Chris Hitchens being waterboarded.

Senex said:
Not exactly James Bond. I'm glad the countries secrets aren't in that guy's hands. He gave up before they even started. None of my submissives ever gave up the safe word inside of 30 seconds.
Click to expand...
The point was not for him to keep a secret as long as possible, the point was to convince him the method was torture.
 
Doctor Evil said:
BTW you seem to be implying that he considered it not to be torture until now. Link?
Click to expand...

Late last year, the writer, polemicist and fierce proponent of the US-led invasion of Iraq Christopher Hitchens attempted, in a piece for the online magazine Slate, to draw a distinction between what he called techniques of "extreme interrogation" and "outright torture".
From this, his foes inferred that since it was Hitchens' belief that America did not stoop to the latter, the practice of waterboarding - known to be perpetrated by US forces against certain "high-value clients" in Iraq and elsewhere - must fall under the former heading.
Click to expand...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/02/humanrights.usa
 
egslim said:
The point was not for him to keep a secret as long as possible, the point was to convince him the method was torture.
Click to expand...

It seemed the waterboard guys were a lttle optimistic before they brought Hitchens in when they stated their strategy was going to be one round of fifteen minute boarding with a fifteen minute break before another fifteen minutes of boarding before a break to be followed by a thirty minute session. It only took a few seconds and they almost killed him. He looked like he was going to have a heart attack when they took his hood off. He looked like he was ten on a scale of ten for physical distress. Somebody should have realized he wasn't in good enough shape to be tortured like that. That looked way too dangerous in pursuit of a story. He's not a young guy. That was a stupid idea.
 
Senex said:
It seemed the waterboard guys were a lttle optimistic before they brought Hitchens in when they stated their strategy was going to be one round of fifteen minute boarding with a fifteen minute break before another fifteen minutes of boarding before a break to be followed by a thirty minute session. It only took a few seconds and they almost killed him. He looked like he was going to have a heart attack when they took his hood off. He looked like he was ten on a scale of ten for physical distress. Somebody should have realized he wasn't in good enough shape to be tortured like that. That looked way too dangerous in pursuit of a story. He's not a young guy. That was a stupid idea.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it was seconds rather than minutes?
 
Senex said:
Somebody should have realized he wasn't in good enough shape to be tortured like that.
Click to expand...
He obtained medical advice beforehand, the doctor's initial response was to laugh and say something like waterboarding was for 20 to 30yo Green Berets.

It seemed the waterboard guys were a lttle optimistic before they brought Hitchens in when they stated their strategy was going to be one round of fifteen minute boarding with a fifteen minute break before another fifteen minutes of boarding before a break to be followed by a thirty minute session.
Click to expand...
I think you misremember that. If you watch the video they talk about "fifteen on, fifteen off." I assumed they meant minutes, but afterwards realised it was seconds.
Consider that the moment you breathe in with a wet towel over your head you start drowning because you suck water into your nose. Nobody would survive that for fifteen minutes.
 
egslim said:
He obtained medical advice beforehand, the doctor's initial response was to laugh and say something like waterboarding was for 20 to 30yo Green Berets.
Click to expand...

I almost posted "waterboarding is a young man's game" but thought someone might think I was being insensitive.

I think you misremember that. If you watch the video they talk about "fifteen on, fifteen off." I assumed they meant minutes, but afterwards realised it was seconds.
Consider that the moment you breathe in with a wet towel over your head you start drowning because you suck water into your nose. Nobody would survive that for fifteen minutes.
Click to expand...

That makes sense to me now. I think you and mummymonkey are right, it must have been seconds.

There would have been hell to pay if they killed him. Would Hitchens life insurance be required to pay if he died undergoing voluntary waterboarding? Who do the torturers work for? Do they carry some type of liability insurance? Did his magazine editor sign off on this stunt? Hitchens still looked like hell on the follow-up interview. He looked like he might be permanently scarred by this episode. It seems silly to have ever denied it was torture -- but I was surprised how quicky your lungs can fill with water when just covered by a plain old bath towel. You won't catch me writing any stories about my voluntary experience.
 
Damn right. "WHO ARE YOU WORKING FOR?!"

hero-showdown-john-mcclane-vs-jack-bauer-20071120024155853-000.jpg
 
Senex said:
That makes sense to me now. I think you and mummymonkey are right, it must have been seconds.
Click to expand...

I think they meant that they would pull back the towel and allow him to breathe freely after 15 seconds for fifteen seconds. He never made it to the first off period. I rather doubt they make those kind of promises for their serious customers either.

There would have been hell to pay if they killed him. Would Hitchens life insurance be required to pay if he died undergoing voluntary waterboarding? Who do the torturers work for? Do they carry some type of liability insurance? Did his magazine editor sign off on this stunt?
Click to expand...
Life insurance? Surely, you jest.

I'm sure that he signed multiple releases for the two doing the work, the magazine, the owner of the garage, the cameraman, the manufacturer of the board, you name it. That is likely also part of the reason the guys were masked, the other being that being identified positively could have serious implications for their legal and financial future.

Hitchens still looked like hell on the follow-up interview. He looked like he might be permanently scarred by this episode. It seems silly to have ever denied it was torture -- but I was surprised how quicky your lungs can fill with water when just covered by a plain old bath towel. You won't catch me writing any stories about my voluntary experience.
Click to expand...
I concur.
 
Last edited:
What baffles me is that he needed to try it. Of course it is ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ torture! It is extracting information under duress. If it wasn't torture they could achieve the same result over a cup of tea and biscuits.
 
wow...that second video reveals a little more information...one could argue that when Hitchens agreed to do this, he didn't think it would be that bad, so it wasn't that brave to agree to do it. However, after doing it the first time, and lasting 12 seconds, he actually requested to do it again, knowing full well what he'd be facing, to see if he could last longer.

He lasted 19 seconds the second time.
 
Nogbad said:
What baffles me is that he needed to try it. Of course it is ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ torture! It is extracting information under duress. If it wasn't torture they could achieve the same result over a cup of tea and biscuits.
Click to expand...
I know an awful lot of people who say, "Oh, its not that bad"; until they actually see videos of it. And having someone who is generally pro-war, and strongly supportive of the actions in Iraq, come out an unequivocally state that this is torture, and it should be stopped...that carries a lot of weight.
 
Even seeing videos of it is not all that bad. There's nothing gruesome about it; no blood, no pain. I would imagine that a person undergoing it for a second or third time, unwillingly might get just a tech feisty before being strapped down good and tight, but I imagine the audio track (minus the music) is probably much worse than the video. It doesn't look bad, but then absolute sensory deprivation doesn't look bad either.

I'm surprised that Paxman didn't make more of Hitchen's stand on the matter *before* he tried the cure.

If for no other reason, one has to admire Hitchens for the courage of his belief in evidence, and the willingness to change his opinions when faced with the reality. He could, for instance, have come out after he first try and lied about it in order to keep his pride about his opinions and his macho (whatever level that might be - I suspect smaller than the ego supporting his opinions). "Oh, yeah, it wasn't that bad...<haunted smile>...I wouldn't recommend it for grins, but I'm here, aren't I?" And then not ever thought of trying it again. Heaven knows we've seen people do that, about much less serious matters on this forum.

My hat's off.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom