Torture letter lacked facts
I am reasonably certain that Hal Dixon is far more intelligent than his April 26 letter indicates. In appointing himself the arbiter of what does and does not constitute torture, he doesn’t let a few facts stand in the way of his preposterous statement. He describes a box where an individual cannot sit, stand or lay down in as “large.” The placement of a “bug” in said box with an individual who is terrified of that bug isn’t torture, according to Mr. Dixon.
For all we know, Mr. Dixon could be terrified of clowns. The visage of a leering, grinning clown could be haunting his dreams. Were that the case, just being in the same room with a clown could constitute torture.
The fact that there is even discussion as to what constitutes torture is disturbing in and of itself.