Re: Should we be developing nonlethal means of

Michael S. Lorrey (
Tue, 05 Oct 1999 00:24:07 -0400

Eugene Leitl wrote:
> Inasmuch is this different from a vanilla sensoric deprivation
> experiment?
> And what prevents the "victim" from supplying any autostimulation it
> needs? Unless you apply spinal anaesthesia, of course. Hmm. Food for
> thought...
> Michael S. Lorrey writes:
> > No, not the 'Chinese water torture'. This method suspends the prisoner
> > in the middle of a pool, no light, weighted so as to be neutrally
> > bouyant in the middle of the pool, not at the surface, not on the
> > bottom. Air supply, microphone and earphones are provided. After a few
> > minutes the subject starts talking to themselves "i can deal with this,
> > this is easy... blah blah..". After about an hour or so all prisoners
> > invaribly start whimpering. This is the point where you can start
> > talking to them, programming them. Manchurian Candidate stuff.
> > Apparently if you leave the prisoner in for more than 8 hours they are a
> > vegetable for the rest of their lives...
> 8 h is a bit long for a sensory deprivation experiment, but it don't
> think it will result in any lasting damage. What are your sources,
> Mike? (Better, don't tell, since then you'd have to kill us).

A gentleman I know who was an intelligence officer in the US Army in the 50's in West Berlin and elsewhere. It might have been longer to veggie status, as I was a while ago that he told me about when he was given the breifing on it, which he said was simply titled "Removal of Sensation". He never practiced that himself, he says. They apparently had plenty of former Gestapo troops around who were quite adept and experienced from the war to help get the info they needed...