One of the big news stories of today is that the US military is using heavy metal music as a means of torture on Iraqis. Along with, if you can belive it, the theme song from Barney. They are hoping to gain info. I think this is a lot of nonsense. I mean heavy metal music is terrible, but it's certainly not as bad as having ones fingers broken or some such torture.
I'm curious what SPers think. Is heavy metal music really torture?

[ May 21, 2003, 01:37: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 23 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: Psy-Ops: Heavy Metal Torture (23 votes.)

Psy-Ops: Heavy Metal Torture (Choose 1)
* Yes, even Gordon Liddy would crack from such inhumane torture - 17% (4)
* No, those Iraqis are tougher than Lars any day. - 17% (4)
* Torture? We're doing them a big favor. Give me more metal! - 65% (15)

Is this serious, and if so, can we have a link?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3042907.stm


The use of this kind of audio-technique is rather new in interrogation," he said.

"There have been other kinds of non-lethal, non-harmful techniques, such as sleep deprivation... which leave no long-lasting effects but do have the end result of breaking down the individual's will to resist questioning."

Amnesty International told BBC News Online that at least one Iraqi captive - a civilian, later released - had reported being kept awake for up to four days by loud music.

"This is an issue that seriously concerns us. If there is a prolonged period of sleep deprivation, it could well be considered torture," said a spokeswoman.

"It is a very difficult line to draw between what constitutes discomfort and what constitutes torture - that line will vary for individuals and it would depend on each particular case," she added. As far my understanding is, the usual modus operandi of an European secret service to cooperate with other countries. Cooperation usually yields great results. And there's no need to ask how. :holy: Like machiavelli said, at the end of the day, results count, nothing else.

I've heard (or read ?) once, that the regular drops of water on the head have a lasting impact on the psche of a human. So, the upside, they don't use drops of water.

When I was pledging they kept us up all night with "Hell's Bells" by AC/DC on a loop, going on and on all night.

I heard the gongs and guitar lick from the beginning for a week afterwards ... everywhere I went.

That was only 6 hours and did have effects on me. I can't imagine what 96 hours could do.

But ... is it "torture"???

From Dictonary.com ...

1. Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion.
a) An instrument or a method for inflicting such pain.

2. Excruciating physical or mental pain; agony: the torture of waiting in suspense.

3. Something causing severe pain or anguish I don't know if this qualifies as severe pain or mental agony.

Oh dear Lord...nooooo!

I think that any form of music could be used in this way. The incessant loud noise and accompanying sleep deprivation will shatter sanity if kept up over an extended period of time. It's controlled "shell shock" that mirrors the mental breakdown suffered by WW1 vets after the heavy shelling during that war. It is a form of torture, though less obvious that slivers under the nails or other such things. I saw a documentary on Discovery a year or so ago on this sort of thing.

"I mean heavy metal music is terrible"

Is terrible? I believe that you will find some who disagree including me, instead of stating this as a fact state it as an opinion...

Maybe they're just trying to create a nation of headbangers. :D

Serious though... i don't play hardrock in my house, but it's not torture. If you don't like it, and someone makes you listen to it all day long, it becomes irritating, but it won't kill you.

now, maybe if they were forcing them to listen to the crap that passes for "country music", then yes i would say it's torture all the way.

They showed on that documentary I mentioned that after 48 hours of sleep deprivation, coupled with the noise (rock music works, as would Wagner, Yanni or anyting else, for that matter) that inhibits concentration, food and water deprivation, alternating periods of strong lighting and a bag over the head; all of these things together will break down the strongest will. The victim will cop to anything after this treatment. In fact, the validity of the data they give becomes suspect because their mental faculties are not anywhere near the normal range. That's what makes this form of interrogation a catch 22. If you want to force someone to say something, fine and dandy. If you want detailed operational data, this method is no good. If you have a list of names that you want verified ("Is Bob Jones a member of your terrorist cell?") this method stinks, because the victim will answer yes to everyone if he thinks it will stop the deprivation and let him get some sleep.

Well i ahve to say that i, like most people find untalented rubbish like slipknot and such very very painful to listen too, however i fail to see how this would work as a means of interregation. As, the goth guy has rather defensivley pointed out, there are some loonies who liek this stuff and therefore cannot be a universal method.

However the repeated playing of nursery rymes and childrens tv themes could work, especially if repeated. With Heavy rock it is simply noise, easy to shut out. With childrens songs it is something different something very disturbing.
Iknow i sound like i am joking but i mean it, there is something underlying in childrens songs that make them quite evil...

I have to agree with lord depaara. It does not matter if heavy metal or children songs, bagpipes or wagner or the noise of a sledge hammer or traditional music from India. Just take the noise which suits best for the victim. I had to listen 2 hours to wagner, it was uncomfortable but no torture. On the other hand, being forced to a few days without sleep, that is torture.

But the information gained through torture is always suspect, because torture will get people to say anything, just to stop it, so it's never a reliable source of information. Never was."Are you a witch ? Oh, yes I am, now would you please move the glowing coal away from my feet, if you don't mind." Iirc, they banished torture, as they changed the assignment of the justice-system from finding someone guilty to finding the truth. I guess the change took place in the 19th century.

Sidenote: I asked google about the water torture. It's not chinese, it's 16th century Europe.
http://www.angelfire.com/darkside/forgottendreams/watertor.html

A prisoner was tied to a table or the floor, and his head was strapped in place so that he couldn't move anything. Water was then dripped onto his forehead, one drop at a time. It drove the person insane, and after a period the victim would reveal the secret, confess to the crime, or agree to do anything his or his captors requested to get them to stop the torture.This was particularly favored in circumstances where torture was necessary, but no evidence of physical damage could show.
I think it does not matter, if torture uses fire, water or noise, if it does inflict pain, it's enough. And I don't see no rational reason, to put up some amplifiers and let someone listen to any kind of sound for 4 days without a break.

Yago, if the possibility exists that by torturing someone (in any way) that innocent lives can be saved, then I'm all for it. But the suspect nature of data received under torture makes for a tough call. As long as there is NO hinting to the victim of what answer will stop the pain, then maybe what you learn could be somewhat useful. This topic comes up in ethics classes.

If there were a nuclear bomb in the centre of a major city, and you had a man who knows its location, is torture justifiable? I say yes, but there are many who would say no. The only question in my mind would be "can this data be trusted?" You'd want to find the location he named VERY quickly and if he'd lied, REALLY turn the screws.

If there were a nuclear bomb in the centre of a major city, and you had a man who knows its location, is torture justifiable? I say yes In this case, I'd say yes too.

But still, the main problem is, the information is always very questionable and usally not easy to verify. Or in other words, if useful information could be gained through torture, it would be very often used. On a legal basis. That's not the case, but I don't think the reason is, that "morale" is valued higher than solving crimes, torture is just no rational way to get usefull information, therefore "morale" is in 99% of the cases no luxury.

But I guess the most cases of torture around the world have nothing to do with information-gaining at all. And when used to get information, that it's often the last straw, like saying, we have actually no idea at all, so let's try torture, maybe it yields some usefull information, even if it is very unlikely.

Not to mention, that revealed cases of torture usally go hand in hand with wrong convictions.

Yeah, I'm with you on that one. However, I also like it as a form of punishment once guilt is verified by other means. Take one of Canada's most vile criminals, Paul Bernardo. he raped and tortured three young girls and videotaped it. Those videos still exist and the cops got hold of them. He's in prison now. I would have no problems whatsoever with him being tortured. I don't care if that makes our society as bad as him or whatever other arguments for being merciful there are. He deserves pain beyond imagining.

Sorry, NtFG, I thought you would understand that it was my own preference for not liking metal that was posted - not fact, as was my opinion about such torture being nonsense. But the military chose the tracks not me. Also, I took time to give metal fans their own button, since I know some people don't find it torturous. I hope I did not offend you with my dislike of the theme from Barney either. Maybe I should have given Barney fans a button also.

I saw the piece on MSNBC's Keith Olbermann's News Countdown, Monday, May 19th. The piece was #1. If I can find a link I will post it later.

[ May 21, 2003, 01:43: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

Where do you draw the line? Some may argue that torture starts with Britney Spears - however that's missing the point - it's about breaking one's will. You can do that by beating someone to pulp or playing music 24/7 on an unignorable sound level and leave the light on ... that was nicely put into picture by Billy Wilder in his movie "1-2-3" where the evil east germans tormented the poor Horst Buchholz into confessing about anything to make them stop the music. "In training, they forced me to listen to the Barney "I Love You" song for 45 minutes. I never want to go through that again," one US operative told the magazine.I agree with Depaara. It's about braking the will. And the results are questionable - as usual with torture the people might tell you what they feel you like to hear. Make no mistake, it just sounds funny, but it's not. Kids at home, who do that all day, have the option to switch it off. The iraqis don't.

BTW during WWII the first eight tacts of Mozarts Little night music were played to people in concentration camps in endless loop for hours - and they all got mad...

Anyway this IS torture, but USA obviously don't care , they use even harsher methods.

I first heard this story from a school friend; 'Enter the Sandman' happens to be one of his favourite songs of all time. The barney song on the other hand is just way too far. It is just painful to hear, that is taking torture to a whole new level!