Journalist lets himself be waterboarded:

This one should be a very valid argument in the discussion about waterboarding being torture or not. The journalist Christopher Hitchens has submitted himself to this cruel method of interrogation, and he writes:

You may have read by now the official lie about this treatment, which is that it “simulates” the feeling of drowning. This is not the case. You feel that you are drowning because you are drowning—or, rather, being drowned, albeit slowly and under controlled conditions and at the mercy (or otherwise) of those who are applying the pressure. The “board” is the instrument, not the method. You are not being boarded. You are being watered.

Link to full article in Vanity Fair:
www.vanityfair.com...

You can also watch a video of the journalist's experience.

There have been similar events where high profile people have undergone this treatment to get a feel for what detainees subjected to this feel.
The problem of course is that those trying out the procedure do so knowing that a simple "stop" signal will end it, and that they will only undergo a simple one-off taster of what it's like. Detainees subjected to this undergo repeated rounds of this and other methods over long periods of time to extract "confessions" from them.
Remember all the criticism of the North Vietnamese using these methods to extract false confessions or war crimes from US military personnel during the Vietnam war? Of course, their treatment and the confessions they gave were condemned by the US government, so what makes any confession gained through this round of torture any different?

A confession to an alleged crime is no proof of guilt if torture is used to extract it.
Hell, most people would say they killed JFK AND MLK if it made the pain and anguish of months of torture stop.

[edit on 8-7-2008 by Britguy]