Hitchen's argument against the use of waterboarding is superb. Now a primary source in the debate over whether the technique constitutes torture, he lays out an eloquent and fairly transparent narrative of his experience. Sourcing is surprisingly good for this type of piece, and his efforts to strike an objective tone, while not perfect, are earnest.

The Vanity Fair editor asked Hitchins, a strong supporter of the war in Iraq, to undergo waterboarding. The point apparently was to get the testimony of someone who endorsed strong-arm tactics in order to "win" the so-called war on terror. Hitchins lasted 17 seconds before he pulled the plug, concluding that waterboarding doesn't "simulate" drowning; it is drowning, if continued. This seems to have changed Hitchins's perspective on how to treat detainees, the most that can be expected of this type of experiment.

Certainly journalism that goes the extra mile. And, while Hitchens' personal experience can't speak to the legality of torture, he's done his homework there too. Developed by the Spanish Inquisition, waterboarding was held to be torture in a court of law when prosecuting Japanese soldiers, and a sheriff in Texas.

This is an extremely powerful first-hand account of being "waterboarded". This term has become a torture buzzword, repeated constantly throughout the media yet without thorough explanation. This piece alone has clarified to me exactly what waterboarding is, what it does to a person, and why it became such a huge issue for the Bush administration's policies against enemy combatants held at Guantanamo. The reporter not only writes compellingly about what he is experiencing, he also interviews his "tormentors" and a head of the SERE military program. Lots of big picture re: how the U.S. has actually damaged its own military by allowing waterboarding. Enlightening and interesting facts and viewpoints. There is a video ... More »

Christopher Hitchens underwent waterboarding himself to find out how the technique is like. He described the technique as actual drowning, not "simulated drowning". I found the piece interesting because of Hitchens' detailed and self-effacing description of his not-so-glorious attempt to withstand waterboarding. What puzzles and saddens me is how Hitchens (and other supporters of the Afghan and Iraq war) seem not to realise that, in the climate of fear and suspicion created by an irrational war, saturated by images and rhetoric designed to terrify us, against enemies that we seem to know so little, torture (and worse) is almost certain to happen. Hitchens himself has contributed to this climate and can hardly absolve himself ... More »

Okay, I want everybody to read it. And I want them to remember what Alexis de Tocquville said: "America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." This is the wrong path to be going down, and anyone who says different has lost his or her moral compass. I just hope we can reverse course and never again venture in this direction.

Is this good journalism? Graydon Carter is a vulture, seeking affirmation for his bankrupt glossy that feeds off trend and popularity, with a perpetual finger to the wind for hot copy. This is the man who featured the ultimate failures of the Bush administration, the people who ensured misery for millions, both abroad and at home, in superhero costumes on the front of his vaunted publication. Hitchens drinks a few drops of Poland Spring and declares it torture after about 7 years of cheerleading for a war and its neoconservative architects, the very people for whom torture is a marquee policy, and readers are supposed to genuflect at his courage? So yes, devoid of history and context this article might--might--have some ... More »