Warning: Rant Ahead
May. 31st, 2005 06:19 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sister_luckRemember that post about 24, the tv show?
Well, I watched three more episodes yesterday. I know that I'm in danger of flogging a dead horse, but please bear with me (or skip this post).
The counter-terrorist unit has a former US soldier turned mercenary in custody who might have close ties to the mastermind of the terror attacks. The terrorists are in possession of a nuclear bomb.
So, what happens?
Marwan, the main terrorist, calls "some slimey PC laywer" working for "Amnesty Global" who then tries to make sure that the rights of the man in custody are not violated.
Thus the guys at CTU have to ask the new President of the US to permit them to torture the suspect. He has difficulties in making the decision whether to allow the torture of a US citizen and wants to have 20 minutes to think about it.
They don't have the time and so they release their suspect in order to get around the problem. With the knowledge and consent of his superior, Jack Bauer, the main hero, goes behind the president's back and obtains the location of Marwan by beating up the suspect.
As Jack Bauer says: "I don't want to bypass the constitution, but these are extremely extraordinary circumstances".
The President throws a hissy fit and has Jack arrested while he is tracking down Marwan allowing Marwan to escape.
The only criticism voiced by the characters is that Jack disobeyed the President.
The moral of the story?
"Restraint is a luxury we cannot afford."
The whole thing is fictional, and the dilemma that is presented is a difficult one, but it isn't even discussed - the fact that torture is the only way to go is made clear right from the beginning. So, which conclusions about actual American politics might the audience draw?
Organisations like Amnesty International are being used by international terrorists and in fact prevent the counter-terrorist agencies from doing 'the right thing'.
It's good that the Americans didn't vote for the sissy who thinks hard about his decisions and instead chose the guy who gets it done - morally correct or not.
Well, I watched three more episodes yesterday. I know that I'm in danger of flogging a dead horse, but please bear with me (or skip this post).
The counter-terrorist unit has a former US soldier turned mercenary in custody who might have close ties to the mastermind of the terror attacks. The terrorists are in possession of a nuclear bomb.
So, what happens?
Marwan, the main terrorist, calls "some slimey PC laywer" working for "Amnesty Global" who then tries to make sure that the rights of the man in custody are not violated.
Thus the guys at CTU have to ask the new President of the US to permit them to torture the suspect. He has difficulties in making the decision whether to allow the torture of a US citizen and wants to have 20 minutes to think about it.
They don't have the time and so they release their suspect in order to get around the problem. With the knowledge and consent of his superior, Jack Bauer, the main hero, goes behind the president's back and obtains the location of Marwan by beating up the suspect.
As Jack Bauer says: "I don't want to bypass the constitution, but these are extremely extraordinary circumstances".
The President throws a hissy fit and has Jack arrested while he is tracking down Marwan allowing Marwan to escape.
The only criticism voiced by the characters is that Jack disobeyed the President.
The moral of the story?
The whole thing is fictional, and the dilemma that is presented is a difficult one, but it isn't even discussed - the fact that torture is the only way to go is made clear right from the beginning. So, which conclusions about actual American politics might the audience draw?
Organisations like Amnesty International are being used by international terrorists and in fact prevent the counter-terrorist agencies from doing 'the right thing'.
It's good that the Americans didn't vote for the sissy who thinks hard about his decisions and instead chose the guy who gets it done - morally correct or not.
