Beomseok Kim
English 1B
Professor Brown
26 March 2013
“Water Boarding”:
Nothing More or Nothing Less than a Torture Technique
The
concept of torturing someone is a subject that we are very well aware of, and
yet seem to feel that we are far away from. Considering this idea, for some
people “water boarding” maybe a word that they have never heard of in their
entire life. To those people who are not aware of the true meaning of “water
boarding,” this word may trigger happy memories such as playing inside a pool
with siblings, or surfing on top of the ocean waves. But the truth behind
“water boarding,” is that it is a method of torture technique that is being
imposed on the victim with water. Although there maybe people opposing views
regarding this topic, but the method of “water boarding” is similar to the
concept of torturing. To emphasize this idea, Christopher Hitchens, the author
of the article “Believe Me, It’s Torture” from the Vanity Fair October 2011 issue, addresses his personal encounter of
the method of “water boarding.” Hitchens successfully convinces his readers
into believing that “water boarding” is in fact a torturing method, through his
vivid descriptions of his experience, incorporating the words of Mr. Malcom
Nance thus adding credibility to his argument, and his sheer choice of words
that he uses throughout the article.
Christopher
Hitchens vividly describes his own personal encounter of “water boarding”
experience, appealing to the emotions of his readers. Hitchens mentions that
before even starting
with his actual “water
boarding” experience, he had to sign an agreement that describes this process
as “[…] a potentially dangerous activity in which the participant can receive
serious and permanent (physical, emotional and psychological) injuries and even
death, including injuries and death due to the respiratory and neurological
systems of the body,” warning him how dangerous “water boarding” actually is.
To begin the process, he adds, “I was very gently yet firmly grabbed from
behind, pulled to my feet, pinioned by my wrists, […] and cut off from the
sunlight by having a black hood pulled over my face.” From signing the
agreement and into starting the process, the description is so vivid that
readers can see what is happening right before their eyes. Without a doubt,
what they are seeing would be a start of a torturing process. Hitchens then goes
on to add that “In this pregnant darkness, head downward, I waited for a while
until I abruptly felt a slow cascade of water going up my nose. [The natural
inhalating process] brought the damp cloths tight against my nostrils, as if a
huge, wet paw had been suddenly and annihilatingly clamped over my face.”
Hitchens’s description drives the readers to sit on the edge of the chair and
to expect the obvious; the torture. With this words creating a vivid imagery of
what he is going through, this whole process efficiently appeals to the pathos
aspect to the readers by making them feel this and thus leaving it to the
readers to decide if this horrible process is torture or not.
Another method Hitchens uses to add
to the idea that “water boarding” is a torturing process, is adding a credible
source to support his argument. The
writer adds that he had read that “Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, invariably referred
to as the ‘mastermind’ of the atrocities of September 11, 2011, had impressed his interrogators by holding
out for upwards of two minutes before cracking.” What is cleverer, is that he
puts his own experience results right afterwards, thus making a comparison: “Well,
O.K, I admit that I didn’t outdo him,” adding to the idea of the harshness of
the torture. What is stronger then this comparison is incorporating the words
of Mr. Malcolm Nance, the author of The
Terrorists of Iraq, and the person who tailed Al-Qaeda from the 1990s. His
argument, regarding the adoption of water boarding by the US starts off by
stating: “Waterboarding is a deliberate torture technique and has been
prosecuted as such by our judicial arm when perpetrated by others.” Right from
the beginning, an expert who had been tailing Al-Qaeda from the 1990s and a
person who dealt with the nightmare of September 11, 2001 attack, defines
waterboarding as “a deliberate torture technique.” It is nothing more or
nothing less- just a method of torturing someone else. What is far more
powerful is Nance’s second argument, which states: If we allow it and justify
it, we cannot complain if it is employed in the future by other regimes on
captive US citizens. It is a method of putting American prisoners in harm’s
way.” Although it indicates that if you stay in the country you would be
affected of it, but what this sentence is suggesting is that if the US does not
abandon this technique, ultimately the country would be putting its own
citizens at risk of the same torture technique by the hands of other countries.
Jeopardizing with all American citizens’ freedoms – what can be more effective
argument then this? In one way or the other, Hitchens brings home the concept
of “waterboarding = torturing method” with Mr. Nance’s arguments.
Not only that, Hitchens also
connects the two methods in making his article successful by his choice of
words, diction. His choice of words seems so perfect and precise; that it looks
like his diction connects the two methods, thus creating a far strengthened
argument then the previous one. Right from the beginning, he starts off his
article with “Here is the most chilling way I can find of stating the matter.”
Hitchens tells the readers right in the front that this is the most “chilling”
way that he can describe this. And then he continues to use words such as
inflicted, harsh, barbarism, a lawless foe, interrogation, darkened, injuries,
death, drowning,
Behading, [and even phrases like] the languages of torture,”
throughout the whole entire article functions in a way that these words pin the
readers into this subject and make them keep the “chill” that they start with
until the end of this article. It not only connects the methods of appealing to
the emotions of readers and adding credibility, but creating a far greater
argument that would last in the readers mind for a very long time.
The writer
Christopher Hitchens successfully defines the process of “water boarding” as a
method of torturing. He achieves this by describing in detail of what the
writer himself felt while going through the experience of the activity of “water
boarding,” painting the vivid visual in his readers mind of the pain and the
suffering that he went through. Not only that, adding creditable source to his
argument strengthens it, thus making it so much more reassuring. After reading
his article, it is very difficult to disagree with the author, which proves
that Hitchens successfully achieves what he meant to do with this article.
