The curtain rises on a bare stage, a barred window is seen. In the middle of the room is a metal desk. Two chairs are placed at opposite sides of this table. A man in his late twenties is seated at this table. He is dressed in a prison uniform. He may wear chains. If the part is played by an African-American actor, chains may be highly appropriate. A bare lightbulb should be visible. There is a danger that the light will be extinguished at any time during the course of the interrogation.
A door opens. Three persons enter the room: An attractive middle-aged woman wearing an expensive, perfect business suit approaches the table and sits directly accross from the "suspect." Two large, muscular, well-dressed men in dark glasses and wearing listening devices -- like secret service officers -- accompany her. The men stand directly behind the seated woman. She is carrying a file and tape recording device. She turns on the recording device.
Act. I.
Scene 1.
INTERROGATOR: "Interrogation of suspect 52459. Date and time noted. The subject is comfortable and under no pressure to respond to questions. He is classified as among the 'worst of the worst.' Additional security precautions have been taken. I have experienced no previous contacts with this subject. I am seated directly accross from the suspect. Security precautions have been enhanced to ensure that the suspect is not concealing a bomb or hidden weapons of any kind. Furthermore, I -- "
JOHN: Interrupting: " -- Who are you? Why am I here? What did I do? You people have been following and monitoring me for years, then somebody grabbed me. ... Now I've been in this room for hours. Where am I? What's the charge?"
INTERROGATOR: "We have reason to believe that you are of interest to national security forces. I am not at liberty to disclose the information that has come to our knowledge. We must protect our sources. I will ask you only once whether you admit the allegations that have been made against you -- allegations which I cannot reveal to you -- made by persons who will not be named? Or will you continue to insist on this absurd claim of innocence?"
JOHN: "Look, I don't know your name. I am sure that you're just a government official trying to do your job, right? There is a mistake here. O.K.? I'm a philosophy student at NYU. I'm working on a dissertation about Foucault and Kafka. I am not involved in any illegal activity. I don't do drugs. I am not into anything even remotely criminal. Got it?"
INTERROGATOR: "Let the record reflect the uncooperative and unresponsive nature of the suspect's answer."
JOHN: "I am not being unresponsive. I don't know what you think I've done. I don't know why you think I've done something, whatever it is. I have no idea who has said something about me or why they've said it. I don't know why I was selected for this attention or for how long you people -- whoever you are -- have been destroying or meddling in my life, interfering with my relationships, earnings, everything else probably."
"I can't answer unspecified charges concerning unidentified criminal offenses or 'moral lapses,' whatever that is -- somebody said something about 'moral lapses' -- Lord knows, I have certainly been late in returning library books. ... "
Turning to the guards: "Can somebody loosen these chains? Please? ... Who took off my clothes? Who put me into these prison clothes? How was I rendered unconscious? How did you get me here? ... "
INTERROGATOR: "Typical patterns of resistance to assumptions of responsibility include denial and a display of assumed ignorance of the specifics of substantive allegations, together with difficulties with authority -- especially from a female authority figure. The subject is engaging in passive-aggressive behavior meant to deflect attention from culpability for these heinous allegations that must not be disclosed to him. He is overly defensive, too sensitive to criticism, and in denial. He is not cooperating."
JOHN: "What allegations?"
INTERROGATOR: "Can you describe your feelings of hostility towards women? Do you experience thoughts of suicide? Homosexual fantasies? Are your politics unpatriotic or radical? Are you a Communist? I have a questionaire consisting of 176 multiple-option inquiries that you should fill out. All of the information obtained will be used against you. If you refuse to provide answers, then we will assume your guilt as to all charges -- charges which must not be brought publicly in order to protect our sources. We will not read these charges to you. Further denials will be useless and will only make things harder for you. Try to adjust to your situation. Accept what has transpired as being for the greater good of society. You may wish to become religious. As long as you do not develop any interest in Islam, religion is useful as a narcotic to foster the ignorance which the authorities prefer for persons like you. Religion as resistance to power is frowned upon as 'excessive.' Do you understand?"
JOHN: "What are you talking about? ... I have a girlfriend. I am not gay. I am all for women's rights and everything. WHAT charges?"
INTERROGATOR: "Do you love America, John? Shouting is proof that you require further restraints. An impression of cordial concern is likely to achieve some level of cooperation or 'bonding' with the evil terrorist -- that's you. Therefore, I will feign civility and polite interest in the terrorist -- that is you, again, John."
