#ending with the Antagonist Arrested By The Police So They Can Go To Jail. pictures that make u go hmmm | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

inappropriatefangirlneeds · 6 years ago

Text

Gotham s5ep8 “Nothing's Shocking” Personal Review

“Put a bow on it..” Warning spoilers below

Hello, old neglected characters, hello detective work and investigations, hello notion that doing bad stuff should have consequences. This sounds like an episode that I should really like but then it turned out to be EHHHHH .. why you gotta do me dirty like this? BARBARA KEAN & JIM GORDON Two guys are murdered at the Sirens and instead of doing the usual thing Barbara Kean is so kind as to tell the cops. But that´s about it. “Harvey, you're confusing me with someone who cares. I called you as a courtesy.” Jim Gordon has the audacity and idiocy to keep being an absolute asshole to Barbara. He thinks he got a part in the child´s life and Barbara´s reluctance about that becomes more and more understandable, not that it wasn´t already. And I say reluctance because we have had surprisingly little clear cut messages of Barbara telling Jim to get lost and that he won´t be a part. It´s usually, as it is now, her pointing out how he presses for this. Would Barbara want a Jim that cares for and about the child, but preferable one that recognizes her as more than a horriblepersonTM. She tried to talk about the pregnancy with Jim but he didn´t give her a chance to not make it public like that. I feel like they keep this notion in that she would be open to have Jim in their life, as long as Jim gets his stupid act together?! At this point I should probably mention the shittyJimLine of this week: “You should think about what kind of person you want to be when it does. It's a chance for you to start anew.” And context matters. Jim says that right there in the moment where Barbara Kean cared and helped the GCPD. She could have just gotten rid of the bodies and have had none of these troubles. Jim is actually acknowledging zero of this. This is infuriating. Granted there´s a point to be made about her usual method of burying bodies is not the behaviour of a outstanding citizen but who has that in that show. Also give credit where credit is due! And Barbara for sure deserves at least a thank you! She says the only right thing: “I like who I am.” And I like who she is too, not so much some of the hers that they had her be but right now she really rocks. And Harvey Bullock´s “That sounds like Barbara” just highlights this. The show provided us with two Barbara´s right next to each other, one pleading Jim to save her and fulfilling this tired stereotype and one with agency and personality, I guess it´s clear with one is preferable. Later Barbara returns. Partly because “I thought I'd be a good citizen.” she got some more information to tell them. Knowing Bullock might be a target certainly might have been very useful in another turn of events. So she´s actually being helpful. But all Jim´s probably going to see is her selfish motive. Although I don´t even want to say it´s selfish, her words illustrate really well how precarious her situation actually is. Can you blame her for at least trying to get clarity on that. And she´s even really civil about it, this could have been played very differently. I feel like she´s not there to accuse Jim of this line of behaviour but to figure out if he would do something like that, which isn´t really an unreasonable thought after all. And it kind of feeds my suspicion that they let her act with that underlying notion of it would be nice to have a father but only one that´s decent. But I guess Jim´s not going to see it that way? But at least I doubt that something like this was something he considered doing. Since Walker and her military unit seem to be out of the picture and they were after all antagonists for Jim he indeed wouldn´t have any clue if this list was just a Walker thing or if current authorities would keep that list up. But, but I do also think if things played out like that Jim wouldn´t hesitate to benefit from the situation. “Listen what you said before, about me being a known criminal. I was on some list your army buddy had. When the government rolls in, am I gonna be arrested?” “Honestly, I don't know.” “But that would work out for you, right? I go to jail. You get the baby.” “I don't want that. Is that a promise? “ HARVEY BULLOCK and JIM GORDON being insufferable pt2 “I felt it. I said something, and they told me to keep my trap shut, just close the case, put a bow on it. After a while, I stopped feeling it. And I went down that path for a long time until I met you.” “What do you want from me, Harvey? Forgiveness? Can't give that to you.” “I just needed you to know.” Okay so I used to be much more forgiving with this stuff but this week they just went overboard with the misguided righteousness of Jim Gordon. Not only his act with Barbara but with Bullock too. Don´t get me wrong “benching” Bullock in this case was justified, and this puzzle piece of the past that Bullock revealed was interesting and well made, but right at the moment when they make it look like Harvey needs or should care for absolution from Jim Gordon everything just crashes into a wall. Jim IS right he can´t give forgiveness, not when he himself has so much to ask for forgiveness for, but that´s not how they played this line. [There really isn´t anything to add about the absurdities of judgmental Jim Gordon that @sunlitroom hasn´t already written down] JANE CARTWRIGHT “That's when Jane Doe was born.” I liked the investigation stuff about this. First we get Jim being a dickhead. Having recognized how much distress this would put her in he tells her she can only keep her mask if she talks, if not she´s going to forcibly remove it from her face. But at least when he figures that the person does not identify with Cartwright anymore he at least switches to a more sympathetic approach. I liked that much more. “Me? Nothing happened to me.” “Okay. What happened to Jane?” It slightly reminds me of KAREN JENNINGS both could have become really interesting cases if they had gotten more time. It was pretty clear from the start that Jane´s face would be fine, because well what else. And I kind of appreciate it that they didn´t have Bullock blurt that out, or try to convince her things are fine cause she got nice skin or something. At least they kept it clear what this character and her issues were about. It seems that the acts of the police guy took a toll on her but she didn´t turn “that bad” until Strange´s experiments. I think it would have been interesting to keep her around (see I still don´t want to hear about the cancellation) and go a bit deeper into who is “at fault” here. Instead of Bullock just shooting here. Obviously both police and “medic” malpractice seem to basically go hand in hand here. I didn´t full get the “You made Jane into a killer. You and your friends. There have to be consequences.” Line? Was this about her killing the police men, or about her testifying against her parent? Or caused Strange to do her anything else, which ultimately was the guys fault too cause they cause her to be a warden of the state and got here into Arkham? Also the following “You killed three men already.” “When is it enough? When you're dead.” Could make for good meta comparing the REVENGE AND GUILT CIRCLE that surrounds Oswald Cobblepot. The cases are different enough that this would be interesting “Ask your friend” If they had just omitted her remarks in the Sirens scene or something I think this line could have had much more impact. Sure for Jane it was probably important that the police guys knew why they were murdered but if we as a audience had just gotten something more vague and in general more vagueness after I think this spotlight shift on Bullock could have been so much more dramatic. * HUGO STRANGE “was obsessed with the power to change. The way a chameleon would change its skin. He wanted humans to have that power. He made it so Jane could change her skin her bones, her hair, the color of her eyes. All it takes is a single touch, and her body becomes a mirror. When it's done, she sheds her skin and starts anew. It remembers everyone it touched. It's touched you, Detective.” I wonder if this skillset was a particular objective of the COURT OF OWLS. I remember them pestering him for results, but not quite which one? Or was this more a personal interest of Hugo Strange, but now it seems he´s following other kinds of things so maybe not unless the current situation forces him as well to focus on doing things that clients pay him for. After all for an organisation like the Court of Owls that would be a very valuable skill. BRUCE WAYNE & ALFRED PENNYWORTH So a woman tells them about a monster and missing people, they contemplate telling Jim Gordon but recognize he´s got all hands full. So they just walk through icky, toxic puddles until someone runs into them scared of someone coming. I want to scream at them why are you still there, get the man out of this place and into safety, he told you the others were dead, that´s what you here for. Why even did he stop running? And indeed he seems to be in danger for a while but luckily at the end he makes it out. Which is nice, if only Jane and Penn could have had the same fate. So then about this one particular conversation between them: “We should've went to Gordon from the start. We were reckless.” “Ah, that's nonsense. We took decisive action. We saved a man's life. The people in this city have suffered, Master Bruce. They need someone that will protect them.” “I agree. But there are better ways to find absolution. “I, um, I don't follow.” “What happened to Wayne Manor wasn't your fault. I know you've been blaming yourself. You didn't destroy our home, Alfred.” “But I feel like I did. I feel like I wasn't strong enough to fight Tetch or that bastard Valeska. I feel like because of my weakness, you lost your last tie to the past. You lost your home, Master Bruce. I must never be that weak again.” “Part of being a family is that we can be strong for each other.” “And when did you get so smart? I had a good teacher.” I don´t follow, why would Alfred look for absolution with getting Bruce into another dangerous situation? Wouldn´t he like maybe send Bruce to tell Jim about it and run off to try handle the situation himself or something? Also holy shit batman, that´s how you get batman. Alfred telling Bruce straight away that the people need someone, aka.Bruce to protect them that´s, that´s a hand full. Especially in this context of Bruce talking about how it might have been better to involve the police. Like he downright says: This was reckless. We should have told the police. But Alfred is like No! I get that the “nonsense” comment is meant to deflect any doubt that they didn´t cause good and that´s not a bad notion but maybe something at least like, an argument about how going to the police and get them to act would have taken longer and the husband would have gotten ripped to shreds by the time they would have been there .. or some reasoning would be easier to stomach than a .. NO! Go turn into batman! Vigilante Justice RuleZ.

Also Noticeable with Harvey Bullock & Jim Gordon it´s FORGIVENESS and with Bruce & Alfred it ABSOLUTION there´s got to be some meta in this, it certainly links back to the Bruce/Jim contrasts and parallels … Just that we have Harvey arguably having done something wrong (or at least not right) looking for forgiveness from someone who has no business giving that. And then there is absolution that can´t be given because it´s not necessary cause Alfred has no business feeling guilty because it wasn´t his fault.

Sooooooooooo then this last bit. Getting MR. PENN back was a blessing, after word spread I was worried that I wouldn´t like the Mr. SCARFACE stuff but I actually really enjoyed how they set that up but now I hate that they gave and took a second later. Bring him back again you fools! So Mr. Penn just woke up in the GCPD morgue after being shot and patched himself up. Surely, he can do that again after being shot by Ed? Right? Riight? I am not happy about Penn´s death 2.0. This was so unnecessary but I should have seen it coming right away. They started the scene with Oswald pointing out Edward´s “paranoia” which Edward promptly counters with saying there IS someone watching them. Which is why he has the alarm bells. It should keep people out. No one else allowed. Nygma is not happy at all that Oswald brought the muscle in and I feel like if the “mute and dumb as a post” line had not hit right in Edward´s superiority complex (like what kind of threat is a dumb person to him .. ) he would have taken measures against this guys presence if not right away then soon. But it seems pretty clear that EDWARD NYGMA just won´t tolerate anyone else on this project. This apart form the construction work seems to be the strongest focus he has. Moreover Mr. Penn is not only just some random intruder. When Penn talks to Oswald about the “treasure” he lowers his voice and his gazes at Edward make clear that he´s still treating this as a secret between Oswald and himself. There is a connection that is a threat to Edward, and I guess if he didn´t decide right away that was the moment that sealed the deal. Like as long as he was just some lunatic Edward was ready to just do his own thing and have Oswald deal with this nuisance (fitting considering Oswald just gave a speech that proclaimed he´d been working on just quite those kinds of issues) Which in NYGMOBBLEPOT terms makes me wonder how much acting and how much truth was in Edward´s words. Granted even if he chooses to say what he said as a strategy early on then this does not negate it being things he thinks as well, but it might not been that conscious?! Using people and spitting them out, Oswald deserving this, him being opportunistic, shaky loyalty, selfish and hurting others that´s all things Edward might actually agree with. And at that point of tangled emotional personal relationship mess I just got to link to @littlehollyleaf because this post says everything about 1.) Ed possibly recognizing something from himself in Penn, with a personality that manifests in parts, 1a.) which he recognizes considering his own issues as a persistent threat despite the “free” revelation, 1b.) hostility due to projected self loathing 2.) Jealousy and preceding incidents of this liking (Butch and him rivaling over Oswald) 3.) With 1 & 2 combined you get a parallel of Penn/Ed caring for Oswald, then being treated not so nicely, then resentment and later Oswald as someone that “fixes” their split 1b.) then would also be the rejection that Ed is a “lunatic” like that Nevertheless, Oswald talking about being alone, claiming seeing/recognizing Penn for what he was must be worth something culminates in the Nygmobblepottery that his Edward throwing this idea right back at Oswald and claiming that Oswald sees and accepts him for what he is which means their friendship works and they got some common ground [Eh idk, if it would work, would Ed feel threatened that easily .. just saying .. ] Anyway recognizing and valuing people for what they are?! Did I say I love Oswald, lately cause I do. Is Edward right though? ~~ If Oswald wasn´t loyal at all I feel like a lot of people would be dead by now, isn´t he the one plagued by betrayals. But then again if Jim shared his “BarbaraBad”Goggles then I guess this could be seen as Oswald just keeping them around for selfish reasons, like he would only protect people because he thinks he can use them later, or like as trust investment that pays off later. ~~ Does Oswald deserve this? Eh, with Penn I´m leaning towards a firm kindaish ~~ Cold Logician? Eh, Edward is more an emotional drama bitch? EDIT: Yes @vampirebillionare got to the root of this issue: while I think Ed isn’t quite right about him being a “cool logician” that’s the only way he knows how to phrase “I’m not good with feelings and sometimes I’m going to do what I think is best or what I feel compelled to do even if it hurts you, but you understand that about me and you’re still here” ~~ I am 100% convinced Oswald remembered PENN´s name. It was just the Doylist thing that the original Ventriloquists name was Arnold Wesker, and while this is a nice nod, Oswald would have remembered the name, fight me! ~~ Edward saying “Dummy” is awesome because not only does it sound like he´s insulting Oswald but it also totally reminds of the corrective “IsabellA” Back to MR. PENN AND SCARFACE I actually really loved this. Because Mr. Penn getting a puppet that says what he can´t is really relatable. He can just outsource and shift all the blame on Scarface. It was even the puppet that found him! Not the other way round! Wonderful. And as short as it was and even despite them showing us nothing of the transition period, I would vote this as one of the better origin stories. Like it´s got more going on than being “aged” and being “aged again”. I feel like I understand that someone like Penn could get out of his turtle shell by proxy like that. You still have this “he” wouldn´t ever do that, and a preservation of his character but also enough change to buy that he´s acting differently now. There´s also a great focus on motivation and personal relationship. Maybe it´s due to his profession that he kept track of everything that well and can list all of Oswald´s