With "change" and "hope" comes the inevitable emboldening of the long-suffering intellectuals. Their musings fell on deaf ears as they weren't in any position of official influence, but now they are empowered and they are making their opinions known, as wrong as they are.

“Primary care specialist Dr Homer Drae Venters says the popular drama series ("24") should tone down the violence because viewers have "become accustomed to the idea of torture".

“Suffocating, electrocuting or drugging a suspect are all in a day's work for Bauer, played by Emmy Award winning actor Kiefer Sutherland.”

But in an article for medical Journal The Lancet, Dr Venters claims the show's hero Jack Bauer "makes torture popular" and warns that people are increasingly viewing such methods of interrogation as "acceptable".

Dr. Venters is basing his conclusion on a television show, thus a grain of salt is in order, however recent events warrant a bit if intellectual sparring.

I wonder if Dr. Venters is in any way aware of what goes on behind the scenes to keep him safe from terror attack? Now while "24" is just a television program with talented writers, actors, and crew that have the show's "cult" following coming back for more every season (which is the point of any television program), the issue of torture is a reoccuring theme and also has real-world parallels.

Looking at the ongoing events in Mumbai, given the dozens of innocent people killed and hundreds injured, would Dr. Venters agree that an opportunity to extract prior notice of the plot from someone involved may have been valuable? If that capture party simply said he (or she) didn't know anything, should that be accepted on face value and the authorities just sit back and watch the carnage play itself out for days?

Of course it doesn't justify actions, but do you think the terrorists still holding an entire city hostage today would show Dr. Venters one iota the humanity he argues Jack Bauer denies those in his captivity? Does Dr. Venters understand that those "people" who flew passenger jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon gave a damn about the humane treatment of those onboard and in the buildings?

There are realities of the world that are sometimes accurately reflected in entertainment.

“They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue.”
— Malone (Sean Connery), "The Untouchables"

In the world of the fictitious Counter Terrorism Unit, and I wouldn't doubt in real world circumstances, a choice need be made. Do you allow a prisoner (that may have detailed knowledge of a terror plot) withhold that information and watch dozens, if not, hundreds or thousands of people die because the human rights of one should not be infringed upon?

I'll never know, but there may be at least one person in a Tower who had to make the choice of either being burned alive or jump to their death who may have asked why the government didn't see this happen.

While making the next horrific decision, the last thing on their mind would be the assurance that someone with advanced knowledge of the terror attack was spared the humiliation and temporary pain.

The anti-torture argument will be a fine discussion to be had once the plague of terrorism is cleansed from the world. Using a television program to make an anti-terror argument is opportunistic.

Avoiding the real world justification for torture is convenient and somewhat cowardly.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Bob Parks is a member/writer for the National Advisory Council of Project 21, VP of Marketing and Media Relations/Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Senior Writer for the New Media Journal, and commentator for the Intel Radio Network.