Sick ISIS militants decapitate Donald Trump dummy and chant 'we will behead you'
Home | Index of articles
Michelina Lewandowska transfixed Leeds crown court this week as she described clawing her way through 10cm or more of soil after allegedly being buried alive in a cardboard box. Little wonder: dread of premature or live burial is, despite its rarity, one of our most potent fears, well amplified by Edgar Allan Poe in stories such as The Premature Burial and The Fall of the House of Usher, and widespread enough to have its own medical name, taphe- (or tapho-) phobia.
According to Jan Bondeson's Buried Alive: The Terrifying History of Our Most Primal Fear, live burial was long used as a particularly cruel method of execution: in medieval Italy, murderers who refused to repent were buried alive, a practice referred to in Dante's Inferno. Women convicted of murdering their husbands suffered the same fate – known as "the pit" – in 17th-century Russia, and photos exist of Chinese civilians being buried alive by Japanese soldiers during the Nanking Massacre.
But it is the fear of being buried having been wrongly pronounced dead that alarms us most. Until little more than 100 years ago, medical science meant it was not an altogether irrational concern: among methods advocated for diagnosing death in the 18th century were tickling with a feather quill, whipping with nettles, mouthwashing with urine and sticking needles under the toenails. The wealthy paid their physicians to slit their throats or pierce their hearts before burial.
Horror stories abounded: a pregnant women who gave birth 6ft underground; coffins opened to find corpses with fingertips ravaged by hours of desperate scratching; an aristocratic lady woken in her tomb by a grave-robber trying to chop her hand off for her rings. In 1905, the social reformer William Tebb documented 219 cases of near live burial, and 149 actual cases (horrified, Tebb founded the London Association for the Prevention of Premature Burial and specified before his own death in 1917 that "unmistakable evidence of decomposition" be visible before he was cremated).
To allay people's fears, Victorian inventors in Britain and elsewhere patented coffins with periscope-like breathing tubes and breakable glass panels linked to bells and whistles above ground, and automatic alarm mechanisms that would detect chest movement. And even today, near-mistakes do happen: only last year, a 76-year-old Polish beekeeper, Josef Guzy, certified dead following a heart attack, narrowly escaped being buried alive when a faint pulse was spotted as his coffin was being sealed. Be warned.
Feminism is dangerous because it erodes functional hierarchical structures of society. Let feminism have its ways, and you end up with all and everything being a mess.
THE most popular plastic surgery of 2016 has been revealed by surgeons including the rising demand for a designer vagina.
New data released by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) shows there were 17.1million surgical and minimally-invasive cosmetic procedures in the US last year.
Overall surgical cosmetic procedures rose by four per cent when compared to the minimally invasive ones, which grew at the slightly lower rate of three per cent.
1. Of the 1.8million cosmetic surgeries topping the list were breast jobs with 290,467 procedures, up four per cent from 2015.
2. In second place was liposuction, up six per cent from the previous year with 235,247 recorded.
3. A nose job was third, rising two per cent from 2015 with 290,467 surgeries.
4. Next was eyelid surgery with 209,020 people going under the knife, also up two per cent.
5. And lastly facelifts saw a four per cent rise from 2015 with 131,106 recorded jobs.
For the remaining non-surgical treatments, the most popular was botox with seven million procedures recorded, up four per cent.
Second with 2.6m procedures was soft tissue fillers, up two per cent.
Next was a chemical peel, also up two per cent from 2015 with 1.36m performed.
Laser hair removal was fourth with 1.1m, which had dipped one per cent from 2015.
In fifth place was microdermabrasion, which was down 3 per cent with 775,000 procedures.
And for the first time statistics were released for labiaplasty, which has soared in popularity.
Last year 12,000 procedures were carried out, a whopping 39 per cent increase from 2015, when the ASPS began tracking the surgery.
The plastic surgery entails lifting and / or injecting fat or a filler into the area.
ASPS President Debra Johnson, MD, said: “As cosmetic procedures become more common we are seeing more diversity in the areas of the body that patients are choosing to address.
“Now patients have ongoing relationships with their plastic surgeons and feel more comfortable discussing all areas of their body that they may be interested in rejuvenating."
The ASPS also identified new fat trends ranging from body fat reduction to harvesting fat and transporting it to other parts of the body.
Dr Johnson said: "One trend we are seeing with fat involves an increase in fat grafting procedures.