shortcomings but it just feels like what happened gets accounted for. Like all those other messes where characters pretty much must have had some blind eyes to act like they did, I don´t think that would fly with Penn. Related to the change, just basically dying is a good “trigger” point. I absolutely buy that this would get him to a point where he is like. Look where everything got me so far. Time for something different. Just that he´s aiming for something that he doesn´t really want, something that he isn´t really. He doesn´t want what Oswald has and does but obviously he´s had no tools to demand the recognition that he wanted before and at that point that whole horse has left the barn so it´s understandable that he wouldn´t just go straight back to status quo and some more demands but to a new thing altogether. Althought it´s not so new entirely, cause there still is this issue of who he is and what he actually wants. And because isn´t Scarface partly an Oswald substitute?! First of all the introduction goes straight from “Mr. Cobblepot this is Mr. Scarface.” don´t tell me that´s not a parallel. (In 4x14 I think he consistently calls Don Falcone ~Don~ Falcone, there´s also no reason Scarface had to have a Mr. before his name … ) Then just the “Mr. Scarface is very persuasive.” I know it´s also a reflex of shifting the blame, if Scarface is good at what he´s doing, Penn just got no other chance but it also used to be one of Oswald´s defining qualities. And then of course it´s Oswald comparing himself to Scarface and pointing out even if he was manipulative he was not as horrible with it than Scarface is. While pointing out they have different goals/methods he´s basically acknowledging that they got something in common for a moment. It´s just amazing how Scarface on the one hand is an ENABLER that should “free” Penn from the likes of Oswald Cobblepot but at the same time he´s subjecting himself to quite a similar dynamic/relationship because that´s what he actually wants. Also OSWALD COBBLEPOT in this. I love how he goes from chiding Nygma for “playing along with his psychosis” right to “The dummy was the threat” aka to actually “believing” the content of said psychosis. Or like rather understanding why the dummy is there and how it works for Penn. Aka. seeing he in fact doesn´t want murder/gold/beingboss. So of course in between there´s Oswald figuring out something about Mr. Penn. The dummy is indeed the threat, Oswald doesn´t have to care about the “treasure” and “being boss”. Scarface isn´t there to grant Penn this, and this is when Oswald targets the relationship. He recognized that this isn´t what Penn is or wants and he´s ready to treat Scarface as a different entity to undermine their relationship. He understands that Scarface ins some way actually is forcing Penn. Pointing out that he, knowing Penn would never asked something so severe of him works, saying that he accepted him for who he is and valued him for that and not something that he isn´t works too. And omg him shooting the dummy was such a good moment. Can we just, honour their relationship and start over at “Mr. Cobblepot you freed me, how can I ever thank you” Because Oswald Cobblepot had a prime chance to be every nasty thing that has just been said about him. Not even that, he could just shoot the man that pointed a pistol at him and not load to much guilt on his shoulders because that´s what you get going around pointing guns at people, so I wouldn´t even call that overly nasty.. Yet he does NOT do that. That´s got to be worth something, give it room to grow. And moreover Penn says he was ALONE waking up in the gcpd I wonder if Oswald intentionally threw that bit about him being Alone in too, cause Oswald indeed feels alone (just all that “only friend” talk the past episode) and Penn did too , so much he fixed himself another Oswald .. PENN & NYGMOBBLE RELEVANT QUOTES ** “That's where Mr. Scarface found me.” “And he told me all about you. How you used him. Chewed him up and spat him out. Treated him like a palooka!” “That's a lie!” “Oh, please, Oswald. It's what you do.” “Arnold, Arthur. What do you want?” “I don't want anything. But Mr. Scarface, well he wants your treasure. And to be boss.” ** “What am I doing? I'm talking to a doll.” “Dummy.” “Seriously?” “ You know what, Oswald? Honestly, you deserve this.” “Nobody asked you.” “You are opportunistic, your loyalty is shaky, at best, and you will hurt anyone, anyone to get what you want.” ** “I cannot believe that you told him about the sub. And that you're playing along with his psychosis.” “Obviously, he was gonna kill you. I bought us time.” ** “You accuse me of manipulating you, but what about him? I never asked you to kill anybody.” “That is true.” ** “And yes, I was not a good friend. To you or to anyone. It's why I'm alone. But I saw you for what you are, and I valued that. That must be worth something.” ** “Why did you do that? He wasn't the threat. The dummy was the threat.” Oswald. I accept you for the person that you are. Just as you accept me for the cold logician that I am. That's why this friendship is great. And as friends, I think we can both agree that that lunatic had to be stopped.” “Perhaps, Edward we really are meant for each other.” ** “Mr. Cobblepot. You freed me. How can I ever thank you? “ MORE RANDOM NICE LINES * “And as safe as I feel with your jingle bell contraption in place, I went out and procured us some muscle. You're welcome.” Teamwork is a two way street, just sometimes you got to ride that one street to recognize that it´s indeed rocky, * “I've been working on the sonar, which, turns out, is far more complex than I anticipated.” “Well, I am confident you will figure it out.” “Of course I will figure it out.” I´m glad they recognize that building a whole submarine from scratch just can´t happen like that, not even with Ed, * “He?Who?” It sounded like that one meme that I can´t spell, I´m still giggling * “Penn, show these dewdroppers we're serious.” “palooka” “ventilate that mook” “applesauce” “Now let´s talk turkey turkeys” ~~ Someone needs to write about Mr. Scarface´s dated vocabulary //gotham language// * “Shut it! Let the smart one talk.” * “After you get your tiny wooden hands on that treasure”

* “Then no” The scene between HARVEY BULLOCK and his old partner DIX and all the guilt but also comapssion involved was incredibly well done and emotional. I just wish they hadn´t gotten rid of the character.

#gotham #gotham meta #oswald cobblepot #edward nygma #Mr. Penn #gotham s5ep8 Nothing's Shocking #mine Gotham full episode reviews #gotham language

18 notes · View notes

scripttorture · 6 years ago

Note

Hi. I'm working on a story set in the mid 1950s, taking place in Hong Kong, and this is a bit complicated. I am looking for some help on a torture that will not work, and a method of torture that was used in WW2 to various effects. The situation is that my protagonist is a freelance investigator and he is captured by a rich Western idiot who honestly believes in "civilised" torture, which is the bit that I know cannot and will not work 1/HK

2/HK The person holding him prisoner decides to use some sort of clean, civilised, and scientific (all the things that do not work and do not exist) as a form of torture. Basically the type of guy who has watched one too many movies. He has a couple of flunkies to help him, who think he is an idiot too, but he pays well. What is going to happen is that after a few sessions of the unworkable my Protag basically laughs in the antagonists face and it ends up with him just losing his temper and3/HK and just starting beating on the protagonist with a lump of wood. The reason the protagonist not only finds the previous "civilised" torture to be ludicrous is that they were previously a POW of the Japanese after the fall of Singapore in the war. So, having set the scene I am asking if you can please give me some info on what my protagonist may have suffered during those years from Singapore to the time of liberation. And4/HK And also, and I acknowledge you might not be able to help here, maybe some ideas for what the antagonist might use as a form of civilised and scientific torture. The sort of thing that is ineffective and which is something that someone raised on the idea of being above such inelegant matters as just trying to beat information out of someone with a lump of wood, until they lose their temper. The antagonist is in their mid 20s and Upper Class English, my protag is in his mid 40s. Thank you.

Ithink I can help you out here. :)

Sofirst off I think you should look Ronald Searle’s book of wardrawings Tothe Kwai and Back.Searle was captured in Singapore shortly after he’d joined theBritish army and he drew his experience, both of the fall ofSingapore and his time as a Japanese POW. This includes depictions oftorture, mutilation, death and starvation.

Manyof the drawings are available online. Sometimes they’re accompaniedby Searle’s summation of the picture and a date. Sometimes not.

Obviouslythey only record one man’s experience, but as a quick visual primerto the experience of Japanese POWs they work very well.

Oneof the things Searle records is that he was moved about quite a bit.Between both prisons and forced labour projects. Searle ended up inChangi at first, but I’m unsure how many non-Western prisoners wereheld there. He also records that an estimated 20,000 Chinese andMalay civilians were killed when the Japanese invaded Singapore. Someof them were shot, others were beheaded and beatings even outside ofimprisonment seem to have been common.

Idon’t know a lot about the cultural factors behind the racistviolence Japan engaged in at this time. But I do know that ethnicChinese people often seem to have borne the brunt of it. It’spossible that particular targetted abuses were used againstparticular groups of people. From the sources I have at the moment Ihaven’t seen anything as a repeated pattern, at least not alongcultural, linguist, religious, racialor ethnic lines.

Thatsaid I know I could have more detailed sources dealing with thatperiod of history. I could be missing something.

Asit is I’m going to suggest things based on a combination of whathappened to people arrested in Singapore at the time and whathappened to captured troops in Singapore.

Starvationwas widespread. Unsanitary and overcrowded prison conditions werecommon. As a result of this combination disease was rife. Infections,parasites, dysentery, diarrhoeal diseases and diseases ofmalnutrition were particularly common.

Unethicalmedical experimentation occurred in Japanese occupied areas but I’venever seen any mention of it in Singapore.

