Is this an accepted torture technique?
It seems like it could work wonders without causing any actual damage. Exactly what an interrogator would want.
You need more convincing rubber hands though.

Your video, Police Interrogations: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Uh oh. Now the bank and tax fraud surrounding the Trumps acquiring the lease for the DC hotel are under investigation. This time Ivanka is going down with Daddy, because she overvalued properties used to secure the loan bu 3 times, claiming things like her apartment with a for sale price of $8.5 million was worth 25 million, etc.
nothing new, just more Trump fraud, more Trump theft from America, banks, and the public.

This is you pick. This is you guy? Only makes sense if you’re an anti American Russian troll trying to damage America as much as possible.

Edit: D’oh! Pence’s lawyer, present at many meetings in the whitehouse discussing the coup plans, testified for over 9 hours to the Jan 6 commission. He has direct personal knowledge of exactly what the president’s involvement before, during, and after the attack against America for Trump was, and apparently has no qualms about talking about it. He didn’t plead the fifth like all Trump’s lackeys (which Trump says is proof of guilt except when he does it), he didn’t fight subpoenas (which Trump has said is proof of guilt….when it wasn’t him). He testified, with members coming out of the session calling him a patriot who cares about America, unlike many others they’ve subpoenaed and interrogated. A man who put country before a person. Not good for Tangerine Palpatine.

Delay tactics are failing, obstruction is failing, destruction of evidence is failing, hiding the forging of fraudulent certifications for fraudulent electors failed, hiding and denying direct Republican Party involvement has failed, denying individual involvement has failed, denial of the event has failed, abusing expired privileges to hide evidence has failed, whining and crying like spoiled children has failed, threatening prosecutors has failed. Whole lotta fail going on over there.

72 million, plus or minus, supported the man who attempted the coup...mindlessly. According to polling, over 50% still support the coup outright, the other near 50% still support the man and party and want to ignore the coup or blame it on political enemies despite all evidence to the contrary.

Only a few thousand participated, millions still think it was a good thing that didn’t go far enough. In fact, indications are there are similar actions planned in all 50 states and more in DC before, during, and probably after the inauguration.

If your club decides it’s going to break the law and murder people to complete its goals and you stay in the club, continue to pay your dues, and vocally defend it with zeal but won’t kill anyone yourself, and perhaps most importantly you don’t tell police they’re planning murders, you’re complicit, part of the crime, and deserve to be lumped in with the murderers.

I haven’t heard of any right wing whistleblowers that warned police that the murderous threats were being acted on. The FBI had to find out for itself at the last minute by sifting through encrypted right wing chat rooms on the dark web and their warnings went mostly ignored. They are still finding more planning for more attacks, yet no one on the inside is telling them. That puts all 72 million square in the membership of a domestic terrorism organization.

How do they want terrorists treated? Treat them like that. Rendition, torturous interrogation, and life in gitmo is what they think should happen to anyone belonging to an organization that attacks America, and their families. They should all fear their own criteria and punishments will be applied to them.

I definitely think that’s appropriate for any law enforcement officers that participated, gitmo or firing squad, loss of all benefits, and fines in the millions that their families have to pay.

It happened, it was halted, it's happening again. As long as lower education is so disparate between mostly white and mostly black schools, it's proper. Revamp the education system so all high school graduates have the same educational opportunities, I would support removing it again, but we are moving the opposite direction. No link required, I explained....but from the link you provided....
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-colleges-have-more-students-from-the-top-1-percent-than-the-bottom-60.html

Did you read the link you provided about the one place supporting a day of absence? Evergreen? Their "day of absence" was 100% voluntary, not enforceable and not enforced, contrary to your claim.

The reporter chased out wasn't chased out, he was confronted, and he had left the media area to interrupt the event by "interviewing" people who didn't want to be interviewed in the middle of the event. Trump's campaign has adopted this tactic and added violence, and often physically assaulted reporters even when they comply and stay in the media area. This particular event was akin to a reporter jumping on stage and insisting the speaker let him interview him then and there, disrupting the sanctioned event.

