Ovid (publius_ovidius) wrote,

"Harsh" Interrogation Techniques

You know what I'd like to see? I'd like to see someone rich (obviously not me) offer a substantial amount of money to various people who claim that the US government's "harsh" interrogation techniques are not torture. The catch? The person claiming the prize has to withstand said interrogation techniques for a week or so, on film they agree in advance will be broadcast live. At all times during the "interrogation", they will be free to end it if they simply renounce the money.

Heck. While I'm not a fan of reality shows and this one would be more grisly than most, it would attract a high viewership and networks could afford to pony up this cash. No matter how much torture supporters label this a "cheap stunt", it will get its point across.

Obviously, there are serious issues here. Lots of lawyers with lots of legal documents because you are, at its heart, agreeing to hurt people. Of course, the sort of people who you would target are the sort of people who are claiming this isn't torture, so theoretically they would not have a problem with this. But most, I suspect, would be cowards. Even with lots of money dangled in front of them. I suspect it would be like that recent incident in Mexico where lawmakers applauded the idea to test themselves for drugs but stampeded to the door when they found out it was for real.

Does Rush Limbaugh really think these are akin to "college fraternity pranks", an assessment he agrees with? There are many other commentators who dismissed these issues as "not being torture" (see first link above). Let's let 'em put up or shut up. I'm guessing you'll have hear more excuses for getting out of this than they did for getting out of Vietnam.
Tags: politics
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded