I'm sorry, but "demonstrating" waterboarding only seems to help the GOP

It's relatively easy for people like the Levin or even the code pink people to get waterboarded because they know that no actual harm will come to them. And if it's really torture, shouldn't the Code Pinkers have been arrested on the spot? It seems to me to lessen the impact of the whole procedure if people can just lay on a board and have themselves "tortured" for the cameras. I mean, if any shmoe can do it and walk away, how bad can it be. Let's have a Code Pinker subject himself to having his fingernails ripped out, or hit in the head with a phone book while his nads are electrocuted.

And, using the GOP's old chestnut that Al Qaeda watches CNN and therefore learns our secrets from evil journalists who report the news, aren't we just demonstrating that they're really in no danger if they're subjected to this technique? That it's all a ruse, and even average Joe Citizen can have it done to him and be none the worse for wear?

Make no mistake, I believe waterboarding absolutely is torture. But I don't think anyone is doing us a favor by trivializing it through repeated demonstrations.

.

I think you make some damn good points.

And he was terrified. We know that suspects are not being assured that there are strong controls on any method applied to them. If Levin was terrified, then any suspect will be terrified. To me, that is torture.

You can't drown yourself. You can't do it (unless, of course, you tie a very large weight to your foot and jump in a deep lake). You can try, but your body's natural survival instinct will make you stop every time. That's all Levin described. Even though he knew it would stop, his body went into the same survival mode and the endorphins kicked in and the "fight or flight" mechanism kicked in, beyond his ability to supress it. Yes, he said it was terrifying, but basically the jig is up at this point: anyone hardened bad-guy now knows that it's just a farce. Terrifying, sure, but no point in giving up all your secrets, because it's going to stop eventually. Let 'em do it to you for a while, then tell them anything to make them cease and think they've extracted information from you.

Again, if it is indeed torture and illegal, why weren't the Code Pinkers arrested?

.

Terrifying is torture; unless you want to accept the bush admin's "tortured" definitions.

How can such a terrifying, ILLEGAL activity be carried out on street corners with no harm done, and no one arrested?

.

... yet, I can step into a boxing ring and punch away. Context matters.

Ask anyone who's ever suffered panic attacks, and they can tell you how debilitating - both physically and mentally - it is when that mechanism is triggered on a regular basis and there is nothing you can do to make it stop.

Someone who's prepped for it may very well understand the jig is up ... but say, do you / did you really believe Guantanamo was only filled with hardened criminals & terrorists?

Levin was trying to determine for himself the nature of the procedure and its impact on the victim. It was data collection in the first person. As such, it has an amazing impact, particularly in light of his report and the extent to which the administration went to bury his report.

Code Pink, on the other hand, was trying to put this closer to the front page. As I understand it, their goal was not to prove that waterboarding is torture (that's a given), but to put it in the public eye and in Feinstein's face.

When waterboarding becomes a party game, you might have a point. Right now, it's still torture.

and the people doing it not be arrested?

Ever see protesters pretend to be dead? Who killed them? Where's the police investigation?

Simulating waterboarding to make a point is more than a tad different than repeatedly subjecting a prisoner to torture to extract information.

I expected someone to say "But a news report showing how a thief breaks into your car demonstrates a crime..." And as for stretches in logic, "pretending to be dead" is not a crime. Waterboarding is, right? So my logic comes up short only if you ignore what I posted.

My point is the dilution of the "horror." We're trying to convince people that this is such a horrible crime that international law forbids it and our president should be jailed for it...but any clown in an orange jump suit can have it done to him on a street corner with his friends watching.

Sounds like a JackAss stunt, not a violation of human decency and a violation of the Geneva Conventions. I think we're inadvertently helping make the Republican's case that, hey, waterboarding may be nasty, but it surely doesn't rise to the level of a criminal offense worthy of jailing a president.

.

Waterboarding is a crime, but it is context related. The same loud music you play at a party would be torture under the correct circumstances. The hazing carried out by fraternities is clearly torture but is not treated in the same context (even though many campuses have banned it).

Waterboarding a volunteer is not the same as dragging someone from a prison cell, strapping them down, and simulating their death.

But you know what -- think what a fiat it would be if Code Pink demonstrators were arrested for waterboarding. It would prove to everyone that it is, indeed, completely illegal and those participating in it should be arrested.

As for the dilution of the horror -- maybe. That's the risk that is run whenever an atrocity is put up for public viewing. A balance is necessary.

hmmmm..... I was thinking it didn't help but I hadn't gone the illegal route.

If it's illegal and a person is demonstrating it should the person doing it be arrested?

on the other hand I support the attempt to keep the topic in the news.

It's a thought-provoking post to be sure. I just advocated for a viral Youtube movement on waterboarding for the exact opposite reason and I of course agree that it is torture. I will think deeply on this, but first let me say that I think there is one more component that should be considered in this. That is, that if waterboarding is not torture, if it becomes trivialized, then it can be used on our troops.

People will not allow this procedure to be used on our own troops once they become acquainted with it. I really believe that. Does that change your position at all?

...more than anything else. It's a crazy concept that some people, even some here on DU, often don't get, but when I think of shit like this I kind of like to see what others think, too. Am I an outlier? Does my "idea" have enough merit to change minds? Am I missing some aspect of the equation? There are few better forums than DU outside of a University classroom in which to bounce around ideas and seek others' opinions. I think BuzzClik makes some very valid points. Separating the legality from the dilution is a bigger point, which I'm glad you addressed.

If I watched a guy getting his fingernails ripped out, I'd probably puke. I cringe and look away watching scenes in movies that I KNOW are fake. But actually seeing people waterboarded, right on street corners with their friends video taping them...not so much. Hell, I wouldn't want it done to me, but I do think it tends to show Americans that hey, this isn't that bad. And you know what? That may well be by design. Not by Code Pink, or Levin, of course, but by BushCo and the media who are focusing solely on the waterboarding issue in regards to Mukasy or Bush's criminality. Bush has done so many things which many might view as totally immoral and illegal. But the spotlight is being focused on this one act, while in shadows even worse crimes are perpetrated.

Thanks for response. You've given me something more to think about, too!

.

It doesn't matter if the person can get up and walk away afterwards. You're seeing someone writhing around in terror of drowning, in what is supposed to be a simple *interrogation*, as in, questioning.

I don't think most people even know what waterboarding actually entails, and that's how right-wingers want it. They want to be able to say it's 'like a college prank' or a 'swimming lesson', and without this imagery, they can do so. Once people see what it actually is, the apologists look like monsters.