Um....this was a discussion of why people would vote for Trump, not what's happening in Canada. That said, you can't expect a university to give a platform to a person who would use it to degrade and denigrate the university and it's policies. I wouldn't expect a religious school to host atheistic pro-life lectures, and I wouldn't expect publicly funded universities to host anti inclusion lectures.

Duh...your alleged "whiteness" class was not defining whiteness as inherently negative, it was this....
CSRE 136: White Identity Politics (AFRICAAM 136B, ANTHRO 136B)
Pundits proclaim that the 2016 Presidential election marks the rise of white identity politics in the United States. Drawing from the field of whiteness studies and from contemporary writings that push whiteness studies in new directions, this upper-level seminar asks, does white identity politics exist? How is a concept like white identity to be understood in relation to white nationalism, white supremacy, white privilege, and whiteness? We will survey the field of whiteness studies, scholarship on the intersection of race, class, and geography, and writings on whiteness in the United States by contemporary public thinkers, to critically interrogate the terms used to describe whiteness and white identities. Students will consider the perils and possibilities of different political practices, including abolishing whiteness or coming to terms with white identity. What is the future of whiteness? n*Enrolled students will be contacted regarding the location of the course. And it was cancelled in 2016-17. Don't be dishonest, it will change my responses.

Not sure why you made up this falsely alleged definition of racism that appears nowhere in the definitions or class descriptions you linked, but you did. Calling bullshit....Again.

Critical Race Theory (7016): This course will consider one of the newest intellectual currents within American Legal Theory -- Critical Race Theory. Emerging during the 1980s, critical race scholars made many controversial claims about law and legal education -- among them that race and racial inequality suffused American law and society, that structural racial subordination remained endemic, and that both liberal and critical legal theories marginalized the voices of racial minorities. Course readings will be taken from both classic works of Critical Race Theory and newer interventions in the field, as well as scholarship criticizing or otherwise engaging with Critical Race Theory from outside or at the margins of the field. Meeting dates: The class will meet 7:15PM to 9:15PM on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday (January 7, 8, and 9), and the following Monday and Tuesday (January 13 and 14). Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments.

Not anti white/pro minority/white=evil....but an examination of how laws as written and enforced may (or may not) be an example of racial injustice codified in law, whether by accident or intent. Again, you misrepresent the facts to pretend a class that examines the roll of race in law is a racist class teaching whites are bad and blacks are good.

If everyone BUT Asains do poorly because they aren't offered the same opportunities to excell, then yes, we need to step in to UPGRADE the opportunities of everyone else, that doesn't translate into downgrading the opportunities Asains are offered. Derp. This bullshit is the same racist trope the anti equality side has used for years, it's just bullshit. Asians aren't penalized for being competent at math nor for being Asian....neither were whites, which was V 1.0 of that same argument.

Identity politics are on both sides, played hard by the right too, to the detriment of society.

Affirmative action got national pushback from the racist right the day it was described as a plan, and constantly since.

It seems you may be confused by morons who would tell you racism is dead, reverse racism is out of control. When white women start being lynched by black mobs and blacks get a free pass for breaking the law, come back and try again. Until then, you sound like a bully whining about getting a time out for punching a smaller kid because they're a different race and proclaiming the whole system is unfair to white kids because you had a minor consequence forced on you.

Not by itself. Imo, Russia's backing had far more to do with him retaining power than his torturing.

Also, no one ignored that his changing methods (including aligning with a super power) were successful at retaining power for decades, please stop saying that. It's annoying and goes to show you aren't reading, you're apparently just looking for something to contradict and jumping on it.

None of your walls of text address the point being made, that torture is not an interrogation technique that works. Why do you continue to ignore the topic?

I'm bored with this merry go round....bye bye now.

Using violence, torture, and the backing of the Russian military, and after numerous failed coup and assassination attempts he took and held tenuous control. Torture hardly played a huge roll or he would have been successful the first time, or the second. He retained and increased that power in the 70-80's by spending his huge amounts of oil money on the people, mostly not by torturing them (except for Kurds).

The "others in the room" we're his forces, not random people who murdered for him out of relief. He didn't hand weapons to an adversarial group he was convincing to follow his lead by having them kill those who wouldn't. I mean...WHAT?

You use fear mongering as proof torture works? Um... ok.

