Mechanical

"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:
re
i know a couple submissives that could do that in a heartbeat. I have bdsm set shots of worse than abu graib photos. even crimping iron on the genitals, cutting , bleeding , hanging from hooks(worse than the scene in Last King of Scotland movie), suffocation, bondage. LOL im saying this in sort of jest but id rather see pay per view death penalty proceeds going to victims or their families
There's a BBC drama series called 'Spooks' and in the last series, actor Richard Armitage, playing an MI5 officer captured by Russian agents, decided that he would subject himself to waterboarding "to ensure authenticity" after having being assured by consultants for the CIA and FSB that it was a "a humane way of extracting information without hurting people". (Here's a news article about it from The Times, where he's quoted as saying "I realised that it really is a form of torture that shouldn’t be used. I only lasted five to ten seconds, and the sound of my voice crying out to stop isn’t me acting. The psychological damage of doing that to someone for even a minute would be indescribable.")

Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a clip of the scene on YouTube, but when I watched it it was clear that he was terrified and that the 5-10 seconds he endured was a harrowing experience. And that was with a safe signal in place and knowing that medics were on hand.
Why limit it to the rich? I say ANYBODY that condones torture should get a dose of their own medicine just so they can speak from an educated perspective on the matter. If they undergo torture and still think it is any way to treat another human being, they will still be dead wrong, but at least they will know what they are talking about.