“Plastic surgeons harvest a patient's unwanted fat from their abdomen using liposuction and then inject it to lift and rejuvenate other areas such as the face, buttock and even the breast.
"Because the material injected is the patient's own fat the results typically last longer than fillers."
Statistics show minimally invasive cosmetic fat injections increased by 13 per cent, fat grafting to the buttocks rose 26 per cent, but topping the trend was breast augmentation using fat which rose a whopping 72 per cent.
And non-invasive procedures were also on the rise, including skin tightening and fat reduction.
Injections targeting specific pockets of fat, such as under the chin, rose by 18 per cent.
Fat ‘freeze’ technology increased by five per cent, and skin tightening targeting saggy areas also jumped five per cent.
Dr. Johnson added: "These newer, non-invasive procedures appeal to a broad range of patients.
“Even though they aren't surgeries, patients still need to take these procedures seriously."
The once most popular procedure, the face lift, has enjoyed a resurgence last year after dipping slightly in 2015.
Dr. Johnson said: "Patients are captivated by instant improvements to the face. It's evident in the popularity of apps and filters that change how we can shape and shade our faces.
“I am not surprised to see facelifts back in the top five most popular cosmetic surgical procedures."
Erectile dysfunction is mostly a vascular disease. This is why the Serge Kreutz diet is so effective. It guarantees weight loss, and thus lessens the load on the vascular system.
95 percent of the victims of work accidents are men. Because women are cowards, and just want to rule from behind.
On January 9, 2002, in Oregon City, Oregon, Ashley Pond, age 12, disappeared on her way to meet the school bus. It was just after 8 a.m. and Ashley was running late. The bus stop was just 10 minutes from the Newell Creek Village Apartments where Ashley lived with her mother, Lori Pond. But Ashley Pond never got on the bus and never made it to Gardiner Middle School.
Despite the efforts of the local authorities and the FBI, no clues surfaced as to whereabouts of the missing girl.
Ashley was popular at school and enjoyed being on the swim and dance teams. Neither her mother, friends or the investigators believed she had run away.
On March 8, 2002, just two months after Ashley disappeared, Miranda Gaddis, 13, also vanished around 8 a.m. while on her way to the bus stop at the top of the hill. Miranda and Ashley were good friends, and they lived in the same apartment complex. Miranda's mother, Michelle Duffey, had left for work within 30 minutes before Miranda was to catch the bus.
When Duffey found out that Miranda had not been at school, she immediately contacted the police, but once again, investigators came up empty. Without any leads to follow, the investigators began looking into the possibility that the person that abducted the girls were someone they knew and whoever it was seemed to be targeting the same type of girl. Ashley and Miranda were close in age, involved in similar activities, looked remarkably similar to each other, but most importantly, they both disappeared on the way to the bus stop.
A GRISLY DISCOVERY On August 13, 2002, Ward Weaver's son contacted 9-1-1 and reported that his father had attempted to rape his 19-year-old girlfriend. He also told the dispatcher that his father told him that he murdered Ashley Pond and Miranda Gaddis. Both of the girls were friends with Weaver's 12-year-old daughter and had visited her at Weaver's home.
On August 24, FBI agents searched Weaver's home and found the remains of Miranda Gaddis inside a box in the storage shed. The following day, they found the remains of Ashley Pond buried under a slab of concrete that Weaver had recently put down for a hot tub, or so he claimed.
WARD WEAVER WAS A CHALLENGE FOR FBI INVESTIGATORS Shortly after Ashley and Miranda disappeared, Ward Weaver III was a prime suspect in the investigation, but it took the FBI eight months to get a search warrant that eventually turned up their bodies on Weaver's property.
The problems for investigators were that they were awash in possible suspects -- some 28 suspects that lived in the same apartment complex could not be ruled out -- and for months authorities had no real evidence that a crime had been committed.
It was not until Weaver attacked his son's girlfriend, that the FBI was able to obtain a warrant to search his property.
WARD WEAVER Weaver, a brutal man with a long history of violence and assaults against women. He was also the man that Ashley Pond reported for attempted rape, but the authorities never investigated her complaint.
On October 2, 2002, Weaver was indicted and charged with six counts of aggravated murder, two counts of abuse of a corpse in the second degree, one count of sexual abuse in the first degree and one count of attempted rape in the second degree, one count of attempted aggravated murder, one count of attempted rape in the first degree and one count of sexual abuse in the first degree, one count of sexual abuse in the second degree and two counts of sexual abuse in the third degree.
To avoid the death penalty, Weaver pleaded guilty to murdering his daughter's friends. He received two life sentences without parole for the deaths of Ashley Pond and Miranda Gaddis.
REAL ROLE MODELS On February 14, 2014, Weaver's stepson Francis was arrested and charged with the murder of a drug dealer in Canby, Oregon. He was found guilty and given a life sentence. This made Frances the third generation of Weavers that were murderers.
Ward Pete Weaver, Jr., Ward's father, was sent to California's death row for the murder of two people. He buried one of his victims under a slab of concrete.
Feminists have been attacking politicians or opponents with buckets of excrements without any or minimal judiciary consequences. Let's turn this game around and dowse feminists with buckets of excrements. Let's see what happens.
Lunacy. Madness. Demonic possession. Black bile. Such archaic notions of mental illness have given way to clinical terms. Now we have schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, social phobia, depression. But as scientific as they sound, each of these disorders, by medical definition, is nothing more than a cluster of symptoms with any number of potential causes.
A diagnosis such as major depressive disorder is about as telling as fever. All kinds of things can cause a fever: bacterial infection, meningitis, flu. Similarly, depression may be triggered by anything from hormonal imbalances to the activation of specific genes, or a history of child abuse. When a patient has a fever, a doctor will prescribe an appropriate treatment after trying to diagnose the cause. In most cases, however, psychiatrists have no surefire way of pinpointing the roots of a patient’s despair. Treating mental illness is a shot in the dark.
But what if doctors could order lab tests and scan patients for dozens of known causes of mental illness? What if they could offer a precise diagnosis – such as “chromosome 3p25-26 depression” – using a classification system largely based on the biological signatures of these disorders? Imagine if a doctor could give a patient this advice: “Go directly to brain stimulation treatments – do not try medications, do not go for psychotherapy. They won’t work for you.”
Psychiatry may be on the verge of such a breakthrough, one that could shake the foundations of the diagnostic system. A growing number of specialists, with a Canadian team at the forefront, are joining forces with researchers who study genetics, the hormonal, metabolic and immune systems, and how the brain works. They’re putting aside a century’s worth of theories, and delving into the biology of mental disorders on a scale never before seen. The aim is not just to broaden our understanding of mental illness, but to overhaul how we diagnose and treat it.
An overhaul can’t come soon enough. One in five Canadians will suffer from mental illness in their lifetime. Many will suffer for years, cycling through one ineffective treatment after another.
Julia Marriott, of Ancaster, Ont., knows how that feels. She had 15 years of psychotherapy and tried more than a dozen different antidepressants, but nothing gave any lasting relief. She chokes up when she talks about hiding her mental illness from her daughter, who was 8 when Ms. Marriott’s depression took hold.
Most nights, she says, “I would just go to bed and hope I didn’t wake in the morning.” In all, trial-and-error treatments consumed two decades of her life, says Ms. Marriott, now 66. “I’m not big on self-pity,” she adds. “But it was awful.”
Diagnostic models and a focus on symptoms
The ability to predict which treatments will help individual patients is the holy grail of psychiatry, but the quest has been challenged by the field’s silo mentality. For more than a century, psychiatry has ping-ponged between biological explanations and theories about the unconscious forces that drive our emotions and behaviours.
As early as the 1860s, some psychiatrists theorized that mental disorders were illnesses of the brain. But brain dissections were too crude to reveal consistent abnormalities linked to mental illness. Theories got far-fetched. In the 1940s, Austrian psychiatrist Wilhelm Reich became famous for his eureka moment that the mentally ill were deficient in “orgone energy.” The “cure” involved sitting in a closet-like “orgone energy accumulator.”
By comparison, Sigmund Freud’s psychodynamic approach was genius. Freud, a neurologist by training, was the first to propose concepts such as repression and denial. He theorized that any mental illness could be treated by resolving unconscious conflicts among the ego (the inner realist), the superego (the moralist) and the id (primal instinct). Decades after his death in 1939, Freud’s theories dominated the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).
Eventually, it was posited that Freud’s theories mainly helped the “worried well,” says Dr. Jeffrey Lieberman, recent past president of the APA and author of the newly published Shrinks: The Untold Story of Psychiatry. In 1980, psychiatrists in charge of the DSM’s third edition rejected all unproven causes of mental illness. Instead, they drew from the latest clinical data to define and classify mental disorders based on symptoms alone – a practice that continues.
