Sean Hannity offers to be waterboarded for charity

[Dr Adequate]

Besides, Hannity knows something.

Evidence?

 

[Cleon]

If Hannity volunteered to do it, especially as a charity fund-raiser for the troops, then he will do it. He might take some time to set it up to make it a big event and raise as much $$$ as possible, but he wouldn't back out on it. Even if he turned chicken, the credibility cost would be WAY too high.

So far, Hannity hasn't said a thing about it. If he's setting it up to be a big event and raise as much $$$ as possible, he's doing a piss-poor job of it.

Regardless of his politics, he is consistent, and generally willing to put his money where his big mouth is. Personally, I can't stand Olbermann, and would love for Hannity to go for a couple hours to totally drain Olbermann's finances -- but KO would probably weasel out after about five minutes.

Amazing. Hannity is the one who (thus far) is ignoring Olbermann's challenge, but you think Olbermann is the one who would "weasel out."

 

[Cicero]

Say what you will about Olbermann, you gotta give him props for putting his money where his mouth is.

First KO had to remove his foot to make room for the coin.

 

[maddog]

So far, Hannity hasn't said a thing about it. If he's setting it up to be a big event and raise as much $$$ as possible, he's doing a piss-poor job of it. Amazing. Hannity is the one who (thus far) is ignoring Olbermann's challenge, but you think Olbermann is the one who would "weasel out."

Well, we'll see. I could be wrong. It's happened before. No, really, it has!

Hannity comes on it about 80 minutes, so we'll see if he says anything about it today.

 

[NotJesus]

Well, we'll see. I could be wrong. It's happened before. No, really, it has!

Hannity comes on it about 80 minutes, so we'll see if he says anything about it today.

Prediction: He won't. Not a word.

The million is mine!

 

[Cicero]

I'm for this for a number of reasons. However, in case some one thinks I'm being a hypocrite, I should explain what the difference is. It isn't because I don't like Hannity's politics, even though that is true. The difference is that, for Hannity and for military personnel who go through SERE training, this is entirely voluntary. They don't have to do it and they can, presumably, stop it at any time.

The primary reason I would like to see this happen is that it might wake Hannity up to what torture is and why Americans should have no part in it. I don't have high hopes that Hannity would publicly admit to being wrong on this (when has he ever on something that matters?), but it might be helpful if he actually understood what he talks about.

Hypocrite? You? If waterboarding is torture, and the POTUS and his AG says it is illegal, whether or not it is being done to extract information, or to SEAL's, BUD/S , or to a polemicist, who volunteers for the experience, or for charity, it is either illegal or it is just another nutty sensation in the same fashion as kids do with beer "shotgunning" and the "choke game."

 

[Cleon]

Hypocrite? You? If waterboarding is torture, and the POTUS and his AG says it is illegal, whether or not it is being done to extract information, or to SEAL's, BUD/S , or to a polemicist, who volunteers for the experience, or for charity, it is either illegal or it is just another nutty sensation in the same fashion as kids do with beer "shotgunning" and the "choke game."

One thing we can all agree on; whether waterboarding is torture or not, it can't possibly be as painful as trying to parse that sentence.

 

[Upchurch]

One thing we can all agree on; whether waterboarding is torture or not, it can't possibly be as painful as trying to parse that sentence.

Let me help:

"nuh-uh"

 

[Cicero]

One thing we can all agree on; whether waterboarding is torture or not, it can't possibly be as painful as trying to parse that sentence.

So waterboarding is not illegal?

 

[Cleon]

So waterboarding is not illegal?

Regrettably, the English language is incapable of accurately describing the look on my face right now.

 

[Cicero]

Let me help:

"nuh-uh"

By your estimation, waterboarding is a travesty when done by the CIA to KSM, but it is delicious retribution when done to Hannity. You have already helped enough.

 

[Cicero]

Regrettably, the English language is incapable of accurately describing the look on my face right now.

Why? Were you playing with an electrical outlet?

 

[Darat]

Stop the bickering.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[Dr Adequate]

So waterboarding is not illegal?

* sighs *

Many acts are illegal when done against their will to prisoners which are legal when performed between mutually consenting adults. You may think this an outrageous double standard, but me, I think I see some sort of rationale behind it.

 

[NotJesus]

Hypocrite? You? If waterboarding is torture, and the POTUS and his AG says it is illegal, whether or not it is being done to extract information, or to SEAL's, BUD/S , or to a polemicist, who volunteers for the experience, or for charity, it is either illegal or it is just another nutty sensation in the same fashion as kids do with beer "shotgunning" and the "choke game."

Bad try.

An act is not necessarily illegal under all circumstances. If Manny Pacquiao knocks Ricky Hatton senseless in a boxing ring, he's a hero. If he does it on the street, he's a criminal. Hannity, if he had the guts, would consent to be waterboarded. It would be done under tight controls, and he would be able to stop the procedure at any moment. It would not be, strictly speaking, torture, but a demonstration.

ETA: I see the good doctor beat me to it.

 

[maddog]

* sighs *

Many acts are illegal when done against their will to prisoners which are legal when performed between mutually consenting adults. You may think this an outrageous double standard, but me, I think I see some sort of rationale behind it.

You mean like acupuncture?

 

[Cicero]

* sighs *

Many acts are illegal when done against their will to prisoners which are legal when performed between mutually consenting adults. You may think this an outrageous double standard, but me, I think I see some sort of rationale behind it.

Consent does not mean that you can legally do anything with or to your own person. It is illegal to sell your organs, for instance. Let's review. Waterboarding is torture, whether you consent to it or not, but it is only illegal if you don't consent to it. So if a detainee is given the choice between waterboarding and another method, and they voluntarily select the waterboarding, it is then legal?

 

[Praktik]

Sounds like a "pick one" question when asked whether you'd prefer to be punched with the right or left fist.

If both methods are torture, than yes, it is still torture, for there is no real choice there.

 

[NotJesus]

Consent does not mean that you can legally do anything with or to your own person. It is illegal to sell your organs, for instance. Let's review. Waterboarding is torture, whether you consent to it or not, but it is only illegal if you don't consent to it. So if a detainee is given the choice between waterboarding and another method, and they voluntarily select the waterboarding, it is then legal?

No. That's not the same situation. The detainee would not have the ability to stop the procedure.

 

[Cicero]

Bad try.

An act is not necessarily illegal under all circumstances. If Manny Pacquiao knocks Ricky Hatton senseless in a boxing ring, he's a hero. If he does it on the street, he's a criminal. Hannity, if he had the guts, would consent to be waterboarded. It would be done under tight controls, and he would be able to stop the procedure at any moment. It would not be, strictly speaking, torture, but a demonstration.

ETA: I see the good doctor beat me to it.

Bad analogy. If Ricky initiated a fight with Manny on the street and Manny knocked Ricky out it would be self-defense. If both are in the ring, it is legal for either one to throw the first punch.

You have just described the waterboarding procedure as done by the CIA to the three detainees. There were "tight controls" and the object of the exercise can stop it by signaling the interrogators. The difference between KSM and Hitchens or Hannity, is that neither of them has any info to reveal.