Music Torture as a real phenomenon has been reconfirmed by the publication this past week of the Senate Report on CIA Torture: “The long-awaited Senate Intelligence Committee torture report that was released to the public on Tuesday revealed some horrible physical torture performed by the CIA — waterboarding, sleep deprivation, and sexual assault. But it also detailed the agency's use of ‘sound disorientation techniques,’ as the report calls the music blared at detainees 24 hours a day. One of those was the Blues Brothers' ‘Rawhide.’” The song is described in an article on music torture, as follows: … " ‘Rolling, rolling, rolling,’ Rawhide begins. … In the Blues Brothers recording, the main vocals are a deep alto with a soulful, upbeat tone ...‘Don't try to understand 'em. Just rope, throw, and brand 'em. Soon we'll be livin' high and wide’ … The song ends with men cheering over the sound of a thrashing whip.” --Article in Vox: In a letter to the President and the Justice Department, I am calling for the investigation, indictment and prosecution of those musical works known to have been involved in acts of torture—and for the prosecution of those who approved the plan to use music as torture. The list of musical works will include: Dope: "Die MF Die", "Take Your Best Shot" -- Eminem: "White America", "Kim" -- Barney & Friends: theme song -- Drowning Pool: "Bodies" -- Metallica: "Enter Sandman" -- Meow Mix: commercial jingle. Read here for details regarding the above musical works, and their alleged involvement in torture: The torture “program” was administered to some alleged terrorists, but also to many civilians having nothing to do with terrorism, and guilty of no known crimes. They were subjected by the CIA to extremely harsh and loud music, played for hours, days, or even weeks on end with no let up. This produced total sleeplessness, mental confusion and psychological break down in numerous cases. The United Nations and the European Court of Human Rights have banned the use of loud music in interrogations. Detailed Information about and analysis of the practice can be gleaned from an article by Suzanne G. Cusick, written for the Journal of the Society of American Music: For a simpler account, one can read: Suzanne G. Cusick writes the following, and poses some questions for us about the practice: “In my view, the fact that the United States has theorized and deployed music as a weapon of interrogation is a fact to be faced." She says this fact will "shift radically" the way that musicians and scholars of music look at their subject. She asks how the weaponization of music will further affect civilian musical practices, and how civilian musical practices have affected the weaponization of music. Perhaps most importantly she poses the question: When the American public and the musical community become more aware of the facts, will they approve of this use of tax payer money and "condone this use of music done in our name?" Do members of the “Composers Forum” have any comments, questions or observations to share on the CIA practice of stripping detainees naked, chaining them to the floor in dark rooms (or hanging them from the ceiling) and playing music at “ear-splitting volumes” for hours, days and even weeks on end for the purposes of torture?

You need to be a member of Composers' Forum to add comments!

Join Composers' Forum

Email me when people reply –


  • Ondib, If you are willing to overlook the truth behind this whole scam/fiasco

    i.e. 911 and the Patriot Act(Hitler used a similar ploy and created the Gestapo)

    to take away the liberties of 'the masses',then under those circumstances I

    would say that War is indeed Hell and whatever it takes to defeat that enemy

    is  a duty and necessity. Real War is not a game to be lost.( and I mean Real War)

    The circumstances at Gitmo did not equate with a real war, as 911 like other

    CIA/Gov't. 'projects' was contrived to manipulate the public and had it's own

    agenda. Therefore it was a crime.

    If it was a Real War situation I would have gone even as far as to play

    the most torturous piece of music ever recorded; Tiny Tim's 'Tip-toe thru the Tulips'        RS

  • Hi Roger, Thanks for your response.

    I am sure I would NOT wish to force anyone to listen to Tiny Tim’s version of Tiptoe through the Tulips, unwillingly. Not even once. The CIA method would be to strip the listener naked (or force him to wear a diaper), then chain him to the floor in a totally pitch black room, playing the song over and over, for days and days at maximum volume, causing damage to the eardrums, for the purposes of torture.