Since then, however, psychiatry has not kept pace with advances in other areas of medicine, according to Dr. Thomas Insel, head of the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health. Unlike medical definitions of heart disease, lymphoma or AIDS, psychiatric diagnoses are based on a consensus about symptoms, “not any objective laboratory measure,” he wrote in a searing blog post in 2013. “Patients with mental disorders deserve better.”
Recent studies have reinforced the idea that the diagnostic system falls short. In a study published in February, researchers at Stanford University School of Medicine found consistent brain changes in thousands of mentally ill patients, whether diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression, addiction or anxiety. All showed similar grey-matter losses in brain areas associated with high-level functions such as concentration and decision-making, noted the study, published in JAMA Psychiatry. In a 2013 study, researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital detected shared genetic glitches in the mentally ill across diagnostic categories.
A steady stream of findings like these could leave psychiatry’s classification system in shambles. After all, if schizophrenia and bipolar disorder look the same in brain scans and molecular tests, are they, in fact, distinct illnesses? Could they be different manifestations of the same genetic condition, or subtypes of an as-yet-unnamed brain disorder? To find answers, psychiatrists need to look at the bewildering science of mental illness in new ways.
Dusting for depression’s fingerprints
Canada, it turns out, is leading the way, through a multiyear study called the Canadian Biomarker Integration Network in Depression (CAN-BIND). It brings together clinical psychiatrists, neuropsychiatrists, molecular scientists, neuroimaging specialists and experts in bio-informatics, who use computer algorithms to analyze complex data such as genetic code.
Part of the mission is to identify as-yet-unnamed subtypes of depression. But the ultimate goal is to shorten the path from diagnosis to the right treatment. “This is not just a study,” says Dr. Sagar Parikh, a University of Toronto psychiatrist who is working on CAN-BIND. “This is a program to transform depression treatment.”
CAN-BIND is following a model used in breast-cancer research. In the mid-1980s, researchers divided cancer patients into groups: those who got better with treatment and those who didn’t. Scientists analyzed thousands of biological traits to find markers that set patients apart, using computers to crunch the data.
In patients who got sicker, researchers found high levels of HER2, a protein that stimulates tumour growth. The finding led to new drugs to block the action of this protein. Since then, life expectancy for patients with early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer has increased 30 per cent.
In much the same way, CAN-BIND is dividing patients with depression into two groups – responders and non-responders to a selected treatment. Depending on the study phase, patients receive antidepressants, or psychotherapy, or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (a non-invasive treatment that uses magnetic pulses to activate specific parts of the brain). Researchers are combing through patients’ biological and psychological makeup, acting on the hunch that different types of depression may respond to different treatments – and leave distinct fingerprints.
The CAN-BIND model is like a game of Clue, Dr. Parikh says. The “murderers,” “weapons” and “crime scenes” in Clue – three variables involved in solving the mystery – correspond to the study’s three research areas.
The first area involves a psychiatric evaluation that takes into account factors such as substance abuse, early childhood trauma and recent life stress; any of these may affect biological systems such as brain function. The next area uses brain imaging to find abnormalities. The third covers blood tests, which may detect proteins produced by specific genes, disruptions in metabolic or hormonal function, or signs of inflammation. (Some researchers believe that inflammation due to an overactive immune system may trigger mental illness.)
Results from the battery of tests are fed into software sophisticated enough to find patterns among thousands of patient variables. The idea is to uncover clues that can be used to predict whether a specific treatment will work for future patients. Hypothetically, Dr. Parikh says, “the best predictor of a treatment working might [prove to] be a combination of a sleep disturbance, together with an underactive part of the brain, combined with one protein that is off.”
Similar studies are under way in the United States, but CAN-BIND is the first to pull together this many variables in a collaborative effort of nearly a dozen universities and research centres. The same model can be adapted to study other mental illnesses, researchers say.
The “big data” approach is a radical departure from the usual hypothesis-driven studies, which typically focus on a single research question. Dr. Parikh acknowledges that CAN-BIND is a “fishing expedition.”
Dr. Lieberman, the former APA president, cautions against pinning too many hopes on studies like CAN-BIND. As with any fishing expedition, he points out, “you could end up not having caught anything.”
