By evmonk
Published Wednesday, July 2nd, 2008, 10:51 am
Filed under: Videos: Political, Videos: Documentary, Human Rights, War, Terrorism, US Politics

10 Responses to “Christopher Hitchens Gets Waterboarded for Vanity Fair”

1. 

   The second video is far more disturbing, as they actually use force and stuff the rag down his throat. I think you need to watch this to be trult informed, same goes with the use of deadly weapons.

   John Geraghty
   07/2/08 at 11:24 am
   
2. 

   Christopher Hitchens has become very confusing in the last decade. He still holds an affection for Trotsky, but he has become a bit more comfy with neo-conservatives, especially in foreign affairs (e.g. his support for the war in Iraq and the “war on terror” in general). I think that he’s departed from the realm of serious social criticism and now just does stunts to get attention.

   Bernie
   07/2/08 at 12:15 pm
   

3. I will not argue that it isn’t torture, but forgive me if I call Hitchens a pussy.

   I mean Geezus. Can’t that fat ass hold his breath for more than 12 seconds?

   (I resemble that remark)

   BuelahMan
   07/2/08 at 1:41 pm
   

4. […] bloody pulp. B’Man: Speaking of waterboarding and fat asses like me, evmonk has a post up at The Largest Minority showing Christopher Hitchens lasting all of 15 seconds on a waterboard […]

   Water Conservation Gone Wild « BuelahMan’s Redstate Revolt
   07/2/08 at 1:51 pm
   
5. 

   “I think that he’s departed from the realm of serious social criticism and now just does stunts to get attention.”

   Indeed. Getting waterboarded in sterile lab conditions? I’m surprised he beat Geraldo to the punch. There use to be a time when reporting was about compiling information from various eyewitnesses and survivors who’d actually experienced the real thing, not about superstar personalities putting on a show for their fans. Reenactment merely places emphasis on the journalist rather than the technique itself. The story here is more about Hitchens and his personal experience than about waterboarding.

   Manila Ryce
   07/2/08 at 3:17 pm
   

6. Reading about Hitch getting waterboarded on Pharyngula reminded me of this blog and its proprietor’s wholehearted agreement with wackaloon Hedges that Hitchens defends torture. When I tried to open his eyes to reality some time ago, he didn’t give a flying fuck. So after I watched the video, it made me wonder if Manila Ryce still lets his personal hatred blind him to objective facts. He did not disappoint. In fact, he’s probably going to continue to assert that Hitchens somehow defends torture or torturers even after this.

   And, of course, I learned another bit of wisdom today. Turns out, things experienced under sterile lab conditions are [b]obviously[b] not real. That’s how we know science is a crock and all those experiments and studies are a pile of shit. Hitchens obviously didn’t experience being drowned at all because knowing that he would be released whenever he wanted made his nostrils impenetrable to water.

   I know you are not at all familiar with the notion of objectivity, MR, but this has become utterly ridiculous. You will stand in opposition to any act Hitchens commits. He breathes and eats, you know. You should try not engaging in those activities because they are obviously evil.

   Given your hostility to anything remotely resembling the scientific method, it’s no surprise that you think there is no valuable information to be gained from the experience of a person being waterboarded under controlled conditions. How dare people suggest that the mere act of waterboarding, without the added stress of hostile surroundings and lack of control over the situation, is enough to make a person experience unbearable suffering? That they have concluded that you cannot write off the feeling of impending death as a mere consequence of being a prisoner with no rights? Or are you suggesting that only Gitmo detainees can experience torture?

   You view that second-hand accounts of events that cannot be verified should be trusted more than first-hand experience also fits in with your ridiculous religious beliefs. Of course, reality begs to differ, but when have you cared about that?

   You seem to care a lot about the personal experience of people who actually engage in acts of terrorism, but when it comes to someone you don’t like, their personal experience is worth nothing. Waterboarding is all about personal experience, hence all the debate surrounding it. If it were completely possible to grasp the concept without experiencing it, there wouldn’t be any arguments about the definition.

   I remember all that babble about how you judge people by their actions rather than by their beliefs. Clearly, that does not apply to Hitchens (and, for all any of your readers know, to any other public figure you dislike). Hell, if he single-handedly solved the problem of world hunger, you would just call it a show for the fans.

   Hmm, what are those people who think their presuppositions are inerrant and who refuse to surrender their prejudices in the face of piles of contradicting evidence called again? Oh, right, fundamentalist bigots.

   Entropy
   07/2/08 at 11:13 pm
   
7. 

   @entropy

   Um, it’s been over two months since the last Hitchens thread and you still have an ax to grind? Talk about “personal hatred”. I’ve argued all I’ve needed to argue regarding Hitchen’s views on torture and cultural ignorance in general in the previous thread you’re referring to. Anyone interested in reading it to boredom can search for that story with the keyword “Hitchens”, but the best part is at the bottom where Entropy says:

   “…I enjoyed reading your blog up to this point. I suppose this whole exchange means I’ll have to get political commentary elsewhere from now on. Oh well.”

   I thought that would be the price I paid for insulting your god, but apparently you weren’t comfortable with a truce. Fundamentalists never are. Unlike Hitchens, I have no intention of getting into this again and making the story about me. I will not respond to further attacks either now or another 2 months into the future from you. Peace.

   Manila Ryce
   07/3/08 at 5:12 am
   

8. Oh please. I, unlike you, don’t have any gods, and made it clear a long time ago that I am not a fan of Hitchens. I don’t like him and I don’t like his writings. I just like giving a consideration to reality, and therein lies the difference between you and me. I don’t have an axe to grind, and I [b]have[/b] been getting my political commentary elsewhere. This is the first time I’ve read anything on your blog since then. Your guest blogger seems to care a little less about demonizing public figures s/he doesn’t like, and a little more about providing interesting information, so kudos to him/her, BTW. Like I said in my previous post, reading about Hitchens getting waterboarded on a different website reminded me of you and your preference for your personal delusions disguised as political commentary, rather than real life events. Of course, according to you, curiosity=fundamentalism. I wondered if maybe this news would make you change your mind about certain Hitchens’s views. If maybe there was a certain threshold after which you started to care about what’s actually going on in the world, rather than just in your head. I would have definitely found it commendable because I don’t hate you, despite your persecution complex. It hasn’t happened. Your grip around your presuppositions is tight enough to make any fundamentalist proud. I, on the other hand, am quite easily convinced by evidence that contradicts my views, but there was none to be found here, unfortunately.

   If you tried to actually grasp the definition of fundamentalism (and atheism, for that matter) and be a little less biased, and give some consideration to reality, your writing would improve considerably. If you stopped belonging to a church that shamelessly fights contraception, protects child molesters and treats women like dirt (and has an impressive history of suppressing science) while proclaiming yourself to be a freedom-fighter, it would probably help, too. Or you can just continue spouting off nonsense or endorsing profiteering, deceitful and ignorant individuals’ nonsense about people’s views and agendas while getting offended at any criticism of your own, and I suspect that’s what you are going to continue doing. Feel free to prove me wrong. Oh wait, wanting to know if I have been proven wrong so I can adjust my worldview is what makes me a fundamentalist. Riiight.

   Entropy
   07/3/08 at 7:31 am
   
9. 

   I’m no fan of Hitchens, but I actually think he did some good by undergoing the waterboarding technique. The fact that he only lasted a a few seconds in an environment where he knew he was completely safe shows how terrifying the experience must be. I can’t imagine being a detainee undergoing such treatment, knowing full well there is a very real possibility of death.

   Andy
   07/3/08 at 8:00 am
   
10. 

    Andy, I totally agree. Hitchens generally annoys me, even when I sympathize with his POV, but in this case I think he’s doing a genuine service to his readers/viewers. Sadly, the vast majority of Americans still don’t know what waterboarding is, so the more attention the practice gets the better. I haven’t seen many other journalists putting themselves in this position.

    evmonk
    07/3/08 at 8:54 am
    

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Tired of filing this information out everytime you leave a comment at the Largest Minority? Why not register as a user? You also get full access to our forum!

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>