Christopher Hitchens and “waterboarding”.
Let it never be said that I lack the capacity to give credit where it’s due. My most recent post was filled with biting criticism of Christopher Hitchens jacked-up television debate style and his schizophrenic political stance (left-wing for everything EXCEPT “terror issues” – i.e., the reality-bending conflation of anything concerning the Middle East, Islam, Arab or Persian culture, date palms…tabouleh… and…oh, yeah, actual terrorism). Hitchens’ increasing hawkishness on ”terror” has been a bone of contention with me since 2001, when the events of September 11 suddenly lent every smug semi-fascist arsehole with an opinion both a platform and the moral high ground. Hitchens’ consistent labelling of Islamic terrorist groups as the worst kind in the history of humanity is maddening and incorrect; why the insistence that Islam lends itself better to the ideology of terrorism than any other faith or secular doctrine? (I mean, I hate to be THAT chick, bringing up the Christian-led slaughter-and-pillage fests known as The Crusades, but…aaaaannnywaaaay.) Most of the time I’m firmly of the opinion that Mr. Hitchens, while brilliant, is a fatally-arrogant waste of space… and what was probably, at one point, a reasonably-healthy liver./schnark
So imagine my dismay surprise when one of my Tweeps sent this link of one of the guys I Love to Hate undergoing the torture procedure commonly referred to as “waterboarding”. Apparently it’s an old clip (2008), but what Hitchens wanted to do was get beyond the semantics and hair-splitting of definitions of torture (too many links to post here, but Google “Abu Ghraib vs. Gitmo” and you’ll find everything you need) to a concrete understanding of what these procedures actually are. It should be noted that most torture/execution methods are either given names that are deceptively-benign sounding (“waterboarding” could very well be something akin to surfing) OR sickeningly-ironic (read about “necklacing” here and brace yourself).
*Please be advised that this may be difficult for sensitive readers and viewers to watch.*
I’m really glad that he did this. Now, while this illustration of a modicum of personal growth from Hitchens doesn’t absolve him of previous transgressions OR remove him from my List (that whole Wanda Sykes thing was just awful), I am relieved to know that a larger-than-imagined chunk of humanity very much resides in his otherwise stunted soul.
Tags: Christopher Hitchens, Controversy, media
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
June 3, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Hrm. Not sure how I feel about this. Seems like every other day there’s a conservative white guy itching to try waterboarding (Hannity, Limbaugh)–so they can prove it isn’t “really” torture. But what demonstrations like these prove is that an essential element of torture lies beyond measurable physical pain. In other words, when Hitchens gets kidnapped from his house, doesn’t know where he is, is taunted with threats against his family, prevented from sleeping, eating properly or using the toilet, sexually humiliated and THEN waterboarded 100 plus times by people he doesn’t know/can’t see… then he can talk to me about torture. Until then he can shut the fuck up.
Many, many torture methods involve no direct application of physical pain whatsoever. For e.g. forced standing will, given enough time, cause the body to break down. And simple isolation will eventually drive even the most well adjusted person completely insane. So many descriptions of torture practices sound benign (standing? being alone?) because they do not take the context of their application into account.
I take off my clothes every day. But if it were done at gunpoint in front of masked strangers it would take on an entirely different character. The persistent failure of conservatives to acknowledge the importance of this context is why their critiques of “aggressive interrogation” vs Torture are such bullshit.
June 6, 2009 at 6:18 pm
I agree with 100% with Joseph.
Did they really have to use Enigma music for this clip? Come on, they’re one of my favorite bands! I hope I don’t get reminded of Hitchens every time I listen to “Gravity of Love” now…
June 8, 2009 at 12:03 pm
@Joseph: I hear you. I guess what I was trying to get at was that Hitchens appears to have gone into the “waterboarding experiment” with the intent of illustrating that it wasn’t torture. What he proved -however inadvertantly – is that, semantics be damned, this IS torture. Hitchens experienced a fraction of what detainees are put through (and I ahould be clear that I am IN NO WAY equating this with what detainees endure) and he pissed himself.
At least, that was my takeaway. I’m notorious for missing the point, though.
@Broken Mystic: Welcome, and thank you very much for your feedback. Re: “Gravity of Love” – there’s a joke in there somewhere about “Broken Mystic Moods.” Find it for me, and I’ll give you a cookie.
June 13, 2009 at 9:52 am
UPDATE: I am linking the Vanity Fair article follow-up referenced in the video. Having read through it a coupla times, on top of the expected sneering Islamophobia, I’m kind of hearing this “dick measuring contest” undertone in Hitchens’ recollection and recounting of the reactions of others. Once again, I may be misreading, but decide for yourself.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/08/hitchens200808
June 17, 2009 at 7:53 pm
“Dick measuring contest” between, say, himself and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? I see where you are coming from, especially with the line “I find I don’t want to tell you how little time I lasted,” thus making it a more self-centered (if the title wasn’t a clue) than case-making (shameful that it even has to be written) article. If waterboarding was the type of thing that you could be proud of, then what’s the point in writing about it as a torture method?
Oh wait, but it’s not… it’s really just “foreplay,” that is, “when contrasted with ACTUAL torture….”
June 19, 2009 at 9:34 am
@teiquirisi: Precisely! And this was why I’m glad his experience was recorded. Hitchens very much entered this experiment with a “test my mettle” mindset, and left it with a soul-shaking mere glimpse of the horror that detainees are subjected to. It should never have been about how “tough” (gar, EYE ROLL!) he was, or how much of this he could take. It should have been about illustrating that NO HUMAN BEING should ever be put through this process, or any of the other abuses detainees endure. I worked briefly at the ACLU some years back, and in the legal department there was an entire room filled with file cabinets dealing with just human rights violations material. What does it say about our national character when we are using interrogation methods that we learned from the Khmer Rouge? Utterly deplorable and shameful.