Hitchens's waterboarding experience

I doubt many readers of Comment Central approve of the use of waterboarding on subjects being interrogated by the United States.

But still there may be some who confuse support for the war on terror with support for this technique.

If there are then I urge you to read Christopher Hitchens's article on his own waterboarding experience and his encapsulation of the argument against its use:

1. Waterboarding is a deliberate torture technique and has been prosecuted as such by our judicial arm when perpetrated by others.

2. If we allow it and justify it, we cannot complain if it is employed in the future by other regimes on captive U.S. citizens. It is a method of putting American prisoners in harm’s way.

3. It may be a means of extracting information, but it is also a means of extracting junk information. (Mr. Nance told me that he had heard of someone’s being compelled to confess that he was a hermaphrodite. I later had an awful twinge while wondering if I myself could have been “dunked” this far.) To put it briefly, even the C.I.A. sources for the Washington Post story on waterboarding conceded that the information they got out of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was “not all of it reliable.” Just put a pencil line under that last phrase, or commit it to memory.

4. It opens a door that cannot be closed. Once you have posed the notorious “ticking bomb” question, and once you assume that you are in the right, what will you not do? Waterboarding not getting results fast enough? The terrorist’s clock still ticking? Well, then, bring on the thumbscrews and the pincers and the electrodes and the rack.

I agree completely.

It is moral blindness of the worst kind to think that just because I (and Hitchens, of course) share the desire of the US administration to prosecute the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, we should go along with this dreadful practice.

As for those who claim that it isn't torture, Hitchens has this to say:

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.

Comments

[John Bargh]

Mr Finkelstein, I think if you'll re-read the article you'll see that those four points were actually Hitchens' summation of Mr. Malcom Nance's position on torture, not Hitchens own. I think it's fair to say that he agrees - he calls Nance his "main witness" - but it isn't really "his encapsulation" (Hitchens, that is).

That aside, I thought it was an excellent article. I have a lot of respect for Hitchens as a journalist, and this only increases it. Especially in light of some other comments he's made in the past that show, at the least, ambivalence towards the use of such techniques. I think it reflects an ability to change his mind, even if it puts him out of step with those considered to be his newly-acquired fellow travellers.

[Richard Young]

I'm afraid this is more Hitchens tosh. What kind of idiot needs to be tortured to verify that, yes, what's happening is indeed torture? This isn't even remotely good journalism - it's Hitch writing all about Hitch, which, to be fair to him, is all that Vanity Fair seems interested in commissioning from him. For a better analysis of his piece, try Phil Carter: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/inteldump/2008/07/stupid_is_as_hitchens_does.html

[Nullius]

The question is: *why* torture people? Clearly, torture is highly unreliable as a means of obtaining information, but it is very effective as a means of *sending* information - particularly what Chomsky calls "maintaining credibility". Think of the great torturers of the last century - the Gestapo, Stalins's men, the Japanese, Pinochet - they all used torture primarily as a means of political control, not gathering evidence.

[Lloyd]

After reading about "waterboarding,
Abu Ghraib prison" and so forth, I
really ask how much has the USA
Constituted been distorted, and the Geneva Convention been ignored? Is
not this just plain "taking advantage" of the Feedom in which
we have previously lived, prior to this (Administration) that we have had to contend with this past several years! I can now understand
more clearly of the "Political
Party" taking over the Chancelery
in Germany in 1933, and then acting as they wished, in a detrimental way.
Let no Administration take over Our
Constitution in the future, or it will be the beginning of the end,
for America, as we have known it to be in past years! Craewl into the
so-called "minds" that have usurped
Our Constitution! Perhaps some in the Administration and Agencies should allow themselves to be "water-boarded" before inflicting this horrid "technique"
on others! Good Lord! What a mess
of people". The Devil's own? I
really wonder, as as have pondered
about Satan and Evil over the years!

[James]

It is quite tricky defining what torture actually is though, having read some of Hitchens' stuff before, I think I've got a pretty good idea.

[Andrew Milner]

This story was on YouTube two days ago. To my knowledge, the only comment to date has been on the Telegraph Blogs. This is a really important story, so to delay really is remiss of you. Just received clearance from HMG have we? As a high profile journalist and supporter of the Iraq War, Christopher Hitchens is in some sense arguing against himself. For such a high profile media personality to so publicly showcase water boarding as torture, represents a serious body blow to the Bush administration. The United States of Torture: It's official. Many countries aspire to the standards set by the United States. But unfortunately the US fails to live up to its own standards.

[Andy]

Andrew Milner - I would agree with the conclusion of your post, but you have either missed or deliberately ignored DF's point - it is possible to argue for or against the Iraq war independently of the means used to do so:

"It is moral blindness of the worst kind to think that just because I (and Hitchens, of course) share the desire of the US administration to prosecute the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, we should go along with this dreadful practice."

It is in fact not just possible but in fact essential to separate these issues: otherwise, to conflate my cliches, the slippery slope ends up with the end justifying the means - "we're the good guys so we're allowed to do whatever it takes to win"

[Greg]

Ask Daniel Pearl if waterboarding is torture....Oh wait. YA CAN'T because THEY CUT HIS HEAD OFF! Quit being such a sniveler and realize the enemy does not have ANY rules at all. ANY atrocity can be legitimized by saying it's Gods will. In WW2 any soldier caught on the battlefield out of uniform was shot as a spy. It should be the same today.

[jacqui lenhardt]

Why is the world wringing its hands on this issue? While very little is said about "Them" sawing off our peoples heads with dull knives on camera. The soldiers of ours that they captured have been torn from limb to limb literally with no outcry from our "allies". Our own soldiers experience waterboarding as part of training and by the way we did get a hell of a lot of good information from Khalid Sheik Mohammed. I love the President and the fact that he has taken this fight to the enemy. Thank God the democrats weren't in office or we would all be sent to tolerance school to help us understand what WE did to offend the terrorists. Wake up people.

[Nita]

You mean that the nice people of the world are afraid that terrorists will start waterboarding our soldiers and everyone who disagreees with them, instead of beheading and sending their suicide bombers to kill and mutulate them? Oh,the horrors!

[Bryan Abbott]

It's a waste of perfectly good ground water. I say we just put a bullet in each prisoners head and help them on their path to martyrdom. I'm quite serious. Just execute them and be done with it. We in the US are not going to (nor should we be attempting to) win a popularity contest with our enemies. Torturing a rat does display the sadistic side of a captor. It's time to treat these terrorist Dogs more humanely and summarily execute them.
Let's put the torture argument to rest and proceed in a more efficient manner.

[Mick]

For the Geneva Convenrtion huggers out there, have you bothered to read it? It works two ways. It protects legitimate combatants who follow the rules of war, and it condemns those who don't to death. In our own armed forced we have "conventional warfare" troops and "unconventional warfare" troops. When you join an unconventional warfare unit, you have ot sign a volunteer statement. PArt of that statement (at least in the 1970's) was that you understood you were NOT covered by the geneva convention. Part of that reason was because unconventional warfare troops do not follow all the rules. For example, some units, of which will remain anonymous, do not wear uniforms and often are of ethnicity from the area of operations. Example, most 7th Special Forces Goup members I knew in the 70's were of Hispanic Background and spoke spanish because their area of operations was Central and South America. They were trained to infiltrate the population and often did not wear uniforms. "Illegal combatants are NOT covered by the Geneva Convention because they do not wear uniforms or are part of a recognized armed force, use civilians, etc. so they are supposed to be tried and executed by a military court so that others do not violate the rules of war.

[Michal]

Point 2 is ridiculous. If we use waterboarding, terrorist may do the same to their capives.

Oh, right. 'cos if we don't use it they will only chop their heads off.

The “ticking bomb” question is a real one. And I bet Mr Finkelstein would suddenly change his view on torture if it was his wife and kids sitting on it.

The only argument which makes any sense is point 3. And well, there is probably not a lot you can do about it.

[OH]

Hitchens, trying to re-build his credibility as supposedly a liberal, so that he can be of service to the Authoritarians like he was on his support for the Disaster in Iraq.

[Dichard Rawkins]

Andy and Greg are rather obvious Astroturfers. Yes, the bad guys are indeed hideously bad. No, you can't do the same stuff and still be the good guys, you just become more bad guys.

