While the debate on whether waterboarding is or isn't torture but rather "enhanced interrogation" is futile. We all know that it is a heinous act - or rather, cowardly - and I would challenge anyone, who hasn't been waterboarded, to prove me otherwise.
Moving on, not only did Hannity deny that it was a form or torture, he actually offered himself to be waterboarded for charity. Luckily, we have people (although somewhat ego-centric ones) such as Keith Olbermann to swoop in and save the day. Olbermann, not being one to be outdone, quickly responded to Hannity's offer to be waterboarded and offered to donate $1000 for every second that Hannity could withstand being waterboarded. Nico Pitney, for the Huffington Post, appropriately headlined his article on this turn of events as "...calling Hannity's bluff...".
Two questions manifest after seeing such an exchange between Hannity and Olbermann; 1) Will Hannity do it? (In fairness, if he does it, I would take my hat off to him but would recommend further waterboarding) and 2) If he does it, will he change his mind about waterboarding? (I would think that after being waterboarded, it would be difficult to deny its abhorrence.
There are two outcomes that I personally would like to see: that Hannity learns his lesson and reassesses his truly anti-humanitarianistic rhetoric when discussing terrorist suspects; and all those insulted by the remarks of Hannity feel vindicated after witnessing him being waterboarded and pertified beyond belief.
I don't want to get into the discussion on the merits, or lack their of, regarding waterboarding; I feel there is no argument that can justify its use. But I feel sickened with the matter is taken so lightly by people that they feel they can make fun of it.
Olbermann, thanks for stepping up and challenging Hannity.
Hannity, shame on you - not even O'Reilly gives me this cold feeling in the pit of my stomach!