Rejalidescribes the following as reported in Singapore during World War 2.Burning tortures with cigarettes and heated irons, forced kneeling onsharp objects, pumping with water, beatings, suspension, floggingwith knotted ropes or bamboo and electrical torture using a magneto.All of those were common throughout Japanese occupied territory.Additionally there was the practice of putting needles underfingernails, seated stress positions and ‘twisting of limbs’which I’m guessing was similar to the British practice of ‘dorsalflexing’.

There’salso a description of putting ‘sharp edged wood between fingers’but the description isn’t detailed enough for me to feel confidentI know how this was done.

Someof those probably require a little more explanation.

Asfar as I can tell pumping, kneeling on sharp objects, burningtortures and suspension all had a long history in Japan.

I’mnot confident that suspension was analogous to the Italian practicebut I could do with more native Japanese descriptions of the practiceto confirm that. The impression I get is that in Japan victims werebound with their hands in front of them, hoisted up and left there.In Italy victims were bound with their hands behind their backs,hoisted and dropped which dislocated the shoulders and causes furtherdamage as they were hoisted again.

Themethod I think the Japanese were using would also have dislocated theshoulders but this would have happened more slowly.

Kneelingon sharp objects often occurred with weights placed on the top of thevictim’s legs (the upper line if you picture their legs as a

Pumpingis forcing a victim to swallow large amounts of liquid. To the pointof causing visible and very painful swelling in the abdomen. Victimswere sometimes beaten around the gut afterwards or had their legsbent in front of their chests and pressure applied. This could cause-basically liquid to come out of just about every orifice. This is amessy, smelly, painful practice that could be done without leavingobvious outward marks or scars.

Searledoesn’t report pumping. Which doesn’t mean it didn’t occuraround him.

Hedescribes (in Singapore) beatings, starvation, summary executions,forced marches, forced labour, forced standing, exposure to theelements and unsanitary conditions. He notes that the jail he was in,Changi, was not run by the Kempei-tai who controlled Outram Road.Searle’s impression was that few people survived Outram Road.

Ihaven’t got anything definite on Outram Road.

Takingthe general practices Rejali and Searle reports I think it’s safeto say that your torturer character probably wouldn’t considerburning, pumping, beatings or flogging, ‘clean, civilised andscientific’.

Butthere’s a few things the Japanese used that your character wouldprobably consider to be these things andoverlap with British torture practices at the time.

Forcedexercise and stress positions have been practiced by the British fora long time. I’vegot a description of some of the more modern variants here.

Electricaltorture isn’tgenerally common British practice, but a character in this timeperiod, with this background may well consider it more ‘advanced’and want to experiment with it. Which could result in him doingexactly the same thing as the Japanese.

Magnetoswere still relatively common in the 50s. They’re… big metalthings with cranks on the side that were used to generate power forfield telephones and other equipment. As a result they were common inpolice stations and any army units during this period.

Magnetotorture was common in France (and used by the French). It was alsopretty common in America. The result is that a British villain whodidn’t know much about Asian history (recent or otherwise) mightthink of magneto’s as a ‘European’ and ‘advanced’ form ofabuse.

Theexact positions the British tend to use for forced standing aredifferent to the Japanese, but the entire thing is similar enoughthat the victim could easily see his attacker’s posturing as acomplete joke.

Thestress positions and forced exercise in particular have a longhistory in the British army. Which is relevant to your characterbecause many members of the ruling classes in Britain do some armytraining which would expose them to these practices. They were often(and unfortunately still are) used against new recruits.

It’sunlikely the character would realise just how old these practices arein the British army. My experience is that most Brits now aresurprised by how old these practices are. History lessons that are….let’s say concerned with a narrative of progression- tend toemphasise the bloodier punishments of the past and gloss over whenexactly they were phased out.

OverallI think you've got the makings of a good scene here. And potential touse the shared points in Japanese and British modernhistorical torture to further support the scene.

Ihope this helps. :)

Disclaimer

#tw torture #tw genocide #World War 2 #Japanese torture #historical torture #Britain #Japan #tw racism #torture apologia #electrical torture #beating #flogging #pumping #forced labour #Anonymous

26 notes · View notes

kacydeneen · 5 years ago

Text

Estranged Husband of Missing Conn. Mom Says 'Truth Will Come Out'

Fotis Dulos knows what the public thinks of him, and has a message for them: Wait until the facts come out.

"I know what I've done, I know what I haven't done," Dulos said in an exclusive interview with NBC 4 New York. "I have to stand and fight and hope the truth is going to come out."

Exhaustive Trash Facility Search Ends With No Sign of Missing Conn. Mom

It was Dulos' first interview since the disappearance of his estranged wife, Jennifer Dulos, more than a month ago. She went missing after dropping their five children off at school.

Fotis Dulos and his girlfriend Michelle Troconis — who he said he still loves and thinks she still loves him, though her attorneys have filed a no-contact order — have pleaded not guilty to evidence tampering and hindering prosecution charges in connection with the May 24 disappearance of the New Canaan mom. Police says Fotis Dulos and Troconis discarded items containing Jennifer Dulos' blood in Hartford.

While he understands why people are interested in the case, Fotis Dulos wants people to wait before they label him a "monster."

"I think they should wait. I have faith in the system, and in the police and the legal system, and hopefully we’ll have some answers soon," Dulos said. "I never follow the tabloids, and I don't care about the threats. I don't care about malicious comments and about comments from people who don't know me."

"They take the narrative that they see from the arrest, the arrest warrants, what has been reported in the press. And they draw their own conculsion, and I've already been convicted in their mind."

Dulos said he has been shocked at what has gone on over the past month, saying he never thought he would be arrested or have to spend time in jail, calling the whole thing and the prospect of facing more charges a "very scary experience."

"When it all started, I said this cannot be true, I must be dreaming," Dulos said. "I’m wearing orange, I'm in a cell … this cannot be true."

Despite not believing what was going on in his life, Dulos does not blame police or the criminal justice system.