The Interrogator should be as impassive and unexpressive as possible, machine-like.
INTERROGATOR: "Exactly how much do you love America? Are you a loyal American? Do you describe your sex life as normal? Are you in touch with your homosexuality? How long have you been a Communist? Are you a Muslim? Are you some combination of Fascist-Communist-Muslim? Why do you see women only as sexual objects? How long have you been a 'sex-addict'? Do you hate your mother? If not, why not?"
The Interrogator rises and strolls around the room.
"We have interviewed a number of persons who have known you at some point in your life. They have been asked to engage in 'negative speculation' concerning your character and the evil activities in which you are assumed and expected to participate. Naturally, persons have not been told that you have been under psychological torture techniques and the likely effects on your behavior of these pressures that we have brought to bear on your character as part of our experiment. This is because we hoped to generate, solicit, or create the most negative possible assessment of you to justify what we had already done without justification."
There should be amusement, perhaps mild laughter, then an immediate return to machine-like efficiency.
"Persons have been invited to identify others who dislike you and will agree to speculate further concerning your faults based on a promise of anonymity. There is much agreement that you are" -- She looks in her file and reads very slowly -- " ... 'not a team player, a loner, unfriendly at times, elitist, excessively sexually interested in women, possibly gay, Communistic, while displaying Fascistic tendencies, a radical democrat with populist tendencies despite being an elitist, withdrawn, interested in Opera, reading books beyond what is considered normal for career purposes, not forthcoming or sociable.' It is also said that you take an excessive interest in cinema and Shakespeare. How do you react to these accusations?"
JOHN: "Well, the part about 'excessively interested in sex with women' is definitely true. Are you serious? Is this a joke?"
INTERROGATOR: "Are you now or have you ever been a member of Al Qaeda?"
JOHN: Beginning to be concerned: "No, I am not a Muslim. I am not a member of Al Qaeda. I am not a Communist."
INTERROGATOR: "Have you ever met or supported any of the following: Fidel Castro? Ernesto 'Che' Guevara? Sadam Hussein? Yasser Arafat? Ossama bin Laden? Chairman Mao? Nelson Mandela? Hillary Clinton? Barack Obama? Bono? Sean Penn? Madonna? Noam Chomsky? Mumia Abu-Jamal? Angela Davis? Assatta Shakur? Steven Spielberg? Barbara Streisand? Kate Winslet? Ellen DeGeneres? Bill Clinton? Monica Lewisnky? Robert Downey, Jr.?"
JOHN: With a growing suspicion of the Interrogator's insanity: "No. I don't know any famous people. I once saw Brooke Shields in Greenich Village."
INTERROGATOR: "Your efforts to protect fellow evil-doers will not be allowed to succeed. We know that you are well-trained to resist enhanced interrogation procedures. These procedures are used to promote your recovery of normality and reintegration into a peaceful relationship with others. To accomplish this goal physically and emotionally invasive techniques may be useful."
JOHN: Very alarmed: "You have the wrong guy. I am not a terrorist. I am not interested in participating in any experiment from which you can 'learn interesting things.' I don't know what my family members or friends have been told. They may be worried. My child may be upset. Do you understand? What happened to my things?"
INTERROGATOR: "It has been necessary to take your money and isolate you from friends and family. We have done our best to destroy you in their estimation by explaining that you are with Al Qaeda. I am not going to hurt your family members. I am going to hurt you, therapeutically. Naturally, you have no need for money. Therefore, we have kept all that we could find of your hidden funds or intercepted what was owed to you by others. The total cash taken from you today is $587.00. We will not give you a receipt. We have searched through your things, removing the contents of your computer. Your dissertation was deleted because several socialists were mentioned in footnotes. A police report will be manufactured, if necessary, indicating that you were killed in a car crash. Your family members have been questioned under hypnosis, secretly, then instructed to forget the questioning. They provided limited assistance. It is important for us to do these things, secretly, in order to preserve the rule of law and Americans' freedoms. We are always ethical. I am sure that you understand the necessity for these actions and will wish to do your part for your country. You must cooperate. Remember, 'one bad apple spoils the whole bunch.' You are the bad apple who may interfere with such Constitutional rights as we may wish to recognize in the population."
The men approach John. They hold him down, as the Interrogator dons pink plastic gloves before injecting the victim with an undisclosed substance.
Scene 2.
John is naked when he awakes. He is chained to the wall in the same room where he first found himself. He is bruised, and his body aches. The Interrogator is seated, reviewing papers, calmly. There are four new persons in the room. The two large men remain. A small, rotund man in a cheap suit, bearded, balding, wearing metal spectacles is holding a legal pad and taking notes. There is a sign worn around his neck that reads: 'THERAPIST.' A woman in her fifties wearing judicial robes and a gavel looks bored. She wears a sign that reads: 'JUDGE.' An attractive (but slightly vulgar) youthful female court reporter is chewing gum. Her sign says: 'SECRETARY.' A slightly disheveled, distracted, man in his forties is seated chatting with the attractive court reporter. He is wearing press credentials. There is a sign around his neck that says: 'JOURNALIST.' The director or actor may wish to misspell the word, 'JOURNALIST' on the sign worn by this character. The JOURNALIST should be American, youthful, visibly middle-aged in appearance only because of some gray at the temples, with a practiced television voice and perfect smile, a classic anchorman."
THERAPIST: "Your answers under hypnosis were not as helpful as we would like. We did acquire information concerning your childhood, useful facts about embarassing incidents and sources of possible guilt or pain that we can use to induce more guilt feelings or depression. These incidents are wonderful weapons, like scabs that we can tear open during our chats. We can learn from you! Don't worry, you've got me on your side. I'll always go to bat for you. I'm in the CIA!"
JOURNALIST: "I don't see anything news worthy. It's all just business as usual."
SECRETARY: "Could you say that again? I missed a word in my transcription."
The journalist repeats the statement, slowly and haltingly.
INTERROGATOR: Matter of Factly: "The record will show that I approach the recalcitrant and unrepentant witness, offering a final opportunity for a full confession. In the absence of a meaningful response, I insert a plastic object in the subject's rectum."
Everyone laughs gently. The secretary blows a bubble with her chewing gum. John writhes in agony. John is covered in excrement by one of the men who has poured the contents of a dirty bucket over his head. The same man then adjusts a video camera that is placed on a tripod. The man adjusting the camera is humming a tune from an Opera.
INTERROGATOR: "You are very fortunate. Things could have been far worse for you. Luckily, the therapist always 'goes to bat for you.' There are few options now except full cooperation. We are here to instruct you concerning how you must live your life, what words you are permitted to use when speaking to (or of) women, how you must behave in order to be decent and respectful of legal authorities. We are entrusted with protecting your Constitutional and human rights -- if any. Thank goodness you live in America."
JOHN: Barely able to speak, in a whisper: "I don't understand what you want from me. I will never legitimate this for you. I will never approve of what you have done or express anything but disgust and rage at this treatment. You are evil. You have no right to judge me or to treat anyone this way. You are a lie. This interrogation is a lie. The Constitution is made a lie by torturers, like you."
JUDGE: Looking drowsy and bored: "Proceed. Let's hurry this up. I have dinner reservations."
INTERROGATOR: "Well, your honor, the witness refuses to acknowledge the offenses disclosed to the court by unidentified others in secret proceedings -- proceedings in which he was not a participant for security reasons. He persists in absurd efforts to obtain copies of secret statements and other information, in order to confront witnesses, cross-examine, and many other practices associated with outdated notions of due process of law and civil liberties. The witness-suspect-detainee mistakenly believes that he is entitled to the truth concerning what we have done to him and to his loved-ones. We plan to provide additional 'therapy' to deal with his tendency towards hostility or inability to accept authority and 'move on' ..."
The judge stifles a yawn.
"The Supreme Court has expressly struck down most of the provisions of law to which John refers, like the exclusionary rule, determining just this week that this hallowed provision of American criminal procedure must be curtailed. The justices have also suggested that the Bill of Rights should be removed from the text of the Constitution. Only Justices Scalia and Thomas dissented on the grounds that the entire Constitution is unconstitutional. Personally, I agree with the dissent."
Everyone laughs at this display of wit.
"Communistic decisions, such as Mapp v. Ohio -- prohibiting involuntary stomach pumping as 'unconscionable' -- will only lead to terrorism and anarchy. After all, 'pumping' a person's mind through involuntary invasions, by way of hypnosis and drugging or enhanced interrogation methods, have been deemed peachy-keen by our Supreme Court. Why should stomach pumping be a problem? In the words of Justice Cardozo, 'Why should the criminal go free because the constable blundered?' ... Why indeed."
