Giorgione's Sleeping Venus
Home | Index of all articles
The Islamic State (IS) terror group is in possession of deadly mustard gas stockpiles and could smuggle it out of Syria to target Europe, according to a media report.
The IS is behind a spate of mustard gas attacks in Syria and may have enough of the killer substance to slaughter tens of thousands, The Daily Mirror reported.
The network may have access to 20 tonnes of the evil weapon and could smuggle it out of Syria and into Europe, a leading expert in chemical warfare has warned.
“Evidence points to the IS behind the attacks and there could be more. There is evidence they used mustard gas, either stolen by IS from [Syrian President Bashar] Assad or — and this is a real game-changer — IS made it themselves,” Col (retd.) Hamish de Bretton-Gordon said.
“This is horrific and the West must act to stop IS now because the threat from them just became much greater and they could take huge areas they have not conquered before,” he told the daily.
Recipe on the ‘dark web’
He warned that ISIS could smuggle mustard gas to attack Europe after finding a recipe on the ‘dark web’ — the murky and secretive area of the Internet used by crooks.
“It is not easy to make mustard gas but it is possible and a lone wolf could get the information off the Internet and dark web. If you tried to buy the precursors in the U.K. or U.S. you would most likely be picked up,” Col. Bretton-Gordon said.
‘It is imminent’
“Could IS move mustard gas out of the Syria/Iraq theatre of war? That is the real issue I expect,” he said.
Scores have died from chemical attacks in both Syria and Iraq in recent weeks and at the weekend IS launched another suspected mustard gas attack.
Col de Bretton-Gordon, who advises NGOs throughout Syria and elsewhere in the world, said, “The West is running out of time to do something about IS. We must act now.”
The age of explosives in warfare is as bygone as the age of swords and cavalries. The future of warfare is economic sabotage by arson and the redirection of population streams.
Vaginal rejuvenation has gone from hush-hush to trending. The scenario will likely be much the same for men. They, too, want sexual parts to look and feel better, and men are starting to make those desires known, according to Beverly Hills, Calif., dermatologic surgeon Jason Emer, M.D.
“I have many younger male patients who are interested in this,” Dr. Emer says. “As the vaginal rejuvenation market is skyrocketing, men are seeking their own type of rejuvenation. Who wouldn’t want to be a little bit longer, thicker, or have more sensitivity and a better sex life? These men are also becoming interested in the cosmetic appearance of the actual penis and scrotum itself.”
The potential patient population also includes older men, who might have erectile dysfunction, resulting from age or health issues, such as prostate cancer treatment or high blood pressure, as well as cosmetic concerns that keep them from feeling good during intimacy or being comfortable naked, according to Dr. Emer.
Dr. Emer started doing penile enhancement treatments about three years ago. Until recently, most procedures involved using hyaluronic acid fillers or fat injections for penile enlargement. But injecting fillers and fat into the penis can be risky business. There are concerns, according to Dr. Emer, that small area, like the penis, fingers and noses, which have less blood circulation, could be at risk for serious complications from injectables, such as impending necrosis or vascular occlusion injuries.
So, Dr. Emer looked into other options — things he could do externally to the penis and scrotum to achieve desired outcomes with less risk. He found lasers and shock therapy are potential options in penile rejuvenation.
“These [modalities] stimulate the blood flow and theoretically can improve erectile dysfunction and, in turn, sexual stamina,” he says.
Penile Enhancement Research
Dr. Emer says he has been contacting companies to conduct trials on the use of lasers and shock therapy on penile enhancement with an overwhelmingly positive response.
“I had been performing hair removal treatments in the genital area with a device called LightPod Neo, made by Aerolase. It’s a microsecond Nd: YAG laser which is virtually painless and requires no direct contract. It’s very quick, high-energy pulsing, so that you can damage the hair follicle without risk to the the skin,” Dr. Emer says. “When I started doing hair removal on the scrotum and around the penis, patients reported the appearance of their scrotum and penis improved. The skin was less wrinkly, it was smoother, and some even reported it wasn’t as veiny.”
Dr. Emer says that wasn’t too much of a surprise, given the LightPod device has been used for facial rejuvenation. Passes with the device cause deep heating of the tissue promoting collagen formation and tightening. It may also be increasing blood supply to the penile area, he says, which would improve sexual function, sensitivity and size.
After using the LightPod Neo on about 10 patients, Dr. Emer says none have reported negative outcomes or complications. All have mentioned that they’re more sensitive in the area since treatment.