"I think with information they had, they did best they could, I understand they had tremendous pressure on them," Dulos told News 4. "Statistically when this happens, 90 or 95 percent (of the time) it’s the spouse. So I understand why people feel like this."

"It's 90 percent, it's not 100 percent — I'm in the 5 or 10 percent," he quickly added.

The kids have been staying with Gloria Farber, Jennifer Dulos' mother, under armed bodyguard protection in Manhattan since she vanished, and Farber has filed for sole custody. Fotis Dulos remains banned from contact with them, which he views as unfair and said has been very hard for him, but added they remain his main concern.

"It’s been very different ... Been a very tough time for the whole family, we’re all worried about Jennifer," Dulos said. "I’m worried very much about the kids and what they're going through ... I want to tell them to hang in there. It’s a big challenge in our lives. Things will work out and everything will be alright eventually."

"It’s heartbreaking," Dulos said about not having contact with his kids. "This is a very tough time I'm sure they have a lot questions ... I'm sure they're missing their mom, I'm sure they're missing their dad."

Dulos said that he sends his prayers to Jennifer's family, and any notion that he wished her ill is "ludicrous."

"I had my differences with Jennifer like many people do when they go through a marriage, but that doesn’t mean that I wish her ill in any way ... I never wanted Jennifer out of the way."

Dulos detailed his interactions with Jennifer during the final weeks before her disappearance, painting a more optimistic picture as the couple was still in the midst of their ugly divorce and custody battle — saying he and his lawyer were starting to get hopeful an agreement on joint custody could soon be reached.

"The interesting thing was the last month, I tried many times to make an opening and start communicating with her directly, and that didin’t go anywhere in the past. But about mid-April she responded, and we started talking directly," said Dulos. "We started talking about possibly going into mediation, she recognized that she was taken by her lawyers, and the dynamic started changing. We started having good communications, good conversations. We made a rule that if we got onto a subject that we didn’t agree, we would park it so we don’t make it antagonistic."

Fotis claimed the two had even were cordial with each other when they met a couple times to drop off their kids, describing a time Jennifer invited him to stay and have his meal with the children on the back patio of her home the Wednesday before she vanished.

Since his wife went missing, Fotis said he is the one who is "screwed up right now, in a big way."

"I don’t have my kids, Jennifer is not around, Michelle is not around, I’m having a hard time with work. I have a GPS on my foot. Somebody has to look at who is the one worst effected in this situation," he said.

His sister came publicly to his defense earlier Tuesday, saying in a statement emailed to NBC that Fotis Dulos wants nothing more than to know his 50-year-old wife and mother of his five children is well and able to return to their kids.

"Is it relevant for you to know that I have only known my brother to be just that; a loving and affectionate sibling and the greatest of uncles for my two daughters? The life line to a large degree of both our immediate and extended family?" Rena Dulos wrote. "Is it relevant to point out that Fotis — from a very young age — desired to be a father? To be a caretaker? To have a big family under his paternal 'wings?'"

Rena Dulos goes on to talk about how her brother sacrificed much to take care of their ailing parents; she describes an avid skiier who competed professionally and has been goal-oriented his entire "can-do" life.

The comments were the first from Rena Dulos since her brother came under the public and criminal microscope. She says many relatives and friends don't believe Fotis Dulos is capable of harming his wife.

Photo Credit: NBC 4 New York Estranged Husband of Missing Conn. Mom Says 'Truth Will Come Out' published first on Miami News

0 notes

dcnativegal · 7 years ago

Text

I miss protesting

The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says, “Congress shall make no law …abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

On Saturday, March 24, 2018, hundreds of thousands of people gathered to protest the ridiculous ease with which people in the United States can acquire guns, including assault weapons who’s only purpose is to kill as many humans as possible as efficiently as possible.

I watched live video of the “March for Our Lives” that took place in D.C., which was the largest ‘assembly’ in the world that day. The Washington Post tallied more than 300 separate rallies against gun violence in February in the United States alone, and there were protests around the world. In D.C., it was a huge gathering, and the debate will never be settled as to whether it was the largest ever, or whether the Women’s March in 2017 was larger, or whether Obama’s first Inauguration crowd wins the prize. The National Park Service stopped trying to count protesters years ago, so it’s subjective anyway. But it doesn’t matter. The “March for Our Lives” got plenty of press. If the march encouraged everyone who is eligible to vote to actually VOTE, then there’s hope for a progressive wave in this country. As the picture below shows, HOPE is at the center of a protest march.

The District of Columbia may be the location of the most political protests, rallies and marches on our planet. I practiced my right to ‘peaceably assemble’ I don’t know how many times over the 56 years I lived in DC. Several each year, times 50 plus years is over 100 rallies.

My first memory of a march was around 1968. My family was living in an apartment in Adams Morgan, and in the same block was my best friend, Annie Harris. She and I were in the third grade at Oyster Elementary, across the Duke Ellington Bridge over Rock Creek Park. Her mother was what my mother would call a hippy. What I remember is that Annie and I went on a ‘picnic’ with Ms. Harris, and we got to say a bad word along with a whole bunch of other people: HELL NO, WE WON’T GO!! I had no idea where it was we all were refusing to go to but goshdarnit, we were NOT going. I remember the crowd, the yelling, and my father’s face when I got home and told him what we were yelling. Chagrin doesn’t begin to cover it. Let’s just say my dad was VERY conservative.

The anti-war marches of the late 60s and early 70s helped to stop the Vietnam War. The civil rights movement certainly pressured President Johnson to get moving on voting rights and many other legislative corrections to systemic racism.

I have a clearer memory of marching down 16th Street. It was 1976 and I was 16. We were protesting the lack of voting representation for DC citizens in the US Congress. D.C. at that time had more people than 10 states. I used to be able to rattle them off: Montana, Wyoming, both Dakotas, Vermont, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Delaware. I can’t remember the other two. I don’t remember where we were heading to: probably to the public park in front of the White House since it’s at the end of 16th Street NW. What I know for sure is that it wasn’t fair then and it isn’t fair now that 50 states get at least two senators and a representative, and the residents of the District of Columbia get one lively but vote-less delegate.

