Waterboarding.

tor·ture noun \ˈtȯr-chər\

Definition of TORTURE

1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony

b: something that causes agony or pain

2: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure

3: distortion or overrefinement of a meaning or an argument : straining

Thanks, Webster. Let's move on.

While perusing the daily news this morning I stumbled upon this little gem. Of course, the death of a prominent terrorist is understandably big news. For once I understand why his face is in my face day after day in a seemingly endless barrage of opinions and wild speculation. At this time, though, I have no desire to discuss his death or whether or not we should celebrate it (though I have made it clear on numerous occasions that I clearly think "not so much" is the correct response). Instead, I'd like to discuss the article I read this morning about the interrogation of suspected terrorists that apparently maybe sort of possibly could have played some role in the locating of the now deceased.

Waterboarding. If you don't know what it is, I suggest you go and look it up now. Go on. Finished? Now, read on.

The article talks about the use of EITs (Enhanced Interrogation Techniques) by the CIA to coerce information out of their prisoners. No longer, apparently, in use. Probably. This little tidbit of information is still not the part of the article that made me wish to evacuate the contents of my stomach in a projectile manner all over the keyboard. It was this bit that really did that for me:

“The main thing that people misunderstand about the program is, it was intended to encourage compliance,” says John McLaughlin, deputy director of the CIA during the period in which waterboarding was used. “It wasn’t set out to torture people. It was never conceived of as a torture program.”

May I draw your attention to the initial definition, conveniently posted above. And just in case one might try to console themselves that this was simply the thought of a single man, clearly devoid of sense and inadequately stage-managed - it gets worse with the contributions of another "senior official":

Rodriguez says, "It's a mistake to say this was about inflicting pain. These measures were about instilling a sense of hopelessness, and that led them to compliance." None of the Bush officials made a clear distinction between inducing compliance and torture.

Of course they didn't. Because they didn't make that distinction. This is one of those times I wish not to be associated with the human race.