General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

choir practice

Started by Zee · · Last activity · 3 posts · 485 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
19 June 2004
Last activity
19 June 2004
Original author
Zee
Posts
3
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
485
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–3 of 3
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. bon weekend. zee

    from: guardian.co.uk0,3858,4948369
    103677,00.html

    This won't hurt much

    Terry Jones Wednesday June 16, 2004 The Guardian

    For some time now, I've been trying to find out where my son
    goes after choir practice. He simply refuses to tell me. He
    says it's no business of mine where he goes after choir
    practice and it's a free country.

    Now it may be a free country, but if people start going just
    anywhere they like after choir practice, goodness knows
    whether we'll have a country left to be free. I mean, he
    might be going to anarchist meetings or Islamic study
    groups. How do I know?

    The thing is, if people don't say where they're going after
    choir practice, this country is at risk. So I have been
    applying a certain amount of pressure on my son to tell me
    where he's going. To begin with I simply put a bag over his
    head and chained him to a radiator. But did that persuade
    him? Does the Pope eat kosher?

    My wife had the gall to suggest that I might be going a bit
    too far. So I put a bag over her head and chained her to the
    radiator. But I still couldn't persuade my son to tell me
    where he goes after choir practice.

    I tried starving him, serving him only cold meals and
    shaving his facial hair off, keeping him in stress
    positions, not turning his light off, playing loud music
    outside his cell door - all the usual stuff that any
    concerned parent will do to find out where their child is
    going after choir practice. But it was all to no avail.

    I hesitated to gravitate to harsher interrogation methods
    because, after all, he is my son. Then Donald Rumsfeld came
    to my rescue.

    I read in the New York Times last week that a memo had been
    prepared for the defence secretary on March 6 2003. It laid
    down the strictest guidelines as to what is and what is not
    torture. Because, let's face it, none of us want to
    actually torture our children, in case the police get to
    hear about it.

    The March 6 memo, prepared for Mr Rumsfeld explained that
    what may look like torture is not really torture at all. It
    states that: if someone "knows that severe pain will result
    from his actions, if causing such harm is not his objective,
    he lacks the requisite specific intent even though the
    defendant did not act in good faith".

    What this means in understandable English is that if a
    parent, in his anxiety to know where his son goes after
    choir practice, does something that will cause severe pain
    to his son, it is only "torture" if the causing of that
    severe pain is his objective. If his objective is something
    else - such as finding out where his son goes after choir
    practice - then it is not torture.

    Mr Rumsfeld's memo goes on: "a defendant" (by which he means
    a concerned parent) "is guilty of torture only if he acts
    with the express purpose of inflicting severe pain or
    suffering on a person within his control".

    Couldn't be clearer. If your intention is to extract
    information, you cannot be accused of torture.

    In fact, the report went further. It said, if a parent "has
    a good-faith belief [that] his actions will not result in
    prolonged mental harm, he lacks the mental state necessary
    for his actions to constitute torture". So all you've got to
    do to avoid accusations of child abuse is to say that you
    didn't think it would cause any lasting harm to the child.
    Easy peasy!

    I currently have a lot of my son's friends locked up in
    the garage,

    humiliating them in order to get them to tell me where my
    son goes after choir practice.

    [censored] Cheney's counsel, David S Addington, says that's just
    fine. William J Haynes, the US defence department's general
    counsel, agrees it's just fine. And so does the US air force
    general counsel, Mary Walker.

    In fact, practically everybody in the US administration
    seems to think it's just fine, except for the state
    department lawyer, William H Taft IV, who perversely claims
    that I might be opening the door to people

    me.

    So I'm going to round up all the children in the
    neighbourhood, chain them and set dogs on them. I might
    accidentally kill one or two - but I won't have intended to
    - and perhaps I'll take some photos of my wife standing on
    the dead bodies, and then I'll show the photos to the other
    kids, and finally, perhaps, I might get to find out where my
    son goes after choir practice. After all, I'll only be doing
    what the US administration has been condoning since 9/11.

    · Terry Jones is a writer, film director, actor and Python

  2. [email hidden] (Zee) wrote in part:

    Quoted message said:

    Terry Jones is a writer, film director, actor and Python

    He sure doesn't say anything about cardiology.
    --
    Jim Chinnis Warrenton, Virginia, USA

  3. [email hidden] (Zee) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Jim

    "This won't hurt much" ????

    In a way it was cardiology Jim. I wanted to post something
    humourous. Lighter. A weekend prezzy. Perhaps it wasn't a
    good choice.

    Bon weekend.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.