Since what I've been discussing is torture working to get sensitive, useful information, not the long term terrorism and brutal oppression of a population, I'll just move on.
Yes, despots can ride nations into the ground by making the populations powerless and fearful until those populations revolt. Yes, an iron hand and willingness to make your population stone aged can allow you to hold on a long time. Yes, torture can be part of that, but only one small unnecessary part, a strong military willing to murder unarmed civilians is what it takes, torture or not.

Wow, now you think the U.S. military taking out Saddam proves torture works because ...force and violence?

Strength vs weakness is what worked, not torture or terrorism, that's why he failed, brought down by a coalition of locals and Americans with his military deserting him in droves when he needed them most.

Torture is not a functional interrogation technique nor a means to foster loyalty, only fear. Fear only works until someone adds hope to the equation.

After several hours of "enhanced interrogation" the interrogator comes back and says it doesn't matter what we do, she just keeps laughing. Also, she keeps asking when someone is coming in to mow the front lawn.

No, I understand just fine you only want to discuss torture as a means of interrogation and even then with more caveats on what counts as meaningful results. What I am pointing out is that torture, violence and rape ARE used for other purposes and do so successfully. You insist on entirely ignoring that, you might as well stuff your fingers in your ears and yell 'i'm not listening'.

I'm sorry, you have misunderstood me.

What I mean to say is that your post that included the example does not contain an actual example, only a generalization devoid of any reference.

I don't trust that you are a reliable source of information on the history of Saddam Heussane's use of torture and whether or not his results could deem an interrogation effective.

You are speaking generally enough that I'd like evidince I can inspect for myself before I take your word on this or that point being factual or definite.

In other words, I did read your comment and found it unconvincing in terms of substance.

Or in other words, I don't believe you know what you're talking about.

I understand. I'll grant that it seems a little "helicopter-parent" like to worry about this sort of thing. However, I do not agree that the transgressions are as harmful OR harmless as you suggest.

The Toy Story Examples again.
The one from Sid is itself an allusion to Star Wars where Darth Vader is torturing a soldier for information about the rebel base locations. If I'm not mistaken, that person is force-choked to death after his mind betrays him and gives Vader the info he needs.

Buzz approaches Woody after Sid steps out and commends him after the fact. "A lesser man would have talked under such torture."

Here is the encouragement. It doesn't matter if Sid is a good or a bad guy. Although, arguably, Sid isn't really a villain - just a kid who likes to play rough with his toys. But that's a different argument. I believe the encouragement is in the promotion of the idea that, put bluntly, torture is effective.

It's this idea, whatever the character motivation is at the time, nomatter who the character is, that encourages the use of torture as an acceptable means of extracting some kind of cooperation from the person being tortured- which is simply NOT true.

Why the pattern? why can't he be just ripping apart his toys like he did with the doll earlier?

I'm not fishing for 'micro agressions' - I'm against promoting the idea that torture works.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/08/world/does-torture-work-the-cias-claims-and-what-the-committee-found.html

"Time and time again, people with actual experience with interrogating terror suspects and actual experience and knowledge about the effectiveness of torture techniques have come out to explain that they are ineffective and that their use threatens national security more than it helps."
https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/an_fbi_interrogator_on_the_effectiveness_of_torture/

I argue that presenting torture as something that DOES work encourages policy decisions that allow for torture as a means to an end. When in reality it's simply just some kind of revenge driven harm propaganda.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/we-rsquo-ve-known-for-400-years-that-torture-doesn-rsquo-t-work/

*quality

As someone who watches a LOT of kid's movies with my daughter, I notice an alarming regularity of torture in children's media.

You like Pixar movies, right? Pick a Pixar film, ALL of them have a torture scene. It's bizarre.

It's late, so I'll be succinct about these, but let's define torture as follows:
Torture - noun - the act of deliberately inflicting severe physical or psychological suffering on someone by another as a punishment or in order to fulfill some desire of the torturer or force some action from the victim

Fair?

This is a short list I can think of off the top of my head

Toy Story
Sid tortures Woody "Where are your rebel friends NOW?" as he burns his forehead

Toy Story 2
Stinky Pete tortures Woody "You can go to Japan together or in pieces. Now GET IN THE BOX!"

