Promoted by Brendan.

It's about torture-whether our country should become so debased as to resort to medieval methods to exact information; or, as the right would say, whether we should retain the ability to force the truth out of someone who is about to cause grave damage to our people. There are two diametrically opposed perspectives, the TV series now about to start its seventh season, 24; and the new film released last week, "Rendition." I watched the 2004-5 season of "24" with rapt attention, and I just came back from seeing "Rendition."

Rendition starts with introducing a chemical engineer of Egyptian origin, now married to an American, who is suspected of advising a terrorist organization. The dramatization of his being grabbed and whisked off to Egypt to face "extreme interrogation methods" is accurate based on unchallenged news reports from those who actually experienced this.

In "24" this same sequence of events would be that efficient work by the fictional CIA found a mole who, under the guise of respected member of the American community, was actually helping the terrorists. And this series would have built an imminent threat that was abetted by this man to destroy an American city or two, unless he was made to divulge who was going to carry out the attack.

In the world of "24" the bad guys are always, really, without doubt, the bad guys. The fictional CIA section, called the CTU, Counter Terrorism Unit, always get the bad guy because they have what I will call, technological omniscience. From their computers and sensors they see all and know all. All, that is, except what this one individual is keeping from them that would allow the nefarious plot to be thwarted.

And since the entire season is the depiction of a single day, there isn't time for due process. In fact the series has a stock character, usually a liberal President, who always waivers when he is asked to authorize the hero, Jack Bauer, to do "whatever is necessary" to get the needed information out of the captured terrorist.

O.K. raise your hands readers. Do you want Jack Bauer to lean on this guy a bit, or do you want him to have the right to remain silent, as his cohorts are arming the nuclear weapon to explode over YOUR city. Come on, admit it, you like the millions of other viewers, are rooting for Bauer to break the SOB.

Now we get back to "Rendition," which happens to be the true story of how Americans are currently administering torture. In realty, our agencies are operating in the blind. Our information is spotty and we are grasping at straws. In our frustration when there is the least bit of circumstantial evidence that could connect an individual with a terrorist group, those manning the barricades pounce on it.

"No more 9/11 is their motto," as they will not be like the weak President who is despised on "24." They will get the truth out of their captive, no matter what it takes. In Rendition we got an accurate picture of the fear that can transform any one of us into quivering jelly, a frightened child who will say anything to live another day, another hour.

Confessions come easy under such suffering and fear, and our real life CIA can point to their successes with each "confession" they extract with such methods.
------------

Now comes the commercial, which is my own personal take on the torture issue, which is being played out in the Attorney General confirmation, and in Congress's attempt to reign in the President's arrogated authority to ignore the law.

Let's see how we view the word, the concept, of "torture." Here's the relevant Merriam Webster definition:

2: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding)

And this is what we are focusing on, rather than the second part which is

to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure

The Democrats are attempting to define torture by the degree of pain inflicted on the subject, when what is more relevant is the purpose, the specific circumstances. the second part of the definition.

There is never any justification for sadistic or punishment purposes. But coercion, under narrowly defined circumstances, could be justified in my opinion. If properly limited, the number of times could very well be never, but it could also occur on rare events, if the 24 scenario actually occurs.

Since "24" was widely seen for six years, this use of torture has been legitimized when it is needed for the purposes depicted as routine in the series. Such is the power of the mass media, that we would be making a mistake to ignore.

Beyond the issue of torture, the film "Rendition" is powerful in it's showing the cycle of hate and violence. At any point you can stop the wheel and have the illusion of locating the instigator, the agent of terror. But it is only an illusion, as there is infinite regress of pain and retribution that justifies any depredation, at least to the one who is imparting it.

I won't even try to stop the wheel to justify our predilections which is to ban torture completely. It's just too easy and allows us to ignore those who take the "24" view of things. And while rare, the events, the imperative, to break an individual where there is sufficient cause to believe it will save lives, could be a reality.

And just as an aside, the word is that in the upcoming series "24" will have a woman President. Whether she will be Jack Bauer's courageous supporter or his weak nemesis is yet to be seen. But based on the number of people who view this program as reality, it just could determine who our next real life President shall be.

(Co-Posted at Dailykos.com)