WWJBD?

I found it gruesomely intriguing that the Republican talking points (including the WSJ's Jack Bauer Insurance opinionjournal piece) the past couple of weeks have included references to Kiefer Sutherland's "24" character Jack Bauer and his well-intentioned, "for the good of the country" criminal interrogation techniques as the barometer of the American public's support for expanding the President's rights to torture, or should we say "interrogate," detainees (similarly, this week's box-office leader was "Jackass 2," so I think we've pretty much eliminated any need for scientific opinion polls to measure the intellect or morality of the typical American). Now, I'm as big of an adrenaline-junkie Jack fan as the next guy, but isn't "24" a work of fiction? And didn't Jack's last act of vigilante justice serve to bring down a corrupt and incompetent President of these good ol' US of A? By the way, I think Gregory Itzin's portrayal of the President as a self-important, deluded weasel was the most accurate representation of the current administration to be found anywhere on the Fox network. Is the irony lost on these astute observers of the American psyche? Oh, if only we had some real-life Jack Bauers lurking in the halls of Langley!

To follow up on the whole insurance for spies angle, we acknowledge that it is not just an American sense of fair play, but a widely accepted doctrine of international justice to hold individuals accountable for their actions in time of war (and what could be more American than selling insurance against prosecution for criminals?). The Nuremburg trials established clear precedents that not only will "I was only following orders" not excuse illegal behavior, but that the superior officers who issued those orders should be tried for their war crimes. We've locked up the Jack Bauers of Abu Ghraib; when will we shine the light of justice on the despicable acts of Rumsfeld and his henchmen? Are the members of Congress now complicit in war crimes by explicitly condoning illegal acts in an unconstitutional law? Can we add another budget line to cover insurance for them, too? Or is this just another anti-climactic election year ploy so they can puff and preen for the fearful voting public before the Supreme Court inevitably declares this new law to be unconstitutional. Who's exploiting terror now?

"We have nothing to fear but fear itself." - FDR

"We have met the enemy, and he is us." - Pogo