Many years ago I read an article by an Iranian gentleman that basically highlighted that torture doesn't get the answers required, it harms both the sufferer and the person inflicting pain on a deep level. This also brings to mind the prevalence of torture in the early series of "24"... a problem later addressed by the producers when they actively avoided depiction of torture. In the early Obama presidency there was a lot of (over due) contrition over the use of enhanced interrogation at Guantanamo bay. Arguements for the use of torture were often given in the context of a "ticking time bomb" or equivalent scenario that needed to be stopped in a given time limit, despite such incidents not having a real life precedent.
I used to think I'd hold out well under torture until I had gastroscopy without anaesthetic. It was like being attacked by the alien facehugger. A rigid metal tube down the esophagus provoking the suffocation reflex (despite airflow to lungs) for 5mins which felt like 5 weeks. I was an absolute mess until they gave me nitrous gas for the colonoscopy, then it was relatively painless intoxication.
Frustrated they never showed the polar bears backstory including his work as a scientist with a gambling problem and a fractured relationship with his son.
To clarify, do you mean it wouldn't make sense that his body part would dissapear as they were severed in an alternative past. Or do you mean it doesn't belong on the plot/add to the story?
craftyindividual @ craftyindividual @lemm.ee Posts 4Comments 456Joined 2 yr. ago 
Remember the Levi's classic ad 1985, now I feel old.