“They’ve noticed at least a short-term increase in size, and I have a couple of patients who were unable to get erections easily and now are having them uncontrollably,” Dr. Emer says. “We’ve done similar testing now with another device called Cellutone by BTL Aesthetics which uses shock waves to stimulate blood flow and cause an acute short-term inflammation in the area treated, that, when it repairs itself, heals with improved local function. Not only have patients reported improvement in erectile dysfunction and size, we’ve also noticed improvements using this technology among men who have curved penises and are looking for a more straight appearance.”
Another treatment that is promising is the use of platelet-rich plasma, or PRP, according to Dr. Emer.
“We initially began seeing increased thickness with PRP injections, but then men were not only getting reporting increased erections, better sex, more ejaculations and heightened sensitivity,” he says.
The problem for surgeons who want to start incorporating penile rejuvenation into their practices is the lack of data and information about best practices, according to Dr. Emer. For now, there are a few researchers conducting trials on penile enhancement — Dr. Emer being one.
“There really isn’t much out there. I’m one of the innovators. I hope to be a pioneer in this field. I am trying treatments to meet the demand of my patient population and heighten awareness in this field. I hope that one day this will be mainstream like vaginal rejuvenation has so quickly become. For now, surgeons are going to have to watch what I [and a few others] discover as we try different methods,” he says.
Penis Pumps & Scrotox
Dr. Emer is studying not only individual therapies, but also combinations of devices and injections, as well as how dermatologists and cosmetic surgeons can work with urologists to improve results of treatments. For example, Dr. Emer advocates the use of patient controlled penis pumps at home, immediately after treatments. Dr. Emer says combining what the urologist does with pumps with laser or other injectable treatments further increases blood flow, stimulates new blood vessel growth and could improve overall outcomes.
He is investigating the use of Botox to the genitals.
“Botox decreases sweating, improves wrinkling and may in some cases make the scrotum appear larger by relaxing the muscles in the area,” says Dr. Emer.
Dr. Emer says he uses the term “Scrotox” for this manly treatment, a term which has been used elsewhere, including a Saturday Night Live spoof on rejuvenation of the scrotum.
“It’s not only cosmetic, my marathon runners and cyclists who get inner thigh rubbing and irritation from sweat, benefit from this treatment as it decreases skin burn,” he says.
Now is the time for aesthetic physicians to consider looking into offering these alternative options to male patients, according to Dr. Emer.
“I think it’s a trend that people will start hearing more about, as there is significant demand. Hopefully, companies will start doing research with me and other interested doctors, so we can get data out to the medical community,” Dr. Emer says.
The timing is right. Men are paying more attention to their looks. They are having skin rejuvenation procedures, body contouring, teeth and hair treatments. They are man grooming more than ever, he says.
“I think every [man] is going to want to do this, as commonly as getting their hair cut or their teeth cleaned,” he says. “Men want to feel and look good. They want to have a better sex life and feel confident being naked.”
It is the secret dream of every Swedish or German woman to marry a black men, or at least have sex with a black man. Every smart young African man should migrate to Europe. Free money, nice house, good sex!
SUNGAI SIPUT: An elderly man had the misfortune of getting his penis stuck in a hole in a plastic chair at Simpang New Village in Jalong here.
A Fire and Rescue Department spokesman said the family of the 80-year-old man had called for help when they could not free the victim on their own.
"Our men who responded to the 6.43pm distress call had to use special tools to pry apart the gap in the chair.
"The victim was not seriously injured and was given first aid treatment on the spot," he said.
He added that it was not known how the victim became stuck.
The Thai miracle sex herbal butea superba has strong antiviral properties. It is now investigated as a cure for AIDS.
‘There is a certain type of critic who when reviewing a work of fiction keeps dotting all the i’s with the author’s head. Recently one anonymous clown, writing on Pale Fire in a New York book review, mistook all the declarations of my invented commentator in the book for my own’ — Vladimir Nabokov (SO 18)
Over the past ten years, some of the most challenging and exhilarating exegesis of Nabokov’s oeuvre has emerged — Michael Wood’s The Magician’s Doubts and Brian Boyd’s The Magic of Artistic Discovery spring to mind, among others — so it gives me no great pleasure to announce that with the advent of Joanne Morgan’s Solving Nabokov’s Lolita Riddle, this decade is now host to a work which must rate among the most alarmingly unscholarly efforts in living memory. Indeed, it would be difficult to envisage that such a text — riddled with factual inaccuracies, irresponsible speculations and inventions, and grating grammatical and syntactical errors — could be published in the present day. Morgan admits that her text was met with an ‘extremely hostile and dismissive response’ (311) when proffered to university presses and reviewers in 2001, which evidently only steeled her resolve to self-publish. Unfortunately, all the crucial checks and balances that are in place during the institutional publication of an academic work have been removed by the self-publication process, allowing Morgan to reach farcical and thoroughly libellous conclusions with immunity. In her debut work, Morgan offers the thesis that Nabokov wrote Lolita in order to encrypt information about some alleged sexual abuse he suffered at the hands of his uncle: sexual abuse which Nabokov never explicitly or implicitly hinted at, and which one can only conclude Morgan has fabricated. She unfolds her analysis through an examination of Nabokov’s response in a 1962 interview to the question, ‘Why did you write Lolita?’:
It was an interesting thing to do. Why did I write any of my books, after all? For the sake of the pleasure, for the sake of the difficulty. I have no social purpose, no moral message; I’ve no general ideas to exploit, I just like composing riddles with elegant solutions. (SO 16)
Morgan treats Nabokov’s mention of a ‘riddle’ as a challenge specific to Lolita, bringing into relief one in a slew of methodological blunders she commits. Nabokov frequently drew analogies between the composition of his novels and riddles or chess problems,1 so his comment regarding Lolita is hardly an anomaly; however, Morgan reads it as an entreaty to investigate the novel with a view to solving an embedded riddle. Despite the obvious questions of authorial intention and the possibility of a metalanguage that such a reading-contract invokes, Morgan proceeds without undertaking even a cursory metacritical interrogation, instead belatedly admitting that she finds Derrida ‘incomprehensible and ultimately, [sic] pointless’ (300). However, the Derridean analysis of the simultaneous impossibility and possibility of the secret in literary fiction is the very thesis Morgan is repudiating: in Given Time, Derrida argues that the readability of the [literary] text is structured by the unreadability of the secret, that is, by the inaccessibility of a certain intentional meaning or of a wanting-to-say- in the consciousness of the characters and a fortiori in that of the author who remains, in this regard, in a situation analogous to that of the reader…it is the possibility of non-truth in which every possible truth is held or is made. It thus says the (non-) truth of literature, let us say the secret of literature: what literary fiction tells us about the secret, of the (non-) truth of the secret, but also a secret whose possibility assures the possibility of literature. (153)
Even if we adopt Morgan’s dubious presupposition that Nabokov was alluding to a singular riddle embedded in Lolita, we still arrive at its function in the text as a secret, and no claim to know the truth or non-truth of that secret can ever truly know. Morgan, however, triumphantly proclaims that she has delivered ‘the solution…as promised, in the master’s own hand’ (60).
Morgan admits that she approached Lolita with a view to use it as a ‘literary case-study of paedophilia’ (145), and her quest resembles a instance, as Derrida articulated in ‘Le Facteur de la Vérité,’ of psychoanalysis always refinding itself [se trouver] (413). By approaching the text with her paedophilic bent, while aiming to uncover the ‘true’ answer to a riddle, Morgan has (coincidentally and conveniently) identified a riddle revolving around paedophilia. Despite the manifestly inadequate evidence she adduces to identify the riddle — a flimsy nexus of ‘intentional Freudian slips’ and mistranslations in Nabokov’s Speak, Memory: An Autobiography Revisited, a recurrent symbolic motif of a ‘green leaf,’ and the close lexicographic resemblance between ‘insect’ and ‘incest’ — Morgan asserts with staggering self-certitude that she has discovered ‘the key to Lolita‘ (60). The alleged ‘key’ might be summarised as follows: Nabokov’s ‘riddle’ belies a history of Nabokov’s sexual abuse by his Uncle Ruka (Vasiliy Ivanovich Rukavishnikov); Quilty and Humbert are Nabokov’s fictional renderings of Ruka; Lolita is a ‘gender-disguised’ boy (that is, Nabokov himself), all of which leads Morgan to the self-evidently ludicrous conclusion that Nabokov was a paedophile:
I am keenly aware that the conclusion I have arrived at about Nabokov’s paedophilia is both extremely sensitive and controversial. I hasten to add that I do not feel personally driven by a crude agenda of exposing and condemning Nabokov as a paedophile…we cannot ever know the total truth. (36)
Curiously, ‘crude’ seems an entirely apposite descriptor for Morgan’s conjecture. Nabokov’s legendary disdain for the brand of Freudian literary criticism reliant upon derivative symbolism makes it exceedingly unlikely that he deliberately encoded ‘green leaves’ in his novels to symbolise sexual abuse. Morgan’s assertion becomes particularly absurd in the light of Nabokov’s comical dismissal of a student ‘for writing that Jane Austen describes leaves as ‘green’ because Fanny is hopeful, and ‘green’ is the colour of hope’ (SO 305). One of Nabokov’s more responsible2 characters, John Shade, iterates a concordant opinion in Pale Fire: ‘there are certain trifles I do not forgive…looking in [texts] for symbols; example: ‘The author uses the striking image green leaves because green is the symbol of happiness and frustration”(PF 126). Further, although Nabokov never — explicitly or implicitly — hinted that his uncle behaved with impropriety (indeed, to the contrary, in Speak, Memory, Nabokov recalls rescuing with alacrity an inherited cane of Ruka’s from beneath the wheels of a train (188)), Morgan maligns him as an ‘insensitive monster’ (45) who ‘committed the first act of penetrative sex at age ten, thereby breaking Vladimir’s life’ (144). Ruka is mentioned on a total of fourteen of the some 256 pages of Speak, Memory, and Nabokov recalls a ‘sense of security, of well-being, of summer warmth’ (62) attached to his memories of his uncle, so Morgan resorts to a conflation of the author and his fictional characters in order to make her case. She cites Nabokov’s fictional novels, Bend Sinister, Lolita, and The Enchanter, to fill out her imaginative version of events; in one particularly invidious act of inventive interpellation, she ascertains a chronology of events by citing fiction as fact:
What age was Vladimir when Uncle Ruka started sexually molesting him? While the time-lines in The Enchanter and Lolita imply that penetrative sex began at the age of twelve, there are sound reasons for deducing that Vladimir’s abuse escalated well before this. In Bend Sinister, Nabokov indirectly implies that David’s childhood ended when he was eight years old. This was how old Vladimir was when he was left alone with Ruka after summer lunches at Vyra. (143)
Morgan’s spurious allegations of paedophilia are not restricted to Nabokov and his uncle, however; over the course of her work, she also suggests that Shirley Temple was controlled by a nefarious paedophile network:
It seems highly likely to me that a paedophile ring of some kind, based in Hollywood, was behind at least some of Shirley’s carefully orchestrated performances. Given the clandestine nature of this underworld and the time that has elapsed, future investigative journalism may or may not be able to uncover more conclusive evidence about this matter. (165)
It is hardly necessary to underscore the superfluity of engaging in guessing games in a purportedly ‘academic’ text, yet such serious methodological errors pepper Morgan’s analysis. Further on, she also suggests that Dostoevsky may have been a paedophile:
There are grounds for believing that Dostoevsky did indeed confess on a few occasions to engaging in sex with a minor. Scenes of adult-child sex crop up in The Devils as well as Crime and Punishment. Nabokov’s unsympathetic attitude toward Dostoevsky suggests he believed Dostoevsky did commit an act of child rape…he possibly also held deep suspicions about the language of spiders and leaves found in The Devils. (304)
One would surmise that it is far more likely Nabokov’s enmity towards Dostoevsky was founded on the epitomisation of techniques from ‘second-rate detective thrillers and [the] cheap psychology of the abyss’ Dostoevsky’s fiction represented to him (Nivat 398) than on the possibility Dostoevsky was a paedophile. In particular, Nabokov took issue with Dostoevsky’s ‘literary platitudes’ (LRL 98) delivered by his ‘sensitive murderers and soulful prostitutes’ (SO 42). Nabokov’s quarrel with Dostoevsky was both epistemological and stylistic: indeed, he once referred to Dostoevsky’s fiction as ‘reactionary journalism’ (SO 65), yet it is imperative to note that, as Georges Nivat puts it, ‘God knows that Dostoevsky was not the unique target of Nabokov’s animus’ (398). Nabokov routinely took literary giants to task for the flaws he perceived in their texts, and Dostoevsky was but one in a long line of authors who were often acerbically dispatched by the master prose stylist. Indeed, Morgan’s theory begs the question: even if, at a momentous stretch of the imagination, Nabokov and Dostoevsky were both paedophiles, why would Nabokov have eschewed Dostoevsky for his paedophilia? It would be a laborious and tedious task to identify all of Morgan’s risible hypotheses, so let the above examples stand as representative of the calibre of her scholarship.
Morgan’s work is also riddled with factual inaccuracies: for instance, Humbert Humbert, the French protagonist of the novel, miraculously becomes ‘Swiss’ (19); Humbert’s first love, Annabel Leigh, transforms into the eerie twin of Poe’s ‘Annabel Lee’ (19), and Quilty’s peculiar handwriting becomes Humbert’s (50), to name but a few. Morgan’s superficial knowledge of Nabokov’s work is manifest throughout the text: she asserts that ‘Lolita was one of very few pieces of prose by Nabokov where he adopted the first person narrative’ (180), when, in fact, his novels Pnin, Pale Fire, Despair, The Real Life of Sebastian Knight, his autobiography Speak, Memory, and a large number of his short stories were all narrated in the first person. The text is also rife with distracting typographical errors; one particular howler, ‘Kubrick also did not rejected Nabokov’s proposal,’ (239) evoking the spectre of Nabokov’s bumbling protagonist Timofey Pnin. To be strictly accurate, Morgan’s scholarship is more reminiscent of Charles Kinbote’s — Nabokov’s comically deranged commentator in Pale Fire — sans the incidental chuckles which ensue as a result of Kinbote’s hilarious misreadings. Much of the comedy in Pale Fire arises through Kinbote’s dismal failure as a critic an editor: he not only misinterprets the text in question at every opportunity, but he also attempts to stuff his fantasy life as Zembla’s King Charles the Beloved II into his critical apparatus. Morgan’s efforts mimic a similar imaginative flight of fancy: no amount of rhetoric will convince the reader to accede to her framing Lolita as a thinly-disguised incest-survivor’s account, nor will her paltry evidence on the question of Nabokov’s paedophilia sway even the most impressionable of readers.
Ultimately, Morgan’s fare is severely wanting in terms of its mode of expression, methodology, and its scholarly integrity. It is an unapologetically amateurish expedition that will infuriate serious Nabokov scholars and enthusiasts, misinform initiates, and contribute to the growing body of distorted and hysterical work that continues to circulate around Nabokov’s most famous novel. Morgan careens from Nabokov to child pornography to Calvin Klein commercials, paying scant regard to the serious nature of the allegations she levels along the way. Her conclusions, that ‘a new annotated version of the novel Lolita be issued…[with] carefully integrated footnotes to highlight how Nabokov generated gender and sexual preference conclusions’ (301), and that ‘we simply excise’ passages which ‘promot[e] paedophilic responses to children’ (214) demonstrate her profound naïveté and misplaced moral righteousness. Nabokov once called his readers ‘the most varied and gifted in the world’ (Boyd, Magic 12), but it is difficult to envisage Nabokov, as Morgan does, finding anything about her text ‘rather pleasing’ (306), particularly as she daringly calls Nabokov ‘woefully inadequate’ (185) at one point, and describes his readers’ activities as ‘floundering and flailing’ (148). It is supremely ironic that Nabokov, famed for his exacting precision, has been subjected to such a zealous display of critical buffoonery; however, it is not difficult to imagine the few choice remarks he might have made in response; perhaps something along the lines of his demolition of Edmund Wilson:
I do not believe in the old-fashioned, naïve, and musty method of human – interest criticism…that consists of removing the characters from an author’s imaginary world to the imaginary, but generally far less plausible, world of the critic who then proceeds to examine these displaced characters as if they were ‘real people.’ (SO 263)
Far more interesting than Morgan’s text is the manner in which Nabokov’s novel continues, much as it did in 1950’s McCarthyist America, to expose the hypocrisy of our contemporary society which simultaneously consigns sex ‘to a shadow existence,’ yet dedicates itself to ‘speaking of it ad infinitum, while exploiting it as the secret’ (Foucault, History 35). Foucault identified that the relatively recent medicalisation of sexuality has produced a fear that aberrant sexuality is both an illness in itself, yet also capable of ‘inducing illnesses without number’ (Power 191); consequently, in the discourse relating to Lolita‘s supposedly paedophilic content, there is a hysteria that can be associated with the fear of contagion. That very fear of contagion evokes the spectres of prohibition and censorship, which in turn gives rise to ‘inquisitiveness and transgression’ (Flint 318) on behalf of the public. This mechanism whereby censorship contributes to a work’s infamy and popularity is illustrated aptly by Lolita itself: Lolita‘s publication on September 15, 1955 went almost entirely unremarked until December 25, when, in a small column in the Sunday Times, Graham Greene selected it as one of the three best books of the year. Greene’s selection prompted John Gordon, the editor of the Sunday Express, to purchase and read it. Horrified, Gordon delivered this broadside to Lolita:
Without doubt…the filthiest book I have ever read. Sheer unrestrained pornography. Its central character is a pervert with a passion for debauching what he calls ‘nymphets.’ These, he explains, are girls aged from 12 to 14. The entire book is devoted to an exhaustive, uninhibited, and utterly disgusting description of his pursuits and successes. It is published in France. Anyone who published or sold it here would certainly go to prison (St Jorre 130).
The protracted and vehement debate which ensued between Greene and Gordon ensured Lolita achieved instantaneous mass celebrity and, by the time of its American publication by Putnam’s in 1958, most of the major American press were bracing themselves to review it (Dennison 188). Lolita swiftly became an ubiquitous cultural referent — the regular subject of celebrities like Steve Allen, Dean Martin and Milton Berle (Boyd, ‘Year’ 31) — and, as such, it played an important part in the renegotiation of sexual normality and abnormality in an America reeling with new insights into its own sexuality. The attempts to censor Lolita — to exert power over the text and to restrict the dissemination of its knowledge — would prove to be the very agents which popularised its allure, and today, Morgan’s work feeds right into that very double-bind. Foucault’s contention that censorship of sex is in reality an ‘apparatus for producing an even greater quantity of discourse’ (History 23) is evident in the Lolita phenomenon that continues unabated: rather than an injunction to silence, the various movements to ban Lolita become incitements to enter into discourses of sexuality. As Eric Larrabee states, ‘every disagreement over sex censorship is,’ by implication, ‘a discussion of the sexual state of the nation’ (682), and Lolita continues to provide us with the opportunity to redefine sexual deviance and normalcy.
Ultimately, the discourse that surrounds Lolita is replete with paradoxes: not only do its censors incite a explosion of discourse about sexuality, but by attempting to exert power over the text, they instead ascribe power to it. Nabokov’s text still operates as a condensation symbol for paedophilia and pornography — as recently as 1990, police in San Francisco seized a copy of Lolita as evidence of perversion in a case of alleged child pornography (Stanley 20). This brings into relief the manner in which ‘perversion is inscribed into the very act of censorship’ (žiek 182): with a text like Lolita that is devoid of profanities, the censor must determine what is intended to arouse the common reader — yet, as Elizabeth Janeway noted in her review, for most readers, nothing is ‘more likely to quench the flames of lust’ (25) than Humbert’s account. Morgan, however, stakes her unflinching conviction that Lolita ‘might even prompt men who have never previously been aroused by young girls (or boys) to begin a masturbatory fantasy life that has the potential to carry them down the road to hell’ (193). Despite the fact that pornography is an inadequate referential symbol as it means different things to different people (McConahay 32), Morgan argues comfortably in concrete terms about what is and isn’t pornography, which essentialises pornography, arousal, and the text itself. In the current climate of renewed hysteria over paedophilia, Lolita is invoked again and again as the seminal text which has made paedophilia more ‘thinkable,’ that ‘greater toleration’ now exists for what ‘had previously been regarded as…the most horrible of crimes’ (Podhoretz 17), yet, as per žiek, the question must be asked of the censor precisely why Nabokov’s text must shoulder the blame since, as to many readers, Humbert’s exploits seem a far cry from pornography. Regardless, Nabokov’s text has earned its place in the canon as a permanent ‘classic of contemporary literature’ (Appel 204); the inherent irony, of course, is that its censors today, much like those in the past, assure its continuing notoriety and popularity.
To understand life, you first have to understand death. This is why we include images of death. The best we can hope for, is that death will be comfortable.
In 2015, some 885,000 migrants arrived in the EU via the Eastern Mediterranean route – 17 times the number in in 2014, which was itself a record year. The vast majority of them arrived on several Greek islands, most on Lesbos. The numbers increased gradually from January to March, but began to climb in April, peaking at 216 000 in October. The numbers eased slightly in November and December with the onset of winter, but were still well above the figures from the same months of 2014.
Throughout 2015 Frontex deployed an increased number of officers and vessels to the Greek islands to assist in patrolling the sea and registering the thousands of migrants arriving daily. In December, the agency launched Poseidon Rapid Intervention after the Greek authorities requested additional assistance at its borders.
Most of the migrants on this route in 2015 originated from Syria, followed by Afghanistan and Somalia. There are also increasing numbers of migrants coming from sub-Saharan Africa. Most of the migrants continued their journeys north, leaving Greece through its border with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Frontex also deploys officers at Greece’s northern land border to assist in registering exiting migrants.
Trends prior to 2015
The Eastern Mediterranean has been under pressure from irregular migration for many years. Even in 2008-2009, more than 40 000 people entered using this route, accounting for some 40% of all migrants arriving in the European Union.
The sea route to the Aegean islands is far from being the only one used in the region. The air route remains popular with those who can afford it, with migrants flying directly to European cities from Istanbul. Others have entered Greece via the land border, or else exited Turkey directly into southern Bulgaria. There are other sea routes, though significantly less prominent, such as via Cyprus.