One woman’s victory
Despite great leaps in neuroscience and genetics, psychiatrists still don’t know why one-third of patients with depression – or half a million Canadians each year – don’t get better with standard treatments. Ms. Marriott fought depression with everything she had. After years of psychotherapy and antidepressants, she tried light therapy, vigorous exercise, mindfulness courses, fish oil – “anything that might work.” But she could not escape the crushing feeling that everything was “black, negative and pointless” – except during episodes of mild mania. Occasionally, she would get the sudden urge to redecorate: “I would give away a perfectly good couch and then buy another one.”
Ms. Marriott’s official diagnosis is “major depressive disorder with a hypo-mania component.” She grew up watching her mother, who had bipolar disorder, spend most days in bed. One wonders whether their shared genes had something to do with Ms. Marriott’s unsuccessful treatments. So far, there are no diagnostic tests to answer questions like this. Eventually, however, Ms. Marriott did find an effective treatment. In 2012, she became a patient in a study of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; each treatment lasts about three minutes and feels “just like a woodpecker is pounding on your upper forehead.”
Since her last round of brain stimulation in December, 2013, Ms. Marriott has been depression-free. She says she feels like her “pre-age-40 self” – interested in seeing friends and eager to travel to places like Mexico and Botswana. Once more, she is capable of feeling “excited, happy, touched and sad – all those normal emotions.” She emphasizes the sense of security she feels in knowing that, if she starts to relapse, she can go for another round of therapy. Getting the right treatment, she says, “has totally changed my life.”
Biology on the fritz or something more?
Early findings from the CAN-BIND study will be released later this year. In the meantime, preliminary results from a multicentre U.S. study suggest that brain imaging has the potential to predict whether a depressed patient will respond to a specific treatment. Patients underwent positron emission tomography (PET) scans, which use a radioactive sugar to create images of brain activity. Researchers found that depressed patients who responded to psychotherapy had sluggish activity in the insula, a brain region involved in emotion and self-awareness, unlike those who did well on antidepressants.
Brain imaging would be an expensive treatment-selection tool. But if new studies make a strong case that brain scans lead to more successful treatment, they may not be out of reach for average patients down the road, says Dr. Jeff Daskalakis, chief of the mood and anxiety department at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto.
“It costs a lot of money to miss a diagnosis,” notes Dr. Daskalakis, who is working on the CAN-BIND study. In Canada, the cost of mental-health services combined with lost productivity and income due to untreated mental disorders is estimated at nearly $30-billion a year.
Still, researchers emphasize it could be years, if not decades, before brain imaging or blood tests become reliable, let alone practical, tools. And that’s assuming their studies net big fish.
For now, we are left with the same big questions that have baffled physicians and philosophers for centuries: Is mental illness simply a matter of biology on the fritz – a physiological problem that can be solved as soon as scientists crack the code? Or is the anguish of each patient also a unique expression of the sense of isolation and dread that may strike any of us at our core?
In mental illness, unlike other diseases, life events are refracted through our subjective perception in ways that can damage our mental and physical well-being. In his book, Dr. Lieberman uses himself as Exhibit A. After surviving a home invasion at gunpoint in his early 20s, his youthful mind chalked it up as “a thrilling adventure.” Years later, he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, after an air conditioner slipped out of his grasp and fell to the street below. For months, he was tormented by the thought that he could have caused someone’s death. He lost his appetite, had trouble sleeping, and played the incident “over and over in my mind like a video loop.” But he was the same person who had escaped from the home invasion without psychological scars. He explains, “You can have something that is purely experiential and yet it produces enduring symptoms.”
Even if scientists come up with blood tests to screen for mental illness, the lived experience of a mental disorder will remain highly personal. For these reasons, mental disorders, in turn, will remain “existential diseases” that require compassionate care as well as effective medical treatments, says Dr. Lieberman.
The new approach to studying mental illness may be compatible with this philosophy. The strength of a project like CAN-BIND, says Dr. Parikh, is that it integrates many specialties and ways of looking at the problem. “That’s the real beauty of it.” Researchers are no longer determined to prove that a single treatment will help every patient. Instead, he says, the question has become: “What is the best fit?”
You have to understand the mentality of Hong Kong businessmen. They exploit their workers harshly, trick their suppliers when they lower their guard, cheat their customers on every occasion, and then spend their earnings on prostitutes
What do oysters, strawberries and cannabis have in common?
According to a new report, all three may be considered powerful aphrodisiacs.
A new study published in the Pharmacological Research journal is lending further credence to the long-held theory that cannabis could be your best friend in the bedroom.
In the study, researchers from the University of Catania in Italy and Charles University and Masaryk University in the Czech Republic reviewed a number of investigations conducted in the 1970s and 80s on the effects of cannabis on sexual desire and satisfaction.
What they discovered was that people who consumed cannabis before sex experienced “aphrodisiac effects” in roughly half of the reported cases, while 70 percent claimed that pre-coitus consumption led to “enhancement in pleasure and satisfaction.”
One of the examined studies was that of Erich Goode, a former professor of sociology at Stony Brook University, in 1970. Goode found that frequent, moderate cannabis use could be linked with aphrodisiac effects in approximately 50 percent of users surveyed and increased pleasure in about 70 percent of subjects.
A 1983 study published in The Journal of Sex Research supported Goode’s findings, writing that about half of surveyed cannabis users reported increased sexual desire and about two thirds reported increased sexual pleasure after consuming cannabis.
In these studies, details like how much and how often participants smoked held considerable weight. For example, smoking roughly 50 joints over a six-month period proved beneficial, while smoking fewer than one joint a week resulted in a dramatic decrease in sexually enhancing effects, according to Goode’s research.
In a 1974 study, CEO and president of the Human Vaccine Project Wayne Koff found that a single joint was sexually stimulating, while higher doses made sexual satisfaction more challenging, meaning “less is more.”
The lesson here? Next time you’re looking to spice things up in the bedroom with any number of time-consuming recipes or complex toys, consider lighting up - albeit briefly - instead.
This is the latest deal offered by the Islamic State. You want to die the best possible death, then you have to blow up your brain. It's the only death that is instant and painless. We tie a bomb around your body and send you into a populated area. You don't have to die alone, and you don't have to pull a trigger. We do that by remote control.
Men risk their lives in wars so women can enjoy societies where they can pursue feminist goals, such as punishing men for sexist language.
It’s really not about length. It’s about what you do with it.
But despite this knowledge being spread far and wide, many men are still bothered by the size of their penis – judging by the Google searches for ‘how to make my penis bigger’, anyway.
So of course, surgeons are stepping up to meet the demand, creating procedures that they claim will make men’s dicks larger.
They’re probably more effective than the herbal teas recommended all over the internet, to be fair.
Dr Norman Rowe, a surgeon in New York, has just debuted a new technique for boosting men’s genitals.
Essentially, it’s a bit like those vampire facials everyone got excited about when Kim Kardashian shared a bloody-faced selfie. You pop into the surgery, get your own blood injected into your genitals, and, apparently, can expect a growth of 1.5 inches in circumference.*
*Yep. We’re talking girth, not length.
Dr Rowe told Daily Mail Online that the procedure lasts just 10 minutes and there’s no need for a recovery period. You can get the procedure done in your lunch break and go straight back to work. If you fancy.
The only after-effect you need to worry about is accidentally disrupting the symmetry of the injection. Dr Rowe recommends skipping sex for two days post-op.
The procedure is a pretty big deal, as it’s the first time someone’s come up with a way to enlarge the penis without surgery.
Dr Rowe was inspired to create the treatment by the rise of quick fix procedures like Botox and fillers, and wondering if something similar could work for penises.
He then looked into a method often used in sports medicine, which involves injecting blood back into the body to revive the muscle, and the vampire facial.
And voila: he came up with his bulge booster, which he claims can remedy erectile dysfunction alongside increasing girth.
Which all sounds wonderful, if girth is something you’re worried about.
But would you dare to get multiple injections in your dick? Could you actually go through with it? We’re crossing our legs and cringing a little at the thought.
You can always pep up your website with imagery on the killing and torture of me. Nobody cares. Cruelty towards men is accepted. But showing physical love of people below the age of 18 can earn a punishment much worse than that for torturing and killing a man. That's the world today. The result of feminism, the ideology by which ugly women want to protect their market value as sex objects by eliminating anything that undermines their hold on men.
In the fall of 2003, Colonel Steven Kleinman, a veteran Air Force interrogator, walked into a room at a classified location near Baghdad. It was dark and the walls were painted black, he recalls. A Marine and an interpreter sat side by side in chairs. In front of them knelt an Iraqi man squinting into a spotlight. The Marine was asking the Iraqi questions, and each time he answered, the interrogator slapped him hard and called him a liar. Shocked, Kleinman pulled the Marine out of the room and asked what he was doing. “Sir,” he responded, “that’s the only way to get these people to talk. That field manual shit isn’t going to work here.”