Another chuckle from the persons in the room, a "plurality" of whom express approval for this sentiment. Some applause may be in order.
JOURNALIST: "What worries me is that this guy will try to tell his story in the media. I cannot believe that we will ever allow ordinary people to say whatever they please or think whatever they want -- that could lead to Communism! After all, we members of the U.S. press are here to explain the world to these guys and gals, to everybody. We work hard at it. And they have the nerve to reject our suggestions concerning how they should govern themselves -- like us! -- with plenty of freedom and all. I think they're just ungrateful bastards. And besides, aren't they all a little ... dirty? Don't they smell funny? I don't know what it is with those people. It's really hard to get worked up over their troubles, you know, because Americans just can't identify with those weirdos and their strange, irrational religious beliefs. This Islamic fundamentalism -- or any religious belief -- is simply insane in today's intellectual climate. I am a Presbyterian myself."
SECRETARY: "How do you spell 'beliefs'?"
JOURNALIST: "We have editing people and proof-readers who deal with that kind of trivial stuff. I just do the deep thinking and debating with terrorists -- terrorists are all non-Americans, potentially speaking. I read what other people write on the air while looking wise and highly masculine. It's an art form. You know, only Dan Rather and me have it down to perfection."
JUDGE: "I would normally wish to hear from both sides. For national security reasons, however, only one side will be heard in this proceeding and most of the important evidence --"
INTERROGATOR: " -- All of the evidence, judge."
JUDGE: "All of the evidence must be kept from the victim ... eh, I mean the witness and/or defendant, whose life-long guilt concerning some unspecified offense is not really at issue. The witness-defendant's very existence is a kind of guilt, a terrible offense for which he must be made to feel guilty and punished. We must place him in the psychological equivalent of Auschwitz where he can be subjected to constant monitoring. This way he can contribute to society and our freedoms and rights will be secure."
INTERROGATOR: "That's right, your Honor, if we've got him that means he's 'one of the worst of the worst.' And if we have him, then (automatically) that makes him 'one of the worst of the worst.' You are to place a seal of approval on our actions by disregarding the Constitution. If I may say so, your Honor and all of the brethren are amazingly good at ignoring that document. Other than the New Jersey Supreme Court, I cannot imagine another tribunal that is friendlier to the concerns of national security in this troubling time than these 'courts' that have been (to use an apt phrase) 'set up' under the George W. Bush administration and that are now available to protect all Americans' rights."
JUDGE: "Thank you for the kind words concerning ourselves. We must do our duty. I understand that President Bush's features will be added to those on Mount Rushmore?"
JOURNALIST: "A committee headed by Dr. Rice has been established to deal with that issue."
INTERROGATOR: "The therapist will begin with regressive probing and questioning, under hypnosis and drugging. Naturally, none of this will require the victim's consent, nor will the process be explained to him. Sexual violations of John will then be indulged in for fun and profit. The 'process' is designed to elicit information concerning his early life. The goal is to uncover more of those areas of sensitivity that are found in most persons."
"The exploitation of these areas of sensitivity will allow for the maximum infliction of paralyzing emotional suffering -- plenty of threats, wounding insults, guilt-inducement, anxiety, financial pressures -- aimed at the complete destruction of psychological defenses leading to dismantling his identity. Most likely, John will end as a homeless and mentally-addled casualty."
Applause from observers. "If we are successful, we will bring about the total destruction of a personality, together with all coping or functioning mechanisms that might allow for recovery or adaptation to new stress. One really fun technique is to tell him under hypnotic suggestion that someone is aiming at a rifle at him accross the street, or that someone he loves has AIDS, is in a prison cell, has disappeared and that he'll never see that person again. Sexual violation is also useful, as I say, and plenty of fun. Concern for children and old people can always be exploited with wonderful results. Family members can be manipulated to deliver insults and threats, or to provide information, the victim ... eh, 'subject' ... can be persuaded under hypnosis that he is speaking to a celebrity or authority figure. The whole thing is very amusing. We especially like to create a danger or threat to a child that is loved by the victim. His experience of concern and torment for an injured child is fascinating to observe in light of our theories of human nature."
Turning to one of the men in suits: "Make sure that no drawing or writing, no communication of any kind escapes the subject's cell, that is, his area of enhanced sensitivity training. We want his creative work for purposes of analysis. However, we do not want people to discover our important work -- or his talents -- for national security reasons, so that we can lie -- dissemble -- about it publicly. Maybe we can steal and claim credit for some of his writings or artwork."
"Before we are done with John, we will frame him for something, or secretly claim that he is a terrorist member of a secret organization that cannot be named in a secret proceeding that will remain sealed (more secret) forever. All of this must be secret. It may help to accuse him of political incorrectness and get the idiotic kids all charged up."
"This psychological destruction can be accompanied by social isolation, high levels of structural stress, therapeutic theft of his assets, or other measures designed to maximize economic pressures and frustration leading to nervous reactions. In some ideal instances, psychosis or schizophrenia, or other forms of severe dementia have resulted from these psychological assassination efforts. There are a few master practioners of this art who have brought about the suicide of victims! I can only marvel at such expertise."
This should be said with great admiration.
"I mean, the suicide or death of the subjects of procedures who are contributing to society by their deaths is magnificent. It can be reported with absolute certainty that those persons who are made to commit suicide do not commit further crimes after their deaths. True, many have not committed crimes before their deaths. This must be seen as proof of the total success of these methods in preserving and protecting the rule of law -- together with our priceless freedoms -- from terrorists as well as little brown persons from the Middle East and Latin America, who may not be terrorists, but are only a step or two away from such evils by virtue of being little brown persons with strange beliefs and names."
Act II.
Scene 1.
Morgue: A badly mutilated, burned, corpse with visible lacerations and bruises is placed on a slab. Several ordinary, middle class Americans: woman and child, old couple, are standing near it along with the Interrogator and Therapist.
THERAPIST: "We are so pleased to report that our efforts were a complete success. We have cured all of John's problems. He no longer complains of difficulties relating to others and is absolutely well-adjusted. There is no further objection to ending our therapeutic relation with John. Please, there is no need to thank us for all that we have done. For some reason, since his death, John has not expressed gratitude to us. He is very lucky indeed that we entered his life at the nick of time to prevent any number of possible ailments from afflicting him by bringing about his death after excruciating torture. We have killed him in order to preserve his good health and total adjustment to his circumstances. It is sometimes necessary to kill a man in order to save him."
INTERROGATOR: "The nation is secure. I wish you to know that the terror threat level in New York today is velvet green. We expect that terror attacks on this great land of ours will increase -- partly as a result of our humble efforts as your nation's watchdogs -- bringing potential calamity to millions while increasing business and possible bonuses for us."
Therapist and Interrogator should offer beaming smiles to the family members of their victim.
THERAPIST AND INTERROGATOR: "You are very welcome. God Bless America!"
Defacements and Alterations of this text:
April 3, 2010 at 1:26 P.M. A letter was added to a word since my previous review. I have corrected that inserted "error."
September 21, 2009 at 10:41 A.M. Corrections were made, again, to several "errors" that had been previously inserted and corrected.
February 13, 2009 at 3:34 P.M. "errors" inserted in this work have now been corrected. I will try to keep up with "errors" that will be inserted in this play on a regular basis. Attacks on this text and all of my writings will be constant and unrelenting. My second book will not be sent to on-line booksellers. I am obstructed from seeing my books on-line. I do not know whether they continue to exist as I wrote them. My blogs have been damaged by hackers. No image can be posted by me at blogspot or at my profile. My essays are routinely plagiarized. Thinly altered versions of ideas found in those essays appear subsequently in newspaper and magazine articles ostensibly written by others. My publication efforts are blocked. I receive harassing phone calls every day. These and many other difficulties are routine experiences for me. I am not now nor have I ever been a member of Al Qaeda. ("What is it like to be plagiarized?" and "What is it like to be tortured?")
August 6, 2009 at 6:59 P.M. I received a call from 917-000-0000. What an unusual number? ("Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture" and "An Open Letter to My Torturers in New Jersey, Terry Tuchin and Diana Lisa Riccioli.")
February 26, 2009 at 9:57 A.M. Access to MSN Groups and MSN is blocked, denials of access to the Internet are common, my e-mails are inaccessible. I am told by flash notices that "MSN has closed." Spacing has been affected in this text. Other attacks from N.J. government computers are expected. Attacks against this essay, alterations of spacing, removal of letters, destruction of the text should also be expected. ("How censorship works in America.") Perhaps 50,000 hits have really been received at these blogs.