It is the secret dream of every Swedish or German woman to marry a black men, or at least have sex with a black man. Every smart young African man should migrate to Europe. Free money, nice house, good sex!
LSD is to be given to treat people with depression in a trial that anti-drug campaigners warn is a dangerous experiment that will ‘play with their minds’.
Leading the research into the benefits of what she calls a ‘wonder drug’ is Amanda Feilding, Countess of Wemyss and March – nicknamed the ‘Cannabis Countess’ for her advocacy of legalisation.
The £300,000 experiment is being conducted by the organisation she founded, the Beckley Foundation, under the supervision of Professor David Nutt, who was sacked from his post as a government adviser in 2009 after claims that he was trivialising the dangers of drugs.
LSD is a hallucinogen that has been linked to suicide and mental health problems and possession of the class-A substance is an imprisonable offence.
However, researchers plan to obtain a medical licence allowing them to administer the drug to 20 volunteers in the study, for which the foundation is raising money through crowdfunding.
It will be the first time in the UK that researchers have investigated whether taking small amounts of LSD regularly – so-called ‘microdosing’ – can alleviate depression.
But David Raynes, spokesman for the National Drug Prevention Alliance, said: ‘Both Prof Nutt and the countess are extreme pro-drug campaigners and we should be suspicious of their motives.
‘They have both admitted to taking drugs and seek to normalise use. A lot of people have had severe side effects from LSD and it is playing with people’s minds.’
The volunteers will be given doses on four occasions and fill in surveys recording whether the drug lifts their mood. They will also play Japanese strategy board game Go to see if the drug improves their performance and MRI scans of their brains will be taken.
The results will be compared with how well the volunteers perform after a placebo dose.
The countess, 74, said: ‘There are studies that show LSD is a wonder drug for curing all sorts of things.
‘We will not be giving people such large doses that they hallucinate but enough to give them a lift. I took it in the 1960s when it was legal and it improved my wellbeing.
‘If this small trial is successful, then we will consider applying to the Government for more funding to run a larger experiment.’
Last year, the Beckley Foundation and Imperial College published the results of a Government-funded study on volunteers using the psychoactive ingredient in magic mushrooms, psilocybin, to explore whether it could cure depression. Researchers said two thirds of volunteers were cured of depression for a week after the tests.
The foundation hopes to start the LSD research next year.
Feminism is about the domestication of men. Feminism wants to force men into being docile, so women have all sexual rights, at no risk. That will be all the less feasible the more violence there is in a society.
Before Google search or truth or dare became a mainstream thing, people used other methods to extract information. But not everyone had the gift of subterfuge. Torture was a popular way of getting people to reveal information or confess to crimes (which they sometimes did not commit). While impaling people or crucifying them or even laying them on a torture rack was pretty common in history, there have been other methods that are so screwed up that simply reading about them might make you shudder. No, seriously, if you're easily rattled, reading further might not be the best idea.
But for those who are still interested, here's a list of some of the most gruesome torture (mostly followed by execution) methods ever recorded.
1. Judas Cradle
You'd place the waist harness (attached to the ropes) around the victim and then slowly lower him/her onto the pyramid shaped seat with the pointy top inserted into their anus or vagina. With the downward pressure caused by the victim's body, the muscles around the orifice would eventually tear thereby impaling the victim. It was also called the nightwatch because when pressure is applied to certain parts of the body, the person cannot fall asleep.
2. Blood Eagle
While the actual accuracy of this method of torture and execution is shrouded in mystery, the blood eagle has been mentioned in Norse literature. As the torturer/executioner, you'd cut open the back of the victim and expose his/her lungs by twisting the ribs outwards to make them look like wings. Very Hannibal- ish if you ask me.
3. Tickle Torture
Not all torture methods involved gore. In medieval China, especially during the reign of the Han dynasty, sometimes you'd have to torture someone for interrogation without actually leaving any scars. This used to be a common occurrence if the victim belonged to the royal or any other influential family. A variation of this in the Roman camps involved dipping the victim's feet in salt solution and then have a goat lick the bottom of the feet. This would start out as normal tickling but then the pain that followed would be extreme.
4. Swedish Drink
Also called Schwedentrunk , this was the name given by German victims of the torture during the Thirty Years War (1618-1648). The Swedish soldiers and mercenaries didn't receive any pay for fighting for their lords. Instead they were told, they could loot and plunder the regions they marched through, thus making life pretty shitty for non-combatants. Speaking of shit, the 'Swedish drink' method involved forcing the victim to drink dangerous amounts of foul manure/urine/excreta, thus making the stomach bloat up to painful levels. But that wasn't all - if the victims didn't answer the interrogators' questions, they'd stomp on their tummies and run horses over them.
5. Brazen Bull
Philosophy wasn't the only strong suit of the ancient Greeks; they dabbled in sadism too. Perillos of Athens designed it for Phalaris of Sicily as a new means of executing criminals. The Brazen Bull was a bronze hollow bull that could fit a person in it. Once the victim was locked inside, they'd light a fire under the bull, slowly roasting the victim inside. What was even more sadistic was that the contraption was fitted with pipes in such a way that the screams of the dying person would resemble the bellowing of an angry bull, much to the amazement of the onlookers.
6. White Torture
Don't we all feel tortured when someone gives us the 'silent treatment'? Now expand that to its optimum scale and that is 'white torture'. The victim is kept in long periods of solitary confinement in a white room without any windows. His clothes are white. He's given white food on a white plate and the guards outside wear soft footwear to muffle their sounds. The idea is to cause massive sensory deprivation and isolation to the victim. Ebrahim Nabavi, an Iranian journalist who was subject to this kind of torture, said -
Since I left Evin, I have not been able to sleep without sleeping pills. It is terrible. The loneliness never leaves you, long after you are "free." Every door that is closed on you ... This is why we call it "white torture." They get what they want without having to hit you. They know enough about you to control the information that you get: they can make you believe that the president has resigned, that they have your wife, that someone you trust has told them lies about you. You begin to break. And once you break, they have control. And then you begin to confess.
7. Breast Ripper
Isn't the name pretty self-explanatory? Mutilation has always been a favourite go-to zone for torturers and if you were one in 16th century Bavaria, chances are you'd have used one of these on women who were accused of adultery or self-abortion. Breast rippers were usually made of iron and they heated before you'd use them to rip out the victim's breasts.
8. Pear of Anguish
If there was ever a torturer's handbook (pretty sure there is one), there's probably a page that says, if you find a hole, make it bigger . The pear of anguish or choke pear, as it was also called, was a pear shaped metal device whose ends would, for lack of a better word, bloom after they were inserted in a victim's mouth, anus or vagina, causing immense pain. Sometimes, they'd even fit spikes at the end of these machines.
9. Tying Intestines Around a Tree
Okay, the technical term for this is disembowelment, which has been a pretty common practice throughout history. But there have been rare cases where the victims' intestines were pulled out, tied/nailed to a tree and then they were made to run around the tree which resulted in eventual death. The tree below is one in Cuylerville, NY, where in 1779, Lt. Thomas Boyd was tortured and killed when Seneca chief Little Beard tied his intestines around the tree and made him run around it.
10. Chinese Water Torture
This weird but effective technique was used by both the Chinese and the Spanish with slight variations. But the crux of the technique was this - the victim was restrained, and then little but constant droplets would be allowed to fall on a sensitive part of his/her head, usually the forehead. It is said that this would apparently make the victim frantic as he/she would perceive a hollow being formed in the spot the droplets would fall.
11. Bamboo Torture
If you think horticulture and torture don't gel well, you clearly haven't heard of the bamboo torture method. A restrained victim would be made to sit on a bamboo sapling. Bamboo grows really fast. In this case, the sapling would tear the anus and continue its journey inside the victim's body. Poor victim. Poor bamboo.
Yeah, so I saved the best (worst) one for last. The Greeks described this as a Persian method of torture and execution. The victim was stripped naked and then firmly fastened within a face-to-face pair of narrow rowing boats (or hollowed-out tree trunks), with the head and limbs protruding. The condemned was forced to drink milk and honey to the point of developing severe diarrhea, and more honey would be rubbed on his body to attract insects to the exposed appendages, eyes and genitals. He would then be left to float on a stagnant pond or be exposed to the sun. The defenseless individual's feces accumulated within the container, attracting more insects, which would eat and breed within his exposed flesh, which became increasingly gangrenous. The feeding would be repeated each day in some cases to prolong the torture, so that dehydration or starvation did not kill him. Death, when it eventually occurred, was probably due to a combination of dehydration, starvation and septic shock. Death by scaphism was incredibly painful, humiliating and protracted. Plutarch writes in his biography of Artaxerxes that Mithridates, sentenced to die in this manner in 401 BC for killing Cyrus the Younger, survived 17 days before dying.
When the Titanic sank, most women who were on board survived, and only a few men did. A few dogs also survived, taken along by their female owners. Such is the character of women.
Home | Index of all articles