Child of Rage: A documentary about a young girl who was sexually abused when she was a year old. She has a desire to murder her entire family and carries out numerous disturbing tasks.
The Scariest Drug in the World: Scopolamine is a drug that when taken keeps a person coherent but makes them open to follow commands. It’s been used to make people steal, as a rape drug and a way to humiliate people. It’s known as a “chemical hypnosis”. This film documents people’s experience with it.
An Interview with a Cannibal: An interview with a man named, Issei Sagawa who committed a pretty horrific crime. He butchered and raped a young Dutch women because he wanted to absorb her “energy”. He spent 3 days consuming her flesh.
The Bridge: A film on the Golden Gate Bridge, which captures the number of suicides. Many describe it as a powerful documentary, that leaves a lasting impression.
High on Crack Street: Shows just how badly crack ruins lives. A great portrayal of the harsh, dark side of drugs.
Aokigahara/Suicide Forest:A geologist walks through the forest and shows us what he sees. Definitly contains some depressing material.
Atomic Wounds: The effect of a nuclear weapon on a mass number of people. It’s disheartening, it’s horrifying, but it’s reality.
Just Melvin, Just Evil: A documentary about a tormented family who suffered from sexual abuse and substance abuse because of one man. It leaves you wondering how can one man be so destructive?
Earthlings: One of the most intense documentaries made about animal abuse. Footage contains graphic material.
Feel free to add to this list :)
I’m going to have nightmares but I can’t stop looking!!! >___< Ahh!!!
I’ve seen child of rage, it’s crazy! Now I want to see the rest
OMG yessssss. Documentaries are my favorite kind of cinematography & this list just made me so excited I cant even begin to explain.
Interview with a Cannibal is disturbing as fuck - I’d like to add “Dear Zachary” to the list. It’s a documentary about a woman who killed her ex-husband and how his family tries to cope/stop her from harming the child she had with him. It will rip your heart out.
When Apple published its first Transparency Report on government activity in late 2013, the document contained an important footnote that stated:
“Apple has never received an order under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act. We would expect to challenge such an order if served on us.”
Writer and cyber-activist Cory Doctorow at the time recognized that language as a so-called “warrant canary,” which Apple was using to thwart the secrecy imposed by the Patriot Act.
Warrant canaries are a tool used by companies and publishers to signify to their users that, so far, they have not been subject to a given type of law enforcement request such as a secret subpoena. If the canary disappears, then it is likely the situation has changed — and the company has been subject to such request.
Now, Apple’s warrant canary has disappeared. A review of the company’s last two Transparency Reports, covering the second half of 2013 and the first six months of 2014, shows that the “canary” language is no longer there.
The warrant canary’s disappearance is significant because Section 215 of the Patriot Act permits the National Security Agency to demand companies to hand over their business records in secret.
The Patriot Act tool is also controversial because the NSA gains permission to use it by applying to the FISA Court, a body where only the government can speak and whose records are kept almost entirely secret. The tech industry has been battling to disclose the existence of so-called “FISA requests” and only won the right to do so this year; however, companies must wait six months to disclose the number of requests they receive, and can only do so as a range (such as “0-999″).
The disappearance of Apple’s warrant canary thus suggests that the company too is affected by FISA proceedings. Apple did not immediately respond to an email request for comment.
Update: As the ACLU’s Christopher Soghoian has noted, Apple’s latest report says it has not received any orders for “bulk data.” That language, however, appears in the National Security Letter section of the document (NSL letters concern domestic FBI requests, not FISA requests) and, in any event, not all FISA requests concern bulk data.
Meanwhile, as stated above, Apple is newly silent in regard to Section 215, the law that covers the FISA requests whose existence is subject to temporary non-disclosure rules. The upshot is that it is unclear if Apple has not received any FISA requests, or if it is under a gag order not to disclose such requests.
Update 2: Ars Technica suggests that the disappearance of the warrant canary is a result of Apple following new Justice Department guidelines that permit companies to immediately publish ranges of surveillance requests — so long as the figure reflects a combined number of FISA requests and NSL requests. In other words, Apple may have received NSL requests, but not FISA ones (that does not necessarily explain, however, its decision to remove the section 215 language).