The 50th anniversary of the uprising following the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr just passed. There’s an article in the Washington Post about how restrained the police were during the looting of stores. There were two deaths caused by law enforcement, one or both accidental. The other 11 deaths came from fire. The Southern racist who chaired the District Committee demanded to know why the police did not shoot the looters on sight. Basically, the police chief stated that lives were more important than loot.

From the roof of our apartment building on Mintwood Place, we could see the glow of fire to the east.

I didn’t discover St. Stephen & the Incarnation Episcopal Church until 1976, and when I did, I stayed for 40 years. On April 4, 1968, the church became a safe haven during the riots, since it was one long block from the epicenter of fire and looting on 14th Street. Parishioners welcomed their neighbors with cups of water, and a place to rest. You can hear some of the history of this radical hospitality on this video: https://www.facebook.com/ijpoole/videos/10156322731554712/

The protests following Dr. King’s assassination were not peaceful. They were a violent catharsis. What was looted felt like a wee bit of reparations; but the looting also harmed the Black community, sadly.

One good thing came out of the more than 300 protests that spontaneously arose in the grief and rage following Dr. King’s assassination: The Fair Housing Act. It had been stalled and filibustered.

Law enforcement in DC is far from perfect. Even so, decades of mostly orderly and nonviolent protest, since before the Poor People’s March with Martin Luther King in 1963, taught the police officers how to host a protest safely, closing streets, leaving passageways for ambulances, and generally staying calm and protective, rather than antagonistic.

Since the Vietnam protests, there have been marches for women, for choice, for safety from gun violence. Marches for gay people, and for marriage equality. There are also marches organized for conservative causes, including the well-attended March for Life that takes place every January on the anniversary of the Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion nationally.

On one of my birthdays, we went to a small but spirited Black Lives Matter protest, and I had my sign: White Silence = Violence. My children were with me. The gathering started with speeches in Lafayette Square, across from the White House, and walked along Pennsylvania Avenue toward the Capitol. It must have been 2015, because when we got to the Trump Hotel, we booed. I peeled off at Chinatown on 7th Street and waved my children onward. They are pros at demonstrating, my daughter especially. She knows to write the name of the legal services attorney on her arm in sharpie in case she gets arrested.

I understand that the protests which erupted all over the world the day after #45’s inauguration included Klamath Falls. A group of about 200 mostly women walked along a bridge near downtown with their handmade signs. Apparently, a pickup truck burning oil went back and forth, spewing exhaust at the marchers, who’s spirits were undampened. Inhalers probably came in handy.

The Inauguration of Barack Obama, in January 2009, took place on a bitter cold day, at least for DC: in the 20s. My girlfriend at the time and I bundled up, stuffed juice boxes and granola bars in our pockets, wore two socks on each foot, and plenty of layers. We were able to take a bus out of our northeast neighborhood to the area around Chinatown and walk the rest of the way to the National Mall. We made it through crowds of joyful Democrats, including regal black women in full length fur coats. Only their best finery would do on such an occasion. We perched on the east side of the Washington Monument, and watched Barack Obama on an enormous jumbotron take the oath and make a speech.

He told us: “To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”

The man was prescient.

In 1980, my friends and I were so young. Old enough to drive and enlist in war. Too young to buy beer. Privileged to attend an elite liberal arts college that was SO liberal, it had an active Young Socialist Alliance during the McCarthy era. We were earnest. We had taken classes in non-violent civil disobedience and trained well to remain non-violent. We were 6 students, cutting class to drive a rented van to Washington DC.

It was late April. We drove from snowy winter in northern Ohio, to vibrant flowering trees rooted in emerald velvet. We arrived and set up camp in the decrepit mansion on Park Road that I later moved in to when I lost my job and had nowhere else to live in 2012. This house was built in 1906, has three full stories and a huge yard. Our crew filled up all the extra beds. We somehow were fed; I don’t remember if we went shopping, or if Ruth Holly, a very generous woman and the mother of an old boyfriend, simply fed us. We were lucky and well cared for.

On the morning of the protest, we drove to the Pentagon in our van. I remember assembling on the steps in front of one of the many entrances. We were joined by hundreds of other earnest mostly-white young people. We held hands and blocked the entrance so that workers couldn’t use it to go inside and work. I can’t remember whether we sang or stood quietly. I do remember it all went pretty fast. We were arrested one by one, with plastic handcuffs on our wrists behind our backs.

I remember that feeling of being handcuffed, and suddenly, not being in control of what I did. I followed orders. The police were professional, efficient, and nonchalant. All in a day’s work.

Off to the Arlington Police Station we went. We were processed and fingerprinted. We’d agreed: we would plead Nolo Contendere, meaning “No contest” – there is no question that we’d blocked the entrance to the Pentagon. We were doing it to symbolically shut it down. In reality, we inconvenienced a few hundred workers who were just doing their jobs. Our lofty goal was to end the arms race, the risk of mutually assured destruction. Forty years later, the risk remains.

We were allowed one phone call. I called my father at work. I told him I was fine, I’d be in jail for a couple of days and then out again. He said, between clenched teeth: “That’s fine, Janie, but don’t call me at work.” Oops. He worked at the Central Intelligence Agency at the time.

We females were herded into a gymnasium. I remember the awful fluorescent lights which were kept on all night. We were given a pillow and a thin blanket. For dinner, I said I was a vegetarian, so I was given Wonder bread with American cheese. I also remember going to the bathroom in a stall with no door and a corrections officer watching. It was a terrible feeling, being in jail. And I knew I’d be out soon. I’m glad I had that taste of incarceration. It is a deep loss of freedom I felt so very briefly.

Sentenced to 48 hours, most of us were out in one day, except for two of us who decided to plead not guilty. They were both held for five days, and then dismissed. That was a close call. We were renegade college students, but we didn’t want to flunk out this semester, for goodness’ sake. Blissful privilege, we enjoyed. We also learned about nonviolent civil disobedience and incarceration in an embodied way, which isn’t nothing. We learned by doing. Then returned to Oberlin Ohio where we learned by reading and listening and talking and writing.

When asked if I have ever been arrested, I can answer one of two ways: yes, once, in a peace protest. Or no. Since I gave them my name as Jane Doe, there are only my finger prints to call me out. A curious legacy of my idealistic college-age self.

In 2018, I read in the Washington Post: “One in five Americans have protested in the streets or participated in political rallies since the beginning of 2016. Of those, 19 percent said they had never before joined a march or a political gathering.” It goes on to share the results of a national poll:

The poll offers a rare snapshot of how public activism has changed in the 50 years since large street protests and rallies last dominated the political landscape. Back in the turbulent Vietnam War era, college students were the face of protests. Today, many activists are older, white, well-educated and wealthy, the findings show.

A significant number — 44 percent — are 50 or older, and 36 percent earn more than $100,000 a year. Far more are Democrats than Republicans. An equal percentage are men and women. An outsize share live in the suburbs.

The Post-Kaiser poll is the most extensive study of rallygoers and protesters in more than a decade and one of the first attempts to quantify how many Americans are motivated by Trump to join these increasingly frequent political events.”

Nineteen per cent are rallying for conservative causes, or to support President #45.

The poll also shows that the people who rally are also much more likely to vote, or so they say. The proof of this will be in the blue, red, or purple pudding come November 2018. And November 2020.

There was once a Greek playwright, Aristophanes, who created a character named Lysistrata. Her brilliant idea was to get the women of Athens to refuse sex with their husbands until a treaty for peace has been signed. That would have been a highly effect form of protest, no? In the play, it works. What wars would we like to stop, now?

If every resident of DC stopped paying federal taxes in protest, maybe the federal government would grant its 700,000 residents some representation in Congress.

There is a heartbreaking story in the New York Times about a group of Afghanis who hope to promote peace by going on a hunger strike. They are directing their energies at the Taliban. Afghanistan is a country where imperialists go to fail to conquer (see, Soviet Union occupation 1973-1980, per https://history.state.gov/milestones/1977-1980/soviet-invasion-afghanistan, not to mention the United States’ war there since 2002.) But the suffering right now is very real regardless of painful history:

“Within 24 hours of a recent suicide bombing in Helmand Province, which added at least 14 names to the long list of the dead in a bitterly contested corner of Afghanistan, a group of local activists began a sit-in at the site of the carnage.

In their moment of anger and sorrow, they asked not for revenge, but for peace.

Over the following days, mothers and fathers of victims came to pour out their hearts and to support the protest, in a tent pitched near the field in the provincial capital,… where last week a suicide bomber drove a car full of explosives into a crowd leaving a wrestling match. Emboldened, the protest organizers announced a “long march” to bring the message of peace to the Taliban, who control much of the province…

“On both sides, in every mosque, there is a funeral. Why is this? It’s because of our silence,” said Sarwar Ghafar, a local school principal. “Oh silent people, if you don’t break your silence you will remain a slave, remain a slave.

“Many of Mr. Ghafar’s comments were addressed toward the Taliban, disappointed at their rejection of the peace march…

“Qais Hashimi, another of the organizers, was crouched on the floor, wailing… “You have ruined life. Isn’t the taking of life up to God? Who are you to be taking lives? You kill yourself and you take 20 lives with you. I will just kill myself, a sacrifice for this country,” Mr. Hashimi said. “Our blood is finished, our tears have dried. We will not say another word. We will not eat.” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/29/world/asia/afghan-helmand-hunger-strike.html

On a more hopeful note, let us recall the Madres de Plaza de Mayo, a group of Argentine mothers whose loved ones "disappeared" during a military dictatorship supported by the United States. Starting around 1976, they walked in a circle silently, carrying pictures of their children, at the Plaza de Mayo in Buenos Aires, in front of presidential palace, at great personal risk. Over the decades since the mothers bore witness to their grief, and to the injustice, the dictatorship ended, many children were reunited with their biological family through DNA testing, and a political movement for justice continues to this day. To watch the U2 song about the Mothers of the Disappeared, check this out: Bono welcomes some of the mothers to the stage. https://youtu.be/KuFMoWV1cns

I will continue to believe that it is non-violent civil disobedience that is the best path toward justice and liberation. The medium IS the message. The ends do NOT justify the means. Mahatma Gandhi liberated India from British colonial rule using nonviolence. Martin Luther King, Jr. made enormous progress for African American civil rights in the United States using nonviolence. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa started in 1994 as the white minority passed leadership to the newly freed Nelson Mandela, assuaging the fears of white people, and giving black Africans a place to air their grievances and receive some small measure of closure.

The activist organization MoveOn.org has organized protests to occur within 24 hours of an event that President #45 just might resort to: the firing of Special Counsel Robert Meuller. Mr. Meuller is leading the investigation into possible collusion between #45 and Russia during the presidential campaign. Apparently, 800+ are already planned as “No One is Above the Law” rallies. There are protest sites in Fort Rock (90 minutes from Paisley), Bend (2 hours and 15 minutes or so), and Klamath Falls (2 ½ hours.) It depends on the day of the week and where I am but I hope to drive to one of those spots and join the forces. Hm, maybe I should make a sign so I’m prepared…

One of my acquaintances here is a very smart person, and this person has told me in no uncertain terms that carrying a sign in a public gathering is not going to happen. And I wonder. It is partly an introvert thing. But I also think this person might change their mind if, say, someone they loved dearly were part of a movement that needed support, and needed that support right here in Lake County. Maybe then? Or maybe, since I’m used to this marching-around-with-signs business, I might carry the sign in honor of this person and their loved one.

I’m willing.

0 notes