Adam you sir are ignorant.

you dam right it is torture and I think its great. What are they supposed to do to get information that can save lives? Say “Pretty please tell us where the bad guys are”
and for you to say there is little doubt in your mind they have done this to innocent people is a joke..how can you pretend to say that when you have no clue?

There terrorists and they deserve to be tortured for what they have done and are doing to not only this country but the world.

How about all the times waterboarding has worked and they got important information that saved lives?

Well Bill,

First you say that we “have no clue” whether any of the torture victims are innocent, and then you suggest you know that they are all terrorists. For contradicting yourself in only four sentences, I think it just might be you who is “ignorant.”

As for my claim, there is plenty of evidence to back it up. Here’s a link to a story about five innocent people who were detained for 4 years in Guantanamo: http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=1997083 . This is just one of many examples of the Bush admin claiming innocent people were terrorists. In fact, an a recent case, the evidence used by the administration to claim that someone was a combatant was so bad, a panel of the Appeals Court in the DC Circuit mocked the evidence by comparing it to a search for a Snark in a poem:

“Just the place for a Snark!” the Bellman cried,
As he landed his crew with care;
Supporting each man on the top of the tide
By a finger entwined in his hair.

“Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
That alone should encourage the crew.
Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
What I tell you three times is true.”
(translation: saying something over and over doesn’t make it true)

Why you believe that the same administration that mishandled the Iraq War and Katrina would somehow apply perfect scrutiny to make sure only the innocent are tortured is beyond me, but it seems pretty clear that you are wrong.

I noticed there is a lot of “you don’t know what you’re talking about” on this particular subject. This is my favorite quote from a guy who did know what he was talking about. “It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile.”……Napolean to Berthier; 11 Nov. 1798

As long as it happened during the Bush Administration, genocidal maniacs with blood still on their hands would be considered “tortured” if they had to sleep on wrinkled sheets. The instant this treatment is halted, the same loopies will chant in unison, ” That %$*$$@ Bush is not doing enough to protect us.” They just don’t like being out of power.

The ABCNews story does not say the US gov’t classified them as “innocent” but rather as “no longer enemy combatants” or “NLEC.”

My response to the article is:
If only the Chinese Uighurs had not gone to Kandahar — THE hot spot for Al Qaeda — and had they not chosen to do Koranic studies in Kandahar and had they also not received training on machine guns (again, in the hot spot for Al Qaeda, Kandahar) and had not been associated with said bad actors… well they might’ve gotten to Turkey eventually.

Kudos to Hitchens for experiencing what other reporters only blather about. He’s revered/reviled at times by both sides of the spectrum. It says much about his character that he choses to stand squarely against the Bush Derangement Syndrome crowd.

To Adam S., Itsazoo, and BobZ: Waterboarding is not torture. Mr. Hitchens’ own experiment proves it.

First of all, after Mr. Hitchens experienced waterboarding the first time and was disappointed with his reaction, he actually asked the “torturers” to do it to him a second time! “And so then I said, with slightly more bravado than was justified, that I’d like to try it one more time.” What masochistic torture victim would ask his torturers to do it *again*?

Second, Mr. Hitchens’ long-term effects include some irregular and minor sleep difficulties, which he dismisses by saying, “No doubt this will pass.” *These* are the long-term effects one can expect from having undergone *torture*?. After I passed the Bar, I had some irregular and minor sleep difficulties arising from the stress of studying too hard. Using Mr. Hitchens’ reasoning, I’m shocked to learn that I might have been tortured by the state of Missouri!

Third and finally, Mr. Hitchens also sets waterboarding up as something of a “gateway” torture: if we let our government use waterboarding on terrorrists, how much longer before we let them use “real” torture? This argument not only belies Mr. Hitchens’ position that waterboarding *is* torture, but it is also illogical. If we allow the government to interrogate detainees in *any* way, people like Mr. Hitchens would conceivably a slippery slope to bringing out the Iron Maiden (the torture device, not the band).

Thank you, Mr. Hitchens, for proving what I already suspected: waterboarding is clearly not torture and it’s a perfectly acceptable interrogation technique.

http://www.grafshepherd.com

Graf.sheppard,

I’m really sorry that this actually needs to be explained to you, but what happened to Hitchens was not as extreme as what happens to actual detainees. They don’t get to opt out after 10 seconds when they can’t stand it anymore. They don’t get “safe words” or metal clips to release when they want to stop. They don’t get to have only one or two rounds of waterboarding. What is important to note is that Hitchens says it is clearly torture *and* has had lasting psychological effects after what must be the absolute bare minimum of what any actual detainees would endure. Waterboarding is clearly torture and it is truly amazing to see the lengths that folks like you and BobZ will go to defend the practice.

BobZ says, “If only the Chinese Uighurs had not gone to Kandahar … well they might’ve gotten to Turkey eventually.”

In a world of almost 7 billion people, many people are going to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. BobZ appears to be suggesting that it’s perfectly OK for those people to be tortured even without evidence that would stand up in a court of law. Obviously you can believe what you want, but I’m happy that most American’s do not share this disregard for human life.

Adam S., thanks for highlighting the difference between what Mr. Hitchens experienced and what the detainees undergo. However, it is a huge leap to say the following:

1. Hitchens experienced waterboarding for 10 seconds (twice) and now is mildly aggrieved.
2. Therefore, detainees who experience waterboarding for multiple, longer intervals must have been tortured.

My point is that Hitchens’s experiences really don’t tell us all that much, and what his experiences *do* tell us sounds pretty favorable to waterboarding. Based on what I know of real torture (e.g., thumbscrews, electric shocks), I wouldn’t ask for more after ten seconds of it. Furthermore, even Hitchens downplays his “lasting psychological effects.” Thus, we can’t really tell what the lasting psychological effects on detainees are or will be. I can say that the effects (psychologically and physically) are a darned sight better than what American prisoners in Islamofascist hands experience.

Going through USMC training on the island of Okinawa I was hung upside down with my arms and legs tied together and a water hose stuck in my mouth. The water runs out of your mouth and right in your nose, GET IT. They were showing us various methods of interogation if you were captured. I enlisted in the USMC. If it’s good enough to train an American citizen who voluntered for military service like that, it’s good enough for someone CAPTURED on the field of battle.