How bad is waterboarding? Ask Christopher Hitchens. [video]
In his memoir, former President George W. Bush defends the use of waterboarding. Would he change his mind if he personally underwent the 'enhanced interrogation,' as did Iraq war supporter Christopher Hitchens.
Today's publication of former President George W. Bush's memoir "Decision Points" has put one of the more controversial issues of his presidency – his authorization of waterboarding – back in the public debate.Skip to next paragraph
2011 Reflections: Suddenly, a new era in the Middle East
2011 Reflections: the end of a landmark year for Latin America
2011 Reflections: Africa rises, taking charge of its affairs
How the 'Year of the Protester' played out in Europe
In Prague, a tale of communism past
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
Most of the controversy stems from whether waterboarding is considered torture, which is banned under the Geneva Conventions. The Bush administration has called it an “enhanced interrogation technique.”
In this technique, a person is strapped to a board on his back. Water is poured over the person's face so that it runs into breathing passages, which is meant to simulate drowning.
While lawyers and statesmen have debated the issue abstractly, Christopher Hitchens, a formerly firm member of the political left who departed from the camp with his support of the Iraq war, decided the best way to form an opinion was by getting waterboarded himself.
The practice, he decided after the experience, is indeed torture.
He detailed the experience in a column for Vanity Fair, writing: "You feel that you are drowning because you are drowning – or, rather, being drowned, albeit slowly and under controlled conditions and at the mercy (or otherwise) of those who are applying the pressure. ... If waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture.”