Skip to main content

24

I don't write about television much, mostly because it is an escape for me. I don't take it too seriously. I do, however watch some. I like - not surprisingly, given the focus of this blog - shows dealing with ethical ideas crashing into reality. I like Law and Order, and its spin off Special Victims Unit. The other spin off, Criminal Intent, is too formulaic for my tastes. I also like Third Watch and have been enjoying Lost. I have seen small parts of past seasons of 24, but never got into it in a big way. This past weekend a new season of 24 began and thus far I'm inclined to say I might stick this one out. My only gripe so far is that there is too much infighting in Keifer Sutherland's anti terrorism unit. Teams don't fight among themselves like that when the heat is on. (when it's off, that's a different story). While watching the opening episodes I wondered what form the flak from the American Muslim community would take. There was never any doubt that they'd be up in arms. I wasn't wrong either:

"We thank Fox for the opportunity to address the Muslim community's concerns and for the willingness of network officials to take those concerns seriously in an atmosphere of mutual respect and cooperation," said CAIR Communications Coordinator Rabiah Ahmed.

The show, which has a story line that runs the entire season, is based on 24 hours at a counter-terrorism unit.

In its fourth season, this year's story centers on a terrorist sleeper cell planning an attack on the United States.

CAIR is a spin-off of the Islamic Association For Palestine, a group identified by two former FBI counter-terrorism chiefs as a U.S. front group for the terrorist group Hamas.

Since 9-11, CAIR has seen three of its former employees indicted on federal terrorism charges.

Here's a handy formula when thinking about the portrayal of Muslims on television: Not all Muslims are terrorists, but if you are a terrorist, you are probably Muslim. The Islamic community would do well to ask why other people have this perception of them, and to ponder if there is anything they themselves can do to alter it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reuters joins CNN on the bench

Makes room for CanWest to join the majors Kudos to CanWest for calling a terrorist a terrorist . Many, including The Last Amazon , will be happy to hear it. Reuters is among the worst of the major western news services, where I would also place the BBC and the CBC. Unsurprisingly, Reuters is not happy about the changes CanWest made to Reuters wire stories: Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline." Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations. "My goal is to protect

Where credit is due

A good'un from Sawyer Brown . Thank God for You Well I've been called a self-made man Girl don't you believe it's true I know exactly how lucky I am When I'm gettin' this close to you It's high time I'm giving some praise To those that got me where I am today Chorus I got to thank momma for the cookin' Daddy for the whuppin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you A strong heart and a willing hand That's the secret to my success A good woman - I try to be a good man A good job - Lord I know I've been blessed I'm just a part of a greater plan It doesn't matter which part I am Chorus I got to thank momma for the teachin' Daddy for the preachin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you

A very limited form of inquiry

Real Clear Politics is carrying commentary on James Q. Wilson's WSJ article on ID (got that?). Wilson, the respected social scientist, gets it mostly right when he says that ID is not science because it can't be tested: So ID is not science. Does this mean that science, in any way, implies the non-existence of God? No. Does this mean that belief in God is irrational and that we should all be "free thinkers"? No. Does this mean that it is impossible to arbitrate between various theories of the existence/non-existence of God and come to some reasonable conclusions? No. Does this mean