[Leslie Gargan]

Dear Jacqui,
Unfortunately, the President you love so much took the fight to the wrong enemy. The Al-Qaeda terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 were trained in Afghanistan, and were primarily Saudis loyal to bin Laden. Iraq was not involved -- was never part of the War on Terror until Bush decreed it was. Read a book.

[Jon]

Thank you Jacqui L. for speaking some truth. Those who don't understand what evil we face in this enemy are definitely doomed to "repeat history". While I respect Hitchen's position, it is his opinion only. Wake up people. Don't give your country and freedom away to this hand-wringing. Get over it and let's win this war. A victory for the U.S. and allies will benefit far more people in this world than a loss. And as an incentive, all you whiners will still have the freedom to compare our President to Hitler.

[Leslie Gargan]

Waterboarding is clearly torture, as defined by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention; it also meets the four essential criteria that defines "torture" by the United Nations Convention Against Torture.

As for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, behead the son-of-a-bitch for what he did to Daniel Pearl. An eye for an eye, a head for a head.

[Chris Coughlin]

If torture is effective in getting valuable information, why is Bin Laden still alive and at large? Prisoners are tortured simply because those who do so are sexual perverts who enjoy causing pain. Greg is right, shoot captured soldiers or combatants who are not in uniform on battlefields. Those in uniform must be accorded protection provided by the Geneva Accords.

[Dan]

"If we allow it and justify it, we cannot complain if it is employed in the future by other regimes on captive U.S. citizens. It is a method of putting American prisoners in harm’s way." I think this idea fails to recognize who we're dealing with. I seriously doubt al-quaeda and company are really waiting to take their cue from the US on how to treat people. One of the big differences between US prisoners and Al Quaeda's is the presence of a heartbeat. There appear to be some exceptions. And, if a US soldier or intelligence officer steps across a line, the charge should be murder, and it should be capital.

But, when hundreds of bodies show up with knee-caps drilled, genitalia crushed and mutilated, decapitations, slit throats, families murdered together, children murdered, etc...well, my objections to waterboarding seem a bit hollow on those days. Then, my objection is that they don't use enough water.

[Andrew Milner]

Thanks for providing a second bite of the cherry opportunity, Andy. The right decision for the wrong reasons. The end justify the means. You really are on a slippery slope. I'm still looking to join the good guys, but all I see are bad guys and worse guys.
The big picture is that the Iraq misadventure will hasten the decline of the United States, as its political, moral and economic influence is increasingly compromised. But that will let China into the driving seat. Nice, neutral Buddhist country, anyone? Like being given a life sentence at age 90. "Authority can kiss my donkey." Isn't that what you say?

[KOJINATOR]

The demonstration of water boarding does not amount to news and only an adult naif new to this planet would think it is anything but harmful. Please give us news and avoid the politically expedient practice of thought splicing that passes for journalism today.

[Paul Feagan]

The problem, as usual, is that Western values are expected to be applied where they are not reciprocated.
Imagine being in a boxing match where you have to follow Queensbury rules but your opponent does whatever he wants. You then have to resort to a brawl in order to survive and are then admonished by the referee and crowd for breaking the rules.

[a person concerned]

Excuse me for being naive but why on earth is this subject even a discussion - I mean Torture, is I believe, a base level in humanity which, whilst in philosophical and theoretical terms ( aka Noam Chomsky)can be discussed, is simply horrible. If discussed in this philosophical terms almost legitimises the subject and therefore maintains a status -quo of normality - a sort of SNAFU in my opinion. For one side to have some sort of legitimacy to torture and at the same time preach "civil rights" is quite absurd! Clearly Terrorism is complex but in the old tradition if fighting fire with fire where have we been for the past several centuries! By quoting Noam Chomsky who is a respected writer and thinking from the 1960’s it does nonetheless represent part of the problem; Technology has advanced (debatable perhaps!) but certainly the human condition of thinking clearly has not moved up the scale in parallel let alone ahead where it should be in humanity. If such issues sells newspaper then there we have it! But please let’s get to the grass roots of this. Those hailed as the victors and then the captors over the terrorist simply apply the methods which the terrorist knows he will expect and therefore redundant message ( aka Chomsky)– it is in any case quite shameful. Shame on the Americans who force upon its own population through fast-food transmissions religious expectation and then expect the world to discuss and condone thuggery of its captives.

[Steve MacFarlane]

I doubt many readers of Comment Central approve of the use of waterboarding on subjects being interrogated by the United States.

100% wrong I think. I had never imagined supporting the torture of suspects before the show 24, but it won the argument on a gut level. I'm on the centre left, but I think anyone who argues that the rights of one individual are more important than the right of millions of individuals to live is an ideologue. Because it's a question of degree: the rights of every human being on this planet are obviously more important than the rights of one human being - who would contest this? Mankind should be consigned to destruction to protect the constitutional rights of one man in the last moments of human life? If the terrorist could destroy the world, everyone would support waterboarding (and more). I think those who argue that millions of lives should be sacrificed to protect the rights of one individual value ideas more than human life.

[its_Chet]

Given that the Times is a British paper, and that Christopher Hutchens is British, I keep wondering why anyone would think what the US does in pursuit of its own national security is any business of this paper of Mr. Hutchens. Would it be appropriate for me to rant and rave bitterly about the Prime Minister? Would it be appropriate for me to call for the abolishment of the House of Lords? What right would I have? I'll tell you. I'd have none. Is respect and the concept of minding your own business really so hard to grasp? Apparently so.

I could now discuss why I don't believe that waterboarding is torture, and how I personally would define torture. I could offer my opinion on what rights enemy combatants who do not wear a uniform, who hide behind a religion and unarmed civilians, who leave young children in cars with bombs in them and detonate said bombs with the children inside, who commit some of the most savage, barbaric, and grisly murders the world has ever seen upon men and women of any and every age in pursuit of fascist world domination, yes, I could offer my opinion as an American on what MY country ought to do with these insects when they are found, but why validate the concept of sticking your nose in another country's business? That's what I'd be doing if I discussed my opinions on this British paper's website. It would be hypocritical for me to do that after calling on you to mind your own business.

So I'll just say that I have a right to complain about what my country does or doesn't do, but not about yours. Likewise, you have the same rights in your country, but not mine. Don't hold your breath waiting for me to forfeit my country's sovereignty to foreign powers or people. Good day to you.

[Tom]

Mr. Finklestein's missing the point. The only reason Hitchens did this was as a pr stunt. In corporate MSM America "conflict sells." Brittany Spears and Paris Hilton were spun to death for maximum ratings. Now, it's time for something new.

In the U.S., saying this is torture is like publically criticizing Israel. Both are almost illegal. So what does the MSM do? They continue to tow the line to the Bush Administration, just as the Congress does.

But what does Hitchens do?:
He hasn't been starved.
He hasn't been sleep deprived.
He hasn't been bombarded with white noise 24/7.
He hasn't been forced to watch one of his kids being raped in front of his eyes to get him to talk.

This was done in North Carolina? We all know that Blackwater's headquarters is there. So who better to make it look real than experts in torture?

Frankly, this is a joke and a massive insult to anyone (vet, rape survivor, etc.) who HAS been tortured. But most people can't be bothered to deal with this hypocracy. It doesn't matter that the U.S. tortures people. Is it true that MI6 "officially" won't torture people. But they'll gladly outsource this to someone else and then take anything they can get.

Wake up people.

[Ruth D]

We can sit people down for tea, it will not stop them from torturing our men and women . I do not know why people think this would make a difference. We have never indulged in torture and yet our cap people, when captured, have been tortured. I do not think waterboarding is torture, but even if we stopped doing all of these things, it would not make a difference and the people who try to say it would are mislead.

[Kevin]

While Mr.Hitchens may have appeared to come around, I seriously doubt that he would have experienced the same ill-effects of the procedure had vodka been used instead of water.

[Ann]

Jacqui and Greg, don't you think that if we start using torture, we become as bad as "them" and therefor, cannot criticise them for doing barbaric things such as cutting peoples heads off. Also I agree with Nullius when they say that torture is about political control, as in my oppinion any one would answer anything in order to stop themselves being tortured.

[Kim Righetti]

This sickens me beyond words. The US is supposed to stand for something better than the rest of the world. You can trace this back to George W. Bush. He cannot leave office soon enough.

[Robert Postuma]

I do not care if Chris Higgins want to call waterboarding torture.
When you engage the enemy, you in the battle to win.
So long as "waterboarding" works on the enemy, I am for it.
By the way, has big mouth Chris ever served in the armed forces?
Think the answeris no!
By the way, what kind of moral judgment doe old Chris apply to Al-Quada?

[kp]

Waterboarding might save a million lives someday.

[S Flanag]

I applaud Cristopher Hitchens for his fortitude. We Americans must realize that this, waterboarding, and all other forms of torture, are something we as a people must not do, regardless if it saves lives or not. It is incredibly telling that the only member of the U.S. Congress who has been tortured as a P.O.W., John McCain, has stood categorically against waterboarding, even in the face of persecution from his own party. As we say in the States, "A spade's a spade." It's no use to call it by another name.
Whether or not those in congress have fooled themselves, they will not fool us, the American people. We know it's torture, and shame on those who propose it as the solution to our problems in Iraq which are clearly too complicated to be resolved by torture.

[Andrew Milner]

FYI Christopher Hitchens was granted US citizenship, although I imagine he retained his British "subjectship".
Nevertheless, he is able to truthfully say, "My fellow Americans"
Can understand switching nationality, but becoming a US citizen? Frying pan, fire?
Thought Bobby Fischer made the right move; US to Icelandic citizen.

[Ian Kemmish]

Even if you believe in torture (I don't), only a fool would choose this method:-

5) Several different sources have, I believe, reported that US special forces personnel themselves undergo training to resist waterboarding. So the senior staff and politicians who give permission for the technique to be used don't act as if believe it to be reliable.

6) Almost universally, people who have undergone drowning-related perithanatic experiences report a face-to-face encounter with some deity, followed by a sense of profound well-being. In other words, waterboarding an Abrahamic religious fanatic (irrespective of whether or not he wants to become a martyr) gives him exactly the experience he needs to justify all that he's done and strengthen his resolve..

[captain]

What a discussion! You are forgetting that the so called enemies of the state were actually ordinary people who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.This whole war on terror is a big farce and the global handlers behind it don't care whether American soldiers are victim or the Arabs being held at Gitmo are. -can't you see....its the Hegelian principle all through but the ordinary cattle are too dumb to see that they are both manipulated to follow the act..torture, suicide bombs( ask yourself the question) who loses their life on both sides-the ordinary man/the common man (whether from the US or from Iraq, while the financiers of the carnage dress up like clown and show up for the next press briefing at the pentagon and the east lawn-wake up pawns, you have been fooled a little too long to take sides while your masters pull the strings. Read Atlas shrugged for beginners. Torture is wrong and will always be wrong but the CIA and all the other players have never played by the universal moral code give by God himself...they are a standard by themselves and right and wrong does not appear in their rule book.
Captain

[Esther]

It isn't that tricky to define what is torture. The same definition that Justice Potter Stewart used to define pornography is fairly apt i.e. "I know it when I see it". But the folks who refuse to acknowledge that Americans don't use torture have probably never seen any pornography either, natch; that would conflict with their Christian family values.

[Charli]

If you think this is bad, you should check out www.current.com/kajwaterboarded. Hitchens lasted only 2 minutes but this guy lasted 24!

[michael campbell]

Americans can hardly complain if in years to come some of their 'boys' are 'tortured'
The so called civilized world, of which America acts as leader / judge and jury, has descended into a moral morass. Pity the poor unfortunate military men and women that have to follow and are captured, waterboarding is open season, authorized by non other than Dick Chaney and George Bush.

[MJ]

Just how do you extract vital information from a terrorist suspect? Isn't keeping the status quo of the security of this country and its citizens more important than the rights of one person who is connected with terrorist activities. Admittedly the 42 day ruling is a bit over the top, if they (the security services) don't the links within a month, then there more than likely isn't any. Let's face it, these guys would rather die, than submit any info. I think its high time the Muslim Council of the UK put their money where their mouth is and help weed out these infidels to their own culture. Then the Muslim community may get the respect they are demanding.

[Michael Statarius]

To those who support using 'lesser evils' like torture in order to save lives, please take into account that such an argument was used by thousands of soldiers in 20th century fascist Europe as they dragged millions of citizens from their homes.

Not to mention that our ability to negotiate peace in a country or region is rendered impotent by brutalizing its kinsmen in our custody.

And is it truly the lesser? By violating morals and ethics - which is far worse in reality that it looks on paper - we may indeed be saving lives, but at the same time spreading a societal disease around the world that costs many more.

[Phil1]

I am not sure why people talk about this being against the geneva convention - that only applies to conflict fought under its rules between countries or nations.

Al Qaeda terrorise and murder civilians deliberately and do not recognise or follow Geneva Convention rules so they are not entitled to its protection.

Terrorists cannot have their cake and eat it. If someone is planning a terrorist bomb attack that might kill my wife and children unless I waterboard them then I would waterboard them. And don't give out the rubbish that it doesn't work it wouldn't be used by scores of regimes over hundreds of years if it didn't work.

Water boarding is torture so is having your head sawed off on live broadband shows and distributed on video - only in the case of water boarding you survive.

[Ethan Edwards]

I have no problem whatsoever with this or any other coercion or excution methods. Only if applied to Terrorists.
They kill with no scruples and are not legitimate combatents and thus are not entitled to the Geneva convention or in fact any decent treatment whatsoever.
In fact I would suggest that the suicide murderer remains are publically buried in so called religiously 'unclean' circumstances. By what these savages beleive it will discourage the others. Certainly it will stop their graves being the scene of family parties such as the 7/7 murderer Shazeed Tanwar.
You liberals need to wake up and realise this is war. You don't win a war by being nicer than your enemy you win by being prepared to do anything to win. Niceties are for peacetime. Thank goodness for Bush, I wish our PM's had as much moral strength.

[Esther]

Ethan -who decides who the terrorists are? And no, it isn't always obvious. Wars are won by doing the right thing at the right time (strategically), something that's never accomplished by giving in to the all too human urge to exercise knee-jerk, reactionary brutality. It takes a lot more moral strength to abhor torture than to use it.

[Ethan Edwards]

Esther,
Easy. If they carry arms kidnap people, spout religious claptrap and are captured in the act. It's a given.
And no I would NOT accept 'I was in Tora Bora for a computer course' or 'I was only shooting at allied forces because a nice chap with a flowing beard asked me to'.

ie where there exists prima facie evidence. I suggest the rapier rather than the blunt instrument. Remember we are at war not a garden party.
Ponder these Esther.

"It is well that war is so terrible- otherwise, we would grow too
fond of it."
-Robert E. Lee, 1862

"War means fighting... and fighting means killing."
-Nathan B. Forrest

[Esther]

Oh, I do ponder it Ethan, frequently, which is why I find your comments so extraordinarily naive.
For a start there is great deal more to war than fighting and killing; only armchair warriors and devotees of bad drama/fiction ever reduce it to such simplistic terms. Another very commonly held but totally fallacious notion is that those who oppose torture are touchy-feely liberals: this is very far from the truth. Anyone with more than a surface knowledge of conflict and terror understands that torture is nothing more than a blunt instrument of political subjectation and rarely, if ever, yields anything valuable. And, if it does, those who perpetrated the "torture" have the good sense to keep their mouths shut about it and not try to justify it as some legitimate form of policing.
And, no it is not easy to define a terrorist (Mandela, Gandhi, George Washington - rebels, subversives, freedom fighters?)but the real problem lies with the question of who gets to write the definitions and who gets to implement those guidelines. Advocates of using torture usually work on the assumption that it will be done to the "others" and that they will never be the victims.When I first moved to the UK tweny years ago, a policeman spat in my face when all I had done was ask for directions (in my broad Irish accent)- no witnesses, his word against mine. A comparatively minor incident in the great scheme of things but it has always stayed with me as an example of how easily an entire group can be designated as being outside the protection of the law and how easily power can be abused, even in the most mundane circumstances. Many of the opponents of torture are far too aware of how quickly the world turns and how easily it might be them on the receiving end. If the law doesn't protect everybody, it protects nobody.