Your video, lord of war-the interrogation scene, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I love the 2004 Punisher game. I love it.
You can "interrogate" people in it, meaning you outright torture them for information or gratuitous, explicit death scenes. You can shove people into woodchippers, drill holes in their skull with a powerdrill, chromeplating heads or smash their pelvis with a prison cell door to pieces. Additionally there are four basic "interrogations" that you can do anywhere from banging peoples head open on the floor to threatening them with a gun (that goes off a lot). And that goes on top off the usuall ultraviolence you find in such first and third person shooters.
However, the game mechanics reward you for not killing people during interrogations and using them as well as the human shields tactically. I started playing for points, not mayhem. Which is really hard to do if you hide in a coffin with an M60 during a mob burial. It's nice to see the Punisher impaling people on actual Rhinos or crushing them in giant gears in Tony Starks living room but I'm playing to get the gold medal on that level, I wanna take the flamethrower to the zoo.
The game mechanics were really great and rewarded strategy and restraint with unlockable stuff. You actually became less violent in exchange for concept art and additional gear. That game is awesome.
The only thing that ever made me want to be violent was the way certain people behaved towards me or others. Games just feed my morbid sense of entertainment.

Amazing how clear it was that her only instructions going into this must have boiled down to attacking the muslim author for his book that their other squawking corporate tentacles were already drumming up false outrage about.

I'm just positive this was a talking point on several right wing radio programs, magazine, news papers and their other various apparatus.

I wonder if she's just doing her job, or if she actually doesn't realize that she displayed a complete lack of understanding of what scholars do or how books are even written.

So no one should write about the Vikings unless they believe in Odin?

That was a ten minute interrogation about a scholar's background instead of the book they wrote.

I mean, you can't even call that transparent, it's too clear to even pretend it's filtered by a pane of glass.

I second @JustSaying here -- what exactly does it tell you? (Snowden seeking refuge in countries with abysmal human rights records)

What it tells me is that it is pretty pathetic that Snowden's best chances for freedom and a life outside of a concrete cell in Gitmo come from someplace like Venezuela, Ecuador, or Russia as compared to his home, the "land of the free" USA. I think it says much more about the current government and political environment in the US than it does about Snowden.

Given my take on it, I think it is laughable to accuse Snowden of hypocrisy. Aim that word at an entity that deserves it -- the country and government that labels itself:

*the "land of the free" (except for those that we lock up in indefinite detention without trial, those guilty of thoughtcrime, anyone trying to travel freely outside of the country or even from state to state, etc.),

*"home of the brave" (except for any vague threat of 'terrorists', in which case we ask everyone to panic and allow a friendly TSA officer to treat you like a sock puppet, in spite of the fact that you're 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist),

*originator of the bill of rights (unless the government has some tenuous and self serving reason to revoke any/all of your rights: Free speech? Hah! Free press? Hah! Unreasonable search and seizure? No such thing! Due process? Hah! Speedy and public trial? Hah! By a jury? Hah! Cruel and unusual punishments? Waterboarding and other 'enhanced interrogation techniques' don't count! The government laughs at the bill of rights and pisses on their grave.),

*bastion of democracy (except I don't remember voting on ANY of the shit that Snowden brought to our attention, and it seems that neither do any/most of our elected 'representatives' -Hah!), and

*home of the American dream (as long as your dream doesn't involve freedom from any of the myriad transgressions listed above).

Oh how my once proud nation has fallen.

If I thought he would actually get a fair trial, I would agree with you.

But let's be honest, if the US gets hold of him, he'll disappear into Guantanamo, probably be "enhancedly interrogated" and the best he could hope for would be a military tribunal in a decade or two.

First thing I thought when I saw the title, "Oh boy, another enhanced interrogation technique."

Well, he started with a fair question... but collapsed into inanity under interrogation.

If you are truly curious I hope you'll read everything.

TLDR Post Inc:

It's basically pragmatism and the slippery slope. You're making a registry of all the citizens who own guns. I mean have you ever applied for your firearms license before? Have you ever purchased a handgun? It's pretty crazy.

I wanted to purchase a handgun about 10 years ago after I got held up. It took me over 6 months to get my permit. Then it took me about another month to be able to purchase a handgun.

The Process:
In order to get your firearms id card you have to apply for it. Part of the process involved me having a sit down "evaluation" with a detective that was basically an interrogation for about 30 minutes.

Then once that detective says "this guys not crazy" He takes his form and all my information and mails it to the FBI. Then I had to wait about six months for the FBI to say "this guys not crazy and/or a terrorist.

When I have my Firearms ID card I can buy a shotgun or a rifle if I want that's no problem. But if I want to buy a handgun (which I did) I have to go back to get a handgun permit. Luckily since I was applying for my firearms permit they also gave me one (read one) permit to buy a handgun. I could buy one handgun; If I wanted more I had to apply for ANOTHER permit. Not another Firearms ID Card just another Handgun permit.

So I take my permit and I purchase said gun. I can't purchase the gun after 5:00 PM because the NIC office over at the FBI closes and they have to call it in. Even AFTER they call it in I still had to wait like 6 days before I could pick it up.

I receive a copy of the permit (and a receipt) , the dealer gets a copy, and the last part gets sent to the FBI. Once the FBI confirms they have a copy of the permit (which includes the serial # that is on multiple parts of the gun) then and only then am I allowed to pickup my firearm.

So even if I sold it to someone everyone would know know who it belonged to beforehand.

I'm not sure how much more gun control you can have. The "gun" that needs the most "control" are handguns because they are used in almost all gun related crimes if you look at the stats.

I wont' get into hypothetical situations about how citizens could perform those checks or whatever. I just want to show how regulated things are already. The idea that I could purchase like 10 handguns and then re-sell them all to someone else and NEVER have it traced back to me seems almost impossible. Heck I doubt I could even get approved to own that many handguns!

Also:

I'm not a "giant conspiracy" kind of person. But I feel like with the way government has been going with Guantanamo, stop and frisk, not really enforcing a lot of anti-trust laws, not really prosecuting some of the big banks responsible for what happened, etc etc etc I just feel like there really an upward swing for government control and collusion with protecting their own interests and not the interests of the people.

I don't see the government as an instrument of the people anymore it just seems to be wealthy people patting each other on the back.

What happened in Boston really upset me where people were just pulled out of there houses at gunpoint because there "could be" a terrorist nearby.

I believe that Obama has a good reason for trying to put these tools in place and he has no motive behind it he is just trying to protect the American People in his own way. But I don't believe gun control will help at all and all it will do is put more of a hindrance on law abiding citizens. I'd equate these laws to Anti-Piracy solutions? Ala Sims3 and Diablo etc etc. It just punishes the actual customer NOT the criminal.

If you told me there was a way to ensure program the registry of gun owners could only be searched if the striations from a bullet were scanned that was used in a crime or something like that I'd be fine with it. But there really is no way to do that.

Sorry it was long but it's not really something I can just say something short.

I'm sure people will says "Well what are your guns going to do against tanks and helicopters and xyz xyz". First I'll point to Iraq and Afghanistan and how well those "wars" went. Everyone can agree it was a disaster and we probably made a lot of terrorists by just killing people innocent or not. The same thing would happen here in America.

Would the government actually TRY to take over? I don't' believe so because it's not in our best financial interests. Everyone wants to stay wealthy and some sort of civil war would be horrible for our economy. But I believe over time constantly just eroding our rights will just lead to that. People got pulled out of their homes at gunpoint and screamed at by police in boston and they were just like "Well the police are just trying to keep us safe!" I just find that creepy.

There's a saying blah blah blah doesn't go out with a bang it happens with a whimper. I'm not going to make myself look smart by googling the quote.

Anyway that's my whole post sorry if it's long but I'm tired. I would have put it in the discussion section but I'm not at the appropriate star level.

Actually, they were answering her question very clearly and I guess she doesnt have the capacity to understand what they were telling her. Basically, Cohen's group can only impose fines. There are other groups that can shut down banks. Cohen was well within his right to not speak for another group that he does not work for. He was also very smart for not speaking hypotheticals because it may or may not line up with what their organization feels. Warren is basically interrogating the wrong person for those opinions. She needs to be asking those questions of Lew, the head of the Treasury Dept.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Cops-Interrogate-14-Year-Old-Into-False-Confession-Of-Murder

60 Minutes - Interrogated Coerced Confessions has been added as a related post - related requested by oritteropo on that post.

Cops Interrogate 14 Year Old Into False Confession Of Murder has been added as a related post - related requested by oritteropo.

I got that from around 0:00 to around 4:03>> ^Edgeman2112:

All I hear is horrible acting and fake laughter. Anyone else get that feeling too around 1:55?

On a side note, first song is Drowning Pool - Bodies, which was allegedly used by interrogators in Guantanamo bay, along with strobe lights. Not a hundred percent sure how recreating the typical concert could be considered a form of torture, but I'm not expert.