Toy Story 3
Buzz gets put in the "time-out chair" with a burlap bag put over his head and is forced to turn on his friends

Monster's Inc.
Mike is put in the "scream extractor" and is interrogated "Where's the kid?" as the extractor inches towards his face.

Wreck it Ralph
Ralph asks "What's going on in this candy coated Heart of Darkness?" Sour Bill tries to run away but Ralph picks him up and threatens to lick him. "I'll take it to my grave" "Fair enough" and Ralph pops Sour Bill in his mouth "Had enough?" "OKAY OKAY I'LL TALK!"

Cars 2
The green-gasoline in his tank, the spy car is put in front of the radiation shooting camera and is interrogated about who the other spy is and who has the information about the green gas he recovered that could unravel their plan to get revenge for being discriminated against for being "lemons." His engine explodes (he's killed?) in spite of giving up the information.

The Incredibles
Mr. Incredible is restrained via some black goop and asked about his family's whereabouts on the island.

Finding Nemo
Near the end of the film when Dory finds Nemo but Marlin has wandered off thinking Nemo was dead, they need to know which way Marlin went and come across the little crabs sitting on the pipe "heyyyyyyyyheyyyyyyyyyyheyyyyyyyy" "Yeah I saw where he went, but I'm not telling you, and there's no way you're gonna make me." Dory lifts him up and threatens to feed him to the seagulls sitting on a small rock until he starts screaming "OKAY ILL TALK ILL TALK HE WENT TO THE FISHING GROUNDS!!!"

I could go on, but I hope to make this simple point:
These films do NOT have to include a torture scene. It's simply odd to me that it appears so often, instilling the idea early on that torture works for getting information or cooperation out of people.

Finally, I point to one of many pieces of research on the matter https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5325643/

It's kind of impossible to take any kind of sensible position without knowing the context of both sides.

Just because she's married to a black guy doesn't mean she doesn't have a bias against other black guys. There are plenty of studies that show even other black people have an unconscious bias against black dudes. It's not just personal, it's cultural and systemic.

So yeah, maybe he wasn't "reasonable" and maybe he didn't feel like being reasonable. Maybe he'd had a shit day and didn't feel like being interrogated on the way into his own apartment.

He said he had a key fob and even showed it to her. You can clearly see it in the video.

And I can think she was in the wrong without condoning death threats against her.

Not going to ban you for your opinion. But saying a veteran should have been kia is pretty goddamn low. You are, as all the dumbass motherfuckers on the interweb who have been calling him a traitor are, referring to the fact that he broke during his POW incarceration.

Here is a brief excerpt of the new techniques that came out right around the time he was captured. Techniques that were so insidious that the military had to REWRITE the code regarding breaking under torture.

"Some were physically tortured, some of them succumbed to the pain and broke, some did not, but there was also a new technique employed, and it took time.

Put into a dark box, not large enough to even stretch out, it is called sensory deprivation, and along with other enhancements, it turns a person insane, malleable, and open to the most ridiculous suggestions. like confessing to the war crime of being ordered to bomb hospitals and orphanages, and doing so.

Some of those who broke under this new kind of interrogation feared to be repatriated, thinking they would be tried for collaboration upon their return. American psychologists and psychiatrists, after interviewing some of these ex-POW’s, determined that, given enough time, anyone, if not everyone, could be broken.

John McCain made them start all over on him a number of times, until his Vietnamese interrogators finally gave up, and threw him into a miserable cell, and not back into his horribly, miserable dark box. His conduct, during his interrogation period, and thereafter, was nothing short of heroic."

Now, if you ever go through enhanced interrogation techniques, please feel free to report back to us how you managed not to break or suffer mental damage from them. Until that time, I find your opinion to be ill informed and lacking weight.

EDIT: Before you go saying I am a fanboy, I didn't care for him as a senator or presidential candidate. He was gullible enough to get sucked into the Keating Five mess and I didn't feel he would be a good president, so I voted democrat in 2008, even though I generally vote republican. I can still recognize him as a war hero and for his service though. The man was not a traitor.

Disturbingly, this show actually made people think torture is an effective interrogation technique.