A Reversal Of What Constitutes Torture And How Wrong It Is
Here is the definite morality tale for all those rightwing mouthpieces out there who still think that waterboarding is not torture - a tale coming from one of your very own, I should add:
Hitchens says drowning practice is 'torture'
Christopher Hitchens, the British journalist who is among the staunchest defenders of the war in Iraq, was waterboarded for a recent article in Vanity Fair.
Hitchens says drowning practice is 'torture'
Christopher Hitchens, the British journalist who is among the staunchest defenders of the war in Iraq, was waterboarded for a recent article in Vanity Fair.
"Believe Me, It's Torture" is the article's title.
In it and an accompanying video Hitchens outlines a trip to North Carolina where interrogators experienced in the Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape (SERE) training that Special Forces soldiers participate in to resist torture at the hands of enemies.
"I apply the Abraham Lincoln test for moral casuistry: 'If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.' Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture," Hitchens wrote after enduring the procedure.
Hitchens is one of the staunchest defenders of the Bush administration's decision to go to war in Iraq, arguing on the 5th anniversary of the invasion that he was right all along. After the photos of prisoner mistreatment at Abu Ghraib became public he wrote that such conditions nonetheless made the prison an improvement from its pre-war state.
In his most recent piece, Hitchens does not touch on his arguments in support of the war, but he argues that waterboarding as a practice is not helpful in the pursuit and persecution of the war against al Qaeda.
(Read the rest here)
And to all those out there who still think that torture is acceptable (I'm looking especially at you, 44% of America, along with the Bushies and their enablers/supporters), perhaps you will now rethink your appalling, approving/supporting stance for such barbaric and savage injustice.
As an aside, I keep wondering how many folks would remain "pro-torture" - let alone still insist that waterboarding is not torture - after undergoing willingly what Hitchens submitted himself to (and who showed courage in this respect).
That has always been the argument, eh?
Then again - what does it say about a society where those who are the most pro-war and pro-torture can only change their minds after undergoing waterboarding, as Hitchens did?
Cowardly faux patriots indeed.
Addendum: more at Nunc Scio, The Galloping Beaver, Comments From Left Field, The Vanity Press, and News of the Restless.
(Cross-posted at The Wild, Wild Left)
In it and an accompanying video Hitchens outlines a trip to North Carolina where interrogators experienced in the Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape (SERE) training that Special Forces soldiers participate in to resist torture at the hands of enemies.
"I apply the Abraham Lincoln test for moral casuistry: 'If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.' Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture," Hitchens wrote after enduring the procedure.
Hitchens is one of the staunchest defenders of the Bush administration's decision to go to war in Iraq, arguing on the 5th anniversary of the invasion that he was right all along. After the photos of prisoner mistreatment at Abu Ghraib became public he wrote that such conditions nonetheless made the prison an improvement from its pre-war state.
In his most recent piece, Hitchens does not touch on his arguments in support of the war, but he argues that waterboarding as a practice is not helpful in the pursuit and persecution of the war against al Qaeda.
(Read the rest here)
And to all those out there who still think that torture is acceptable (I'm looking especially at you, 44% of America, along with the Bushies and their enablers/supporters), perhaps you will now rethink your appalling, approving/supporting stance for such barbaric and savage injustice.
As an aside, I keep wondering how many folks would remain "pro-torture" - let alone still insist that waterboarding is not torture - after undergoing willingly what Hitchens submitted himself to (and who showed courage in this respect).
That has always been the argument, eh?
Then again - what does it say about a society where those who are the most pro-war and pro-torture can only change their minds after undergoing waterboarding, as Hitchens did?
Cowardly faux patriots indeed.
Addendum: more at Nunc Scio, The Galloping Beaver, Comments From Left Field, The Vanity Press, and News of the Restless.
(Cross-posted at The Wild, Wild Left)
0 POVs/Comments:
Post a Comment
Please feel free to comment on APOV. However, remember to keep in check your tone and respect for all here. Let rational, reasoning, enthousiastic and passionate conversations and discussions rule first and foremost in our participatory democracy, so as to facilitate the free exchange of reality-based facts and ideas. In between, do not forget to have fun and enjoy yourselves ... in other words: keep on rockin'! - Mentarch