Comment: Amazing Polly presents an interesting angle on the coronavirus plandemic in the form of a question: Does our government's handling of the coronavirus constitute torture? Here she presents a compelling case that the measures and guidelines (at this point reaching absurd levels) foisted on the general public contain within them many (if not all) elements of torture as described by Amnesty International's report.
When we factor in ponerology and the fact that the controlling elite are looking for total and complete control of the population, the use of psychological and physical torture on the public to increase compliance is certainly an appealing methodology for them to use.
The main points of the presentation have been transcribed below, with some slight editing of content for clarity.
Amnesty International report
Video on Bitchute
Transcript:
In this video, I want to ask the audience a question. It's a serious question and I'll go through the evidence of why I'm asking it in a minute. The question is this: does the handling of this virus amount to torture? On the face of it, it might seem like a ridiculous question and I can already hear the objections to it. But I'm going to take you through evidence from an Amnesty International report from 1975, where they took a deep look at torture, what constitutes it, what it does to people and what methods actual torturers have used in this thing called "no touch torture". It's psychological torture, it's mental torture. By the end of this I hope that you will see that the question doesn't have an easy answer.
In fact, I think you will come to the conclusion that, yes, indeed, the responses to this coronavirus in many regions of the world do in fact amount to torture. I'm going to also talk about why they would want to do this very briefly, at the end.
Let's begin by looking at excerpts from this 1975 Amnesty International report on torture. I want to take you to page 34, where they are going through the four elements of torture. They say that at least two persons must be involved, the torturer and a victim or victims, and that the victim is under the physical control of the torturer. They move to the second element, which is "the basic one of the infliction of acute pain and suffering". They specify in this paragraph that:
Definitions that would limit torture to physical assaults on the body exclude 'mental' and 'psychological' torture which undeniably causes acute pain and suffering, and must be incorporated in any definition.
Comment: Further from RT: More on Twitter: