will then analyze. Perhaps Dr. Ding is unaware that this data is already publicly available.

Contrary to your published statements about me, I do not wish to mischaracterize anyone. Dr. Ding and UF are receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to conduct brain-mapping experiments when you are on record portraying him as a disinterested third party simply availing himself of public data.

Please help your community and me understand:

1. Is Dr. Ding physically performing invasive experiments on captive primates?
2. If these experiments were done in New York, why was UF the beneficiary of taxpayer-funded federal grants?
3. If the data that Dr. Ding manipulates is already in the public domain, why is he applying for federal grants?
4. If the information is not already in the public domain as you purported, are the brain-mapping experiments being performed by others at his behest?
5. Are these other parties also receiving federal grants for the identical experiments for which Dr. Ding does?
6. Is Dr. Ding responsible for the sadistic neurological experiments perpetrated on the monkeys involved?
7. Is Dr. Ding receiving federal money to analyze data that is already freely available to the public?
8. Is Dr. Ding receiving taxpayer-funded federal grants fraudulently?

Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Camille Marino
(352) 396-4132

There are hundreds of thousands of federal dollars being funneled into UF for primate-related research, much of which will be discussed in the future. Looking only at the irrefutable public information that demonstrates invasive and horrific experimentation on primates currently underway, one is left to wonder exactly what else is going on behind the walls of this guarded institution. Certainly, transparency has been eliminated from the equation with expedience but the exquisite torture that their victims are forced to endure cannot be concealed entirely.


I. Der Fuhrer & Dr. Ding

Principal Investigator (PI): Mingzhou Ding
Project: Top-Down Control of of Attention
Major Component: Biomedical Engineering
Project Number: R01MH079388-04: $259,528 (FY 2010)

Last year, we published information about part “03” ($260,070 – 2009) of this same federal grant awarded to Dr. Mingzhou Ding to conduct brain-mapping experiments in monkeys. Part of the series published about Ding took an in depth look at the barbaric and sadistic experiments in which he was involved. There was an immediate response issued in the media from University Public Relations Director Janine Sikes decrying our research and claiming that Ding was not an “animal murderer.” He was simply a disinterested third party, a befuddled nerdy professor, sitting at a computer compiling public information. In fact, we subsequently learned that the actual experiments were conducted in New York.

Yet, here we are again. Let’s look at part “04” ($259,528 2010):

This is Dr. Ding doing the same thing as before. The abstract doesn’t go into the specifics of what they are doing with the monkeys since he is focusing on his establishing a way to measure their brainwave output and analyze it. The procedure is the same as before and, based on the proposal, as previously discussed, what is physically done to the monkeys in brain-mapping “research” is implicit in this grant request. He makes no reference to the data being provided by a third party. The proposal implies that his project will generate the output data that they will then analyze. Maybe he will let his grad students cut up animal brains or work with an outside contractor such as an institution in New York. But Mingzhou Ding IS the one asking for the money to do it!

I don’t believe Hitler gassed a single Jew himself! Like Der Fuhrer, Ding is presiding over a holocaust. The blood is on his hands. Ding is guilty.

II. Salemi: Mengele Incarnate

Principal Investigator (PI): Marco Salemi
Project: Viral Evolution in Peropheral Macrophages and Brain During Progression to AIDS
Project Number: 5R01NS063897-02: $711,142 (FY 2010)

Marco Salemi received nearly a quarter million dollars to infect 24 rhesus monkeys with the simian form of AIDS. Since the nonhuman primate version of AIDS is not always lethal as is the human form, he is using a ‘genetically defined’ swarm. Most scientists are pessimistic about ever developing a cure or vaccine for the human virus which is why a lot of money was pulled from AIDS research. It was thought to be unethical to sink money into something that would likely never be cured. But ethics are unilaterally trumped by profits for researchers like Salemi. They simply change the ultimate objective for which they torment their victims (e.g., “we aren’t trying to cure it, we just want to ‘understand’ more and more about how it changes over time”).

Salemi is collecting information about how AIDS destroys the central nervous system over time and can lead to eventual dementia. His team will take biopsies of the brain, basically snips of tissue that they themselves have identified as being unethical in humans. They will also sample from areas that they can pull macrophages from, cells involved in immune responses. This presentation from 2010 discusses six monkeys that Salemi infected and “sacrificed” at various points during the progression of the virus. That is, it is evidence that Salemi is in the business of torturing and murdering monkeys for profit with no benefit to greater public interests.

Like his predecessor, Dr. Josef Mengele, this is simply a sadistic pursuit to satisfy Dr. Marco Salemi’s obscene curiosity and line his pockets with blood money.

by Camille Marino
In accordance with Florida state “sunshine laws,” on October 22, I submitted a public information request to the University of Florida concerning 33 nonhuman primates imprisoned in their labs. They responded with a breakdown of the records and costs involved and payment was promptly remitted. Nearly two months after this exercise began, on December 17, I received a telephone call advising me that the documents were ready. The following afternoon I picked up an envelope from campus police containing a refund check and the University’s refusal to release the public records. I am unprepared to elaborate on this issue at the moment. However, the five-page package that I received may be viewed HERE.