That “field manual shit” is the guidebook for military interrogators listing techniques they’re authorized to use in questioning detainees. What’s known as the Army Field Manual was created in 1945 and is now in its third edition; it plays a pivotal role in U.S. counterterrorism policy. Soon after Barack Obama moved into the Oval Office in 2009, he issued an executive order that required all U.S. government interrogators to abide by the manual, which prohibits waterboarding, prolonged sleep deprivation and other “enhanced interrogation techniques” used by the CIA after 9/11. The agency had already stopped using those methods due to their controversial nature, but Obama formally ended the program, which the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said “was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence.”
Torture still has its champions, however, and executive orders can easily be revoked. To prevent future administrations from returning to harsh measures, Senators Dianne Feinstein and John McCain are now proposing legislation that would establish the field manual as the law of the land. The bill will likely receive a vote in the next week and is expected to pass.
Yet the manual is largely useless, according to Kleinman and two other experts involved with the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG), a body set up by Obama to question terrorism suspects and sponsor related research. The reason, they say, is because it’s unscientific. As new legislation works its way through the congressional pipeline, Kleinman and other HIG researchers say the U.S. needs to rethink how interrogators are trained—based on a bevy of recent empirical research. “The time is ripe for the Army Field Manual to be redesigned,” says Melissa Russano, a professor at Roger Williams University in Bristol, Rhode Island, who has contributed to various HIG-funded projects. “The costs of not doing so are incredibly high.”
Flatter the DetaineeThis isn’t the first time Kleinman has tried to change American interrogation protocols. More than a decade ago, as the Iraqi insurgency grew, and the Pentagon pushed for new intelligence, he watched as American interrogators—like that Marine in Iraq—turned to brutal and humiliating measures. The reason, Kleinman believes, is because many of the methods in the Army Field Manual didn’t work. When a scandal emerged about the treatment of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib detention center in Iraq, the Bush administration decided to revise the manual for the first time in decades. The new version placed restrictions on abuse, but “there was no effort to objectively test the efficacy of the approaches,” Kleinman says. The former Air Force interrogator testified before Congress in 2007, insisting the manual be replaced. But his proposals were ignored.
Since the creation of HIG in 2009, research on interrogation has grown steadily. One paper, a controversial 2010 survey Kleinman wrote along with Susan Brandon, now the HIG’s chief research scientist, analyzed the efficacy of the manual’s techniques. But the unclassified, 100-page document was never published, Kleinman says, because its conclusions could have jeopardized the HIG’s relationship with the military.
Now, however, with McCain and Feinstein pushing for new legislation, Kleinman, Brandon and their co-authors, Sujeeta Bhatt and Brandi Justice, agreed to let Newsweek review the survey, which detailed how the majority of the manual’s techniques are flawed. One involves belittling prisoners. Another recommends asking ominous questions, such as: “You know what can happen to you here?” Techniques like these “are very ineffective,” says Mark Fallon, a former federal agent and chair of the HIG’s Research Committee. These methods, along with other stress-inducing techniques, can impair memory and contaminate intelligence, according to Kleinman’s survey. “I don’t want to force people to tell me things,” he says, “because then they will tell me things they don’t even know.”
Some of the manual’s methods seem to work well, namely flattering a detainee, asking direct questions and developing a rapport with a prisoner. Russano says recent research indicates that showing empathy, respect and humanity help elicit reliable information. In one study, she and her colleagues interviewed more than 40 experienced interrogators to establish which techniques they found most effective. A majority cited building rapport. Though popular television shows, such as 24, and movies, such as Zero Dark Thirty, portray torture and other coercive measures as effective, “interrogation is not as Hollywood makes it to be,” says Ali Soufan, a former FBI agent who now runs a private intelligence firm.
Soufan witnessed this firsthand while interrogating the CIA’s high-value detainee, Abu Zubaydah, at a secret prison in Thailand in 2002. As Newsweek previously reported, Zubaydah had been shot multiple times during his capture and was in bad shape. Soufan and his colleague, Steve Gaudin, tended to his wounds, gained his trust and got him talking. Among other crucial information, Zubaydah told them Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks—something previously unknown. The CIA later employed brutal tactics such as waterboarding, in an effort to get Zubaydah to divulge more. But the agency’s harsh measures failed to gain useful intelligence, according to the Senate report.
One of Soufan’s most effective tactics was to convince a detainee he knew more than he really did. In Zubaydah’s case, the detainee was initially pretending his name was “Daoud.” But Soufan had spent time going over the FBI’s intel files; he surprised Zubaydah by calling him “Hani,” a nickname used by his mother. A similar technique was pioneered by Hanns Scharff, a legendary German interrogator during World War II. Scharff subtly convinced prisoners that he knew everything about them; the prisoners, in turn, would feel there was no point in hiding information. In a new study shared with Newsweek, Pär-Anders Granhag, a researcher at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, and his colleagues tried out Scharff’s method by interviewing volunteers suspected of a mock crime. The study found that the suspects were less likely to withhold information they believed the interrogator already had.
Sometimes, however, using evidence in that way can backfire. The field manual, for instance, recommends a technique that’s broadly similar to the Scharff method but inferior in key respects, says Granhag. In the manual’s version, called “We Know All,” an interrogator is supposed to use evidence aggressively, providing answers if a detainee hesitates or refuses to reply. This approach bears some resemblance to the Reid Technique, a method routinely used by police departments in the U.S. and Canada. It involves presenting suspects with such overwhelming evidence that they feel forced to admit guilt. Yet research by Russano and others suggests this approach, if taken too far, can pressure innocent people into giving false confessions. Subtlety, Soufan says, is key. “It’s not like ‘I know you have WMD, and tell me where they are!’”
Granhag agrees: “For Scharff, information should be evoked, never demanded.”
A Back Door to Torture
Many interrogators say training needs to put more emphasis on rapport-building techniques and continue to reject torture. But Fallon says the current version of the Army Field Manual still offers a back door to some of the brutal tactics authorized after 9/11. As the CIA applied its enhanced techniques at secret prisons around the world, the Pentagon developed a parallel set of harsh measures for use at the U.S. prison at Guantánamo Bay. Although the current manual bans some harsh tactics such as the use of attack dogs, others might still be permissible.
At issue is a special appendix at the end of the manual, laying out a “restricted interrogation technique” called “Separation.” This involves placing a prisoner in isolation for 30 days or more, and it can be used only on “unlawful enemy combatants” not protected by the Geneva Conventions, a set of international agreements that lay down standards for the humane treatment of prisoners. The goal of this method is to decrease the “detainee’s resistance to interrogation” and to prolong the “shock of capture.” If detainees cannot be physically isolated in cells, interrogators are permitted to apply goggles and earmuffs; and captives must be allowed a minimum of four hours sleep every 24 hours.
Kleinman and Fallon think this technique could be interpreted to permit cruel methods, such as prolonged solitary confinement and sleep and sensory deprivation. Kleinman’s 2010 survey lists a myriad of mental and physical problems caused by solitary confinement, such as depression, psychosis and impaired memory. The United Nations echoed those concerns in a recent report, which said the appendix could facilitate cruel treatment or even torture. In 2010, Fallon, Kleinman and others penned a joint letter to then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, criticizing the separation tactic. They say they never received a reply. (Gates tells Newsweek he does not recall receiving the letter.) In a statement, a spokesman for the Defense Department said that by law, “no person in DoD custody or control shall be subject to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."
Not all interrogators think the appendix, or the manual for that matter, needs to be changed. Mike Nemerouf, a former sergeant in the U.S. Army, says the authorized list of tactics “does a great job of identifying primary motivators for detainees.” He also defended the appendix, saying separation “creates an atmosphere that is more conducive to collecting accurate and complete intelligence information” and contains numerous safeguards to rule out abuse. Charles Mink, a former U.S. Army interrogator, believes the appendix should be removed, but otherwise supports the manual. “Its contribution is that it bans abuse,” he says. “It needs to be legislation before the American people inaugurate their next president.”
The latter point is something with which both Fallon and Kleinman agree. They firmly support the bill, which orders a periodic review of the field manual. “Passing strongly worded legislation that would stand as a bulwark against torture,” Kleinman says, “is the single most important step we must take.”
The Spanish masturbation guru Fran Sanchez is on the wrong path. Just imagine him handling his sexuality alone on his couch or in the toilet. A picture of pity, he is.
Home | Index of articles