It works. Maybe it's your ISP rightfully blocking Fox's website, since they're crap.
Anyways, this has been mentioned here before (under the Personal section), but I believe it's wrong for the US military to use music that way.
Are they even paying for the music to begin with? (considering its the Bush gov't, I doubt it)
On a joking level, wouldn't ABBA's music alone suffice?
inu-liger wrote:
On a joking level, wouldn't ABBA's music alone suffice?
What do you mean, 'joking'?
Anyway, I think ABBA, Barbra Streisand and The Spice Girls (in that order, at loud volume) would be enough to break any highly trained spy, let alone your average inmate.
inu-liger wrote:
On a joking level, wouldn't ABBA's music alone suffice?
What do you mean, 'joking'?
Anyway, I think ABBA, Barbra Streisand and The Spice Girls (in that order, at loud volume) would be enough to break any highly trained spy, let alone your average inmate.
I meant like, on a more serious level, I don't condone this practice that the US uses to interrogate its war detainees.
But on a humouristic 'joking' level, if they HAD to do it, why not do it with music that would drive us Canadians & Americans nuts as it is if we were to be tortured similarly? (hence 'ABBA')
Phew. For a moment there I was afraid you were downplaying the degree of damage caused by ABBA music.
This is, by the way, a relatively old phenomenon. The use of music as a means of torture has been in use in the US since at least the 1970s, and was used in Europe by the nazis (as a means of sleep deprivation) and probably has been ever since (though I imagine the introduction of long-playing records facilitated this, as the nazis were still dealing with 78rpm records, which had a playing time of 4:30 max. by the time of WWII (12" 78rpm, the more common 10" had a limit of 3:15).