Thanks a lot for posting this. I have always wondered what the actual act was.

It's a neat idea, but real waterboarding would be so much worse. I think this video actually hurts the argument against waterboarding by making it look not so bad as it really is.

a video, no matter how graphic can never capture just how bad it is.

Experiencing it and viewing it are two completely different things. A large part of it is psychological which can't fully be captured on video.

Bottom line:

What good is information acquired by torture?

Eventually the tortured person will tell you anything you want to hear.

You can't ask a question like, "Where are the RPGs being stored?" and get a randomized answer out of the person. These aren't Salem Witch Trial-style questions like, "Are you a terrorist?"



Even this fellow classifies the waterboarding as torture, and yet he wrestles with the idea of what might have happened if they had not employed these tactics. The information can be great if you know you have an enemy combatant and you also know he has vital information you need.

The information you get from tortured people is usually worse than useless:

"We receive intelligence obtained under torture from the Uzbek intelligence services, via the US. We should stop. It is bad information anyway. Tortured dupes are forced to sign up to confessions showing what the Uzbek government wants the US and UK to believe, that they and we are fighting the same war against terror... "

That's purely for things in the past to blame a patsy. We're talking about preventive measures as outlined in my article. Apples and oranges.