    You said, “If you are willing to overlook the truth behind this whole scam/fiasco, i.e. 911 and the Patriot Act …” I am not willing to overlook the truth or truths that you speak of. I think too many people are, however. The truth is not merely 9-11, generally understood as a “terrorist plot,” of course. Even if it were, history did not start on 9-11. What too many people don’t want to think about is a simple statistic, or the answer to a few simple questions: How many Arabs and Muslims did the US kill prior to 9-11, and how many Arab and Muslim governments did the US overthrow prior to 9-11? Of course, nothing justifies what happened on 9-11 (whoever was responsible for it), an event in which about 3,000 died. And likewise, nothing justifies US military actions in the Arab and Muslims worlds (prior to and since 9-11) which have killed hundreds of thousands in recent years and certainly well over a million if we go back many decades. The number of Muslims tortured, by waterboarding or by music would seem almost insignificant in comparison to the total devastation wrought by the US and the West on Muslim World as a whole, if one considers the last 100 years of history.

    The question, "Exactly how many Muslims has the US killed," before and after 9-11 is one that needs to be considered. The final figure will depend on your answers to many questions. Do you hold the US responsible only for the deaths of Muslims at the hands of US troops and US firepower? Do you hold the US responsible for deaths which were caused by surrogates, at the behest of the US, or with US support and weapons? Do you hold the US responsible for deaths caused by leaders which the US forcibly installed? Do you hold the US responsible for deaths caused by sanctions, which were imposed primarily by the US? I would like to see those who planned the “torture by music” program held responsible, but perhaps that is not enough to spark greater awareness of the root problem.

    Estimates of the number killed by US military power since 9-11 go as high as 100,000 or more in Iraq, and 15,000 or more in Afghanistan. That is simply over the last several years. The sanctions regimes against Iraq, from 1990--2003 killed an estimated 1.5 million people. High level UN officials, such as Halliday and von Spoenek, resigned as a result of this policy, calling it tantamount to genocide. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, an estimated 700 people were killed. The US, not content to drive Iraq out of Kuwait, spearheaded an invasion into the hearland of Iraq, and a massive bombing campaign of major cities (Baghdad and Basra). Well over 200,000 Iraqis were killed during this "phase" of the war. We are only talking about recent history, mind you. During the Iraq - Iran war, the US (along with France, Britain, Germany, and the USSR) supported Iraq's aggression against Iran. We sold weapons to both sides, and urged Saddam to fight Iran, so as to weaken the Ayatollahs. Well over one million died in that war alone. Go back further:

    INDONESIA. 1965. Command operation: 500,000 to one million were killed in a CIA-assisted army coup. [Indonesia — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Sukarno with a military coup. The CIA had been trying to eliminate Sukarno since 1957, using everything from attempted assassination to sexual intrigue, for nothing more than his declaring neutrality in the Cold War. His successor, General Suharto massacred between 500,000 to 1 million civilians accused of being "communist." The CIA supplied the names of countless suspects].

    So consider the question, "How many Muslims has the US killed over the past 50 years"? One can convincingly argue that the number is well over one million. Even the most conservative estimates will put the number in the hundreds of thousands. [Notice, however, our media will not even ask, or explore the question, "How many Muslims has the US killed"? Or how many Muslim governments has the US overthrown?

    We can go back much further in history, and the numbers will be much higher. For instance, when the US invaded the Phillipines, in 1898, it met very strong resistance in the Muslim regions. Several hundreds of thousands were killed in those battles which lasted for decades, until the US finally secured control. So it would seem, whether one wishes to go back 50 years, or 110 years, that the US has been directly responsible for the deaths of quite a large number of Muslims. Whether one wishes to count direct kills, or the killing of Muslims by US surrogates, and pawns, the number is quite high.

    Then there is the question of overthrowing governments not to the liking of the US. The US did overthrow Mossadeq in Iran in 1953, the head of a Parliamentary system of government. America and Britain did not like his plan to nationalize Iranian oil. The same thing happened in Iraq, when Qassem was thrown out, with CIA support, AND THE BAATHIST PARTY was put in power. Saddam was a major player in those events, and the supported him at that time. In these two coups we are talking about tens of thousands killed by the people we supported (The Shah in Iran, and the Baathist Party in Iraq).

    These are historical facts, virtually ignored by mainsteam US and UK media outlets. However, AND THIS IS THE KEY POINT: MUSLIMS ARE VERY AWARE OF THE HISTORY OF US AND WESTERN INTERVENTION in their region. Should we not be marginally aware of the thoughts and feelings of Muslim and Arabs on these issues? I must stress this point: History did not begin on 9-11. US government forces, secret operatives, and US surrogates have been killing Muslims for many decades now, in very large numbers. I have not even mentioned the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands in this context, which will add further fuel to flame of Muslim indignation. One-sided US support of the Israeli side, is well known, and needs no explanation here.

    The point here is not to blame the US for all the ills of the world, but to become aware of some basic facts. Americans are all aware of the barbarism of certain leaders in the Muslim world, and the atrocities committed by those termed "terrorists." Unfortunately, most Americans have a limited understanding of what US governments and surrogates have done in the Muslim world over the past half century.

    Torture by music is a “tip of the iceberg,” so to speak. But is it not symptomatic of the larger ills?

  • --- I thank all participants in this thread for their contributions. Allow me to reply to as many points as I can raised by recent posts ---

    Bob Porter said, “Torture may be a subject of debate. But to somehow imply that the use of music as a torture device can and will or should change our ideas about music is strange to me.” It may seem strange. But there is nothing wrong with that. The author of the article is a musicologist, and the Journal of the Society of American Music is a reputable periodical. What seems strange to the author, and to me, is the FACT that the US government has systematically used something that we all love—namely, music—to torture people. You said, “I love music. It is very important to me. But I have no control over it. Who writes what, who listens to what, and why. Nor do I want any such control.” You ostensibly have control over whether the US government funds torture operations. I think your statement might reflect an abdication of your responsibilities as a citizen, a taxpayer and as a person who is knowledgeable about music and dedicated to the proper uses of music. What I find “strange” is that—rather than say, “I love music, and because I love music so much, I do not approve of the CIA’s use of it to torture people”—you say instead, you find the raising of the issue strange. You said, “There are so many other things that are so much more important that we should worry about. …” I reply: If we (members of a “Composers Forum,” dedicated to the exploration, propagation, creation and enjoyment of music) DO NOT THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT, then who will? If citizens of the US and the UK (the UK used the same tactic on detained alleged IRA terrorists, so they are implicated as well)… if they do not object, and pretend they have no control, when THEIR TAX MONEY is being used to fund such things, then who should object? Only the victims? You ended, saying, “So this topic gets a yawn from me.” If you want to yawn while revelations about a thoroughgoing and horrific travesty against MUSIC ITSELF has taken place, then you have the right to yawn, of course.

    Michael Diemer said, “I'll take Tiptoe Through the Tulips over Yummy Yummy Yummy I got Love In My Tummy any day. In fact, I find myself waxing agreeably nostalgic when I think of the shampoo-obsessed Timster with his gorgeous locks crooning out that strikingly original masterpiece on The Ed Sullivan Show. I hope he's resting comfortably, ukulele on his chest.” In principle, I agree. I merely said, I don’t want to force anyone to listen to Tiny Tim’s song if he doesn’t want to hear it. And I said that I don’t want people to be bound, shackled in their underwear (or stripped naked), chained to one spot in a totally dark room being subjected to “ear-splittingly” loud music for days on end. It seems we don’t disagree on that.

    Kristofer said, “Ondib, I'd beg to differ.” We may differ, but there is nothing wrong with that. I thought we differed substantially more than we actually did before, on one or more topics, but later I discovered that I was wrong, or that I exaggerated our differences. Perhaps we should be cautious, since accidental mischaracterizations might arise due to the general human tendency to inadvertently simplify. Now, you said, “You are a political zealot and leftist for sure.” I doubt seriously I would quite qualify for membership in either the zealot camp or the leftist camp. Perhaps I could be qualified as a Neo-Platonic, Parmenidean, Spinozistic, Neo-Kantian, Hegelio-Kropotkinist, DeChardinian, Tolstoyist, Bergsonian, Gandhi-ist, Jungian, Proto-Post-Taoist, Zen Buddhistic-Vedantin, Debordian-Situationniste, Messiaenic, Xenakisian, Scelsci-ite, broadly speaking. But just how seriously should we take any such labels? Depending on the particular issue, I might be considered reactionary, conservative, moderate, liberal, progressive, radical or revolutionary in the opinion I might profess. I am not a member of any organized political party or sectarian religious grouping, nor do I subscribe to any specific ideology, since I like to learn (and ideologies tend to inhibit both learning and thinking). What I said above, regarding US and Western militarism is neither leftist nor rightist, nor at all unusual in the world-at-large. I have heard similar views from the far right nationalists in other countries, and from the far left, and from all parts of the political spectrum in between. There is no hatred in anything I said. I simply think militarism is not logical or beneficial. If we were talking about the history of the Russian militarism, the oppression of people in Chechnya or in Eastern Europe, my comments would be similar. But since many of us are “US citizens,” or “UK citizens” (I am half-English, and half-American, by descent, if that makes any difference), I think it’s good to take a somewhat contrarian view. It’s all too easy to lambast Arabs and Muslims; in fact, that’s what US media try to train American citizens to do on a regular basis.

    Regarding your incorrect supposition that I am a “leftist” and/or a “zealot,” you say, “Not a problem with that, by the way, but let's call a spade a spade here.” I didn’t know this was a conversation about “leftists” (or about “spades”). I thought it was mainly about the Senate Report on CIA torture and surrounding issues. People on the left and the right, as well as moderates, appear to have difficulties with endorsing CIA torture, US military interventions and related policy issues. Do you have any problems endorsing these things? Perhaps you don’t endorse them at all, but simply have a problem with the idea of opposing CIA torture and US militarism a bit too emphatically. Maybe you could clarify your position.

    You asserted, “The US hasn't been guilty of more or less offense against mankind than any other people or group, but shares the ignominy of having done so exceedingly well.” I don’t know how you could prove that. I think the US government has killed far more people, even in proportion to the US population, than the Inuit peoples have. Was Martin Luther King wrong when he said, “My government is the greatest purveyor of violence” in the world during the late 60’s, just before his assassination? Would it be wrong to make the same assertion about the US for the period from 1990 to 2006 or so? I think Switzerland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Costa Rica and a great many other nations have much less aggressive records than the US, UK, Russia, France and other would-be imperial powers. (Germany, Holland and Portugal, for instance). There is no logical or moral reason the CIA had to be complicit in the assassinations of Patrice Lumumba, Qassem, Sukharno, Salvador Allende, and so many others. There is no reason the US (during the Reagan era) had to kill tens of thousands of Nicaraguans, or lend support and give arms to governments that killed hundreds of thousands in Colombia, Guatemala and El Salvador. Excuses can be made of course. Likewise, there is no reason the CIA (the NSA, and the military) had to torture the individuals they did, and with MUSIC, NO LESS - - - DOES THAT NOT BOTHER YOU AT ALL, AS A MUSICIAN? Do you really want your tax money being used for that purpose? I am surprised you oppose me for pointing it out, and do not appear to oppose the government for committing the atrocity.

    You said, “Your bias on this is glaring to me.” If you think so, then perhaps you could challenge any of the factual information I presented above, with any statistics or information that you might have. You appear to want to make this about me, rather than about the issue. I do not claim to be entirely free from any bias whatsoever, but since (although I am a US citizen) I have spent ten years of my life living outside the US, and mostly in the so-called “developing world,” and because I read and speak French, Spanish and Turkish, and have a smattering of a few other languages, I cannot afford myself the luxury of adhering to a purely Anglo-centric view of the world.

    “You never come on here and rant about the suffering of Muslims at the hands of Muslims, their complicity in the African slave trade, their persecution of women, gays, or their intolerance for anyone or anything non-Muslim, for that matter.” I hope by the word “rant” you don’t simply refer to the expression of views that you may disagree with, politically, socially, or economically. The problems in the “Muslim World” are mostly for the Muslims themselves to fix, and it is unfortunate that US bombing, political interference and the killing of hundreds of thousands gives them one more excuse to focus on “us” as the problem. When we “leave them alone,” so to speak, they will be more likely to focus on the internal causes of their own societies’ shortcomings. I don’t disagree with the list you provide above. But that is their problem not ours to solve by bombing them into “our enlightened” way of thinking, or to coerce by economic means. Egypt, the largest Arab state in terms of population, is back to its dictatorial pattern, and no one can say that US continued funding (to the tune of many billions) of the Al-Sisi military dictatorship is NOT a factor in the re-establishment of Egyptian autocracy, as it was under Mubarak, just to cite one example of US neo-colonialism.

    “The crucial point is, you seemingly care more about hating the US, than you do about the welfare of Muslims.” As I said, previously (perhaps you missed that in the last post), this is not about “hating” the US. But allow me to stress the fact that since so many of us here are English speaking citizens of the “Anglo-American” world (mostly from the US or the UK), it appears fairly reasonable to put forward propositions that pertain to the duties of “Anglo-Americans.” One of these duties might be to engage in more constructive activities vis-à-vis the world than we do now as a collective socio-cultural group. In other words, we do not need to condone the mass killings perpetrated by the English speaking states (and their allies) in Iraq and Afghanistan. I notice you did not contest the FACT that the number of Arabs and Muslims killed by US military forces during the current era FAR exceeds the number of Westerners killed by Arabs and Muslims. (Hundreds of thousands, or even more than a million, as compared with mere thousands). Nor did you address the question, just how many governments have the US and UK overthrown in the region? You don’t appear to wish to address the actual facts I cited, the historical background or the larger questions I posed.

    “I suppose it only matters to you if European men, or Western powers, persecute these special groups, much like Sharpton is so very concerned if one black kid get shot by a white cop in Chicago, but seems perfectly content and even apathetic as the death toll rises every summer weekend in the ghetto.” If you want to discuss the issue of white police officers killing unarmed blacks, in what could very reasonably be called “disproportionate numbers,” then we could do that. Perhaps your decision to raise this issue is an indication of your own particular bias. (Perhaps it is not that at all, and you can correct me, since I could be totally wrong in even suggesting it). It’s easy to gauge. Just tell me how much of your time reading literature or consuming media information (proportionately) is spent on White Anglo-Saxon sources, European sources, Russian, Latin American, Middle Eastern, African, South Asian and East Asian sources. If you are spending more than 97% of your time consuming media, literature and information of one kind, and not any of the others, that may be skewing your views a bit. I mean, how can you even speak about Arabs or Muslims, if you have seldom read literature or news from their points of view, or if you have never lived amongst them? It’s not a deliberate bias on your part, I am sure. It’s just a bias you have not been able to overcome yet, perhaps due to a lack of will, or a lack of opportunity or effort. I may be completely wrong, of course, and for all I know, you have a doctorate in Middle Eastern Studies, and speak Arabic, Farsi, Kurdish and Azerbaijani with perfect fluency.

    “When you filter your entire world through a lens of hatred, you can not see things justly. That's you right now; that's Sharpton.” As I said, I have no hatred for anyone. I certainly have no hatred for any people or race either. If you see any sentence, or paragraph or phrase that appears to you to reflect hatred on my part, please point it out, and I will help you to see that it has nothing to do with hatred. I do disapprove of the military policy of the US government, which is not the same thing as “hating” anything; you appear to conflate criticism of a policy with some kind of hatred. But it’s common to refer to policy critiques as a kind of “hatred,” since it allows one to avoid the facts. Were there any facts I presented that you think are incorrect? Now if I were to jump to conclusions, as you seem to have done, I might say that you “hate” Al Sharpton, or that you “hate” Blacks more than you do members of other races. However, let me emphasize this point: I DO NOT draw any such conclusions. You likewise, might do well not to draw such conclusions about me as a person. I think, in spite of all the words poured out here, there is no way we can reasonably sum up our personalities and really “know” one another. We can only catch glimpses, and consequently, it would be all too easy for us to draw wrong conclusions.

    Kristofer Emerig said:

    Ondib, I'd beg to differ...

    Music Torture as a real phenomenon has been reconfirmed by the publication this past week of the Senate Report on CIA Torture: “The long-awaited Sena…
  • Ondib, as much as I like to debate various topics, I agree with Bob here.

    These 10 paragraph responses are a bit torturous.

    What is your main point?      RS

  • Hi Bob Porter. You said,

    “If you want to debate the issue of torture, than do it.”

    Thank you. I will then, if you have no serious objections.

    “To complain about the use of music as a torture device misses the wider point.”

    What do you think the “wider point” is? I respectfully suggest that people can reasonably differ about what point should be under discussion on a particular thread on a Composers Forum (or any forum for that matter).

    “Unless you can't figure out how to complain about torture on a music forum with out bringing in the music angle.”

    Might we think about this, and consider the following: This is a Composers Forum (I think we agree on that). Other web sites that deal specifically with music (Vox and the Web Site for the Journal of the American Society for Music) have posted detailed articles on this particular subject: the use of music by the CIA as a means of torture. [See links above, at the beginning of the thread].

    But you appear to want me to discuss the torture without “bringing out the music angle.” Or perhaps, since this is a music forum, the “music angle” should be stressed more, and gone into in more detail. Many musicians are themselves organizing and announcing their opposition (individually and collectively) to the practice of using music for the purposes of torture.

    It is an issue for the musical community, especially in light of the recent report released by the Senate. Do you have any reaction to these particular realities, in addition to telling me “the use of music misses the wider point?” If you would give your response the fact that music is being used by the government (probably with your tax payer money) and tell me what you think the “wider point” is, then that might be a good thing. I welcome all contributions to this discussion.

    [I will reply to Kristofer's missive shortly].

    Bob Porter said:


    If you want to debate the issue of torture, than do it. To complain about the use of music as a torture device misses the wider point. Unless you can't figure out how to complain about torture on a music forum with out bringing in the music angle.
    This domain may be for sale!
  • Hi Roger,

    As far as I can tell, based on what you said, I think we agree on all points having to do with this issue. That includes main points and minor points. Feel free to elaborate on any of the issues under discussion.

    You asked, "What is your main point?"

    My main points are that (1) US government policy on the use of music for the purposes of torture is misguided, grossly immoral and illegal; (2) that awareness of the issue should be promoted, and (3) that musicians and composers would do well to speak out against such misuses of music. Another subsidiary and important point is that (4) the issue of torture itself (using music or other means) would not be so pressing if the US had less aggressive and less interventionist foreign, military and economic policies.

    That's the concise summary.

  • Ondib, There is one HUGE point overlooked here.

    The US gov't. is NOT the people, in fact the US gov't.

    is not the US gov't. It has been hi-jacked by the elite bankers

    and the military/industrialists. Voting is a sham/scam.

    Apparently, the US media, for the most part is nothing but

    part of the propaganda and agenda facilitators.

    So let's focus on the real issue and not generalize.

     Look at the bright side..... the more air time,the more royalties....... kidding of course   RS

  • ...
    Thanks for your response, Michael D.

    You said,

    It's not an issue for me. I don't belong to a "music community."

    I think perhaps you do. You signed up and are a participating member of the Composers Forum which is an online community of musicians and composers. I don't think you will resign your membership in this community to make a point.

    "Besides, I would consider it an honor if my music were used to "torture" people intent on killing us in the most horrific ways possible, if that would save one American life."

    1. What if it were used to torture people who WERE NOT involved in any plan or effort to kill anyone. The CIA did torture, and use music to torture people who were completely innocent of crimes or any intent to commit crimes. In one case of "music torture," an American undercover agent was mistakenly captured and tortured using the very method of music torture that we are describing. (See links at beginning of the thread). He was tortured for several weeks. Do you think innocent Arab and Muslims should be tortured? Do you think innocent Americans should be tortured?

    2. One musician whose song was used for the purposes of torture said something like what you said, "I would be honored if my music were used, etc. etc. " He has recanted his statement, and said it was taken out of context. Perhaps he learned that many innocent people were tortured. (Also see links above for the story). Would you reconsider your statement, if you knew innocents were tortured under the policy?

    3. Even if "guilty" suspected or alleged terrorists were tortured using these methods, can you prove that one life would be saved? The report says that no lives were saved by the use of torture of any kind. Even CIA director Brennan said in a speech last week that we cannot know if torture has given us any useful information, so he therefore thinks it is NOT right to use torture any longer. He says he agrees with Obama, McCain and Feinstein that we should not be using torture.

    Perhaps the perception abroad that the US engaged in systematic torture would and will actually cost many more lives than it would save. Does that not seem more likely to you?

    michael diemer said:

    It's not an issue for me. I don't belong to a "music community."  Besides,  I would consider it an honor if my music were used to "torture" people intent on killing us in the most horrific ways possible, if that would save one American life.

    Ondib said:

    It is an issue for the musical community, especially in light of the recent report released by the Senate.

    Music Torture as a real phenomenon has been reconfirmed by the publication this past week of the Senate Report on CIA Torture: “The long-awaited Sena…
  • As I thought, Roger, I cannot really disagree with the views that you are expressing.

    Even so, I think it wise to denounce such policies. The more people denounce ear-splitting music torture committed against innocent people—as well as torture in general, war-mongering, imperialism and government excesses of all kinds—the more likely it is that people will become more aware. Larger numbers will refuse to participate in the evils (According to recent revelations, many CIA agents and officials actually refused to go along with torture regime). If fewer and fewer people denounce these evils, change will become even more difficult in both the medium and the long term.

    roger stancill said:

    Ondib, There is one HUGE point overlooked here.

    The US gov't. is NOT the people, in fact the US gov't.

    is not the US gov't. It has been hi-jacked by the elite bankers

    and the military/industrialists. Voting is a sham/scam.

    Apparently, the US media, for the most part is nothing but

    part of the propaganda and agenda facilitators.

    So let's focus on the real issue and not generalize.

     Look at the bright side..... the more air time,the more royalties....... kidding of course   RS

    Music Torture as a real phenomenon
  • Yes Ondib, I agree , the more people aware of crimes and atrocities

    should equate to a louder voice against them.

    Unfortunately, honest information is not always available for people

    to know factually what is really going on. That would take too much

    work for the average individual, concerned more with his or her

    daily life to research, and even with the internet, a common consenses would

    be a miracle. Most people,I think, would as usual, continue to bark

    about the symptoms without a clue as to how to focus a direct hit

    on the source and real cause of these crimes.

    So, how do you influence the decision makers, especially if they are

    rogue and have an agenda- and who would also not hesitate to eliminate

    you if you got in their way? I know, let's pass a law against it. Wait, that's been


    My advice, keep a pair of earplugs with you at all times.        RS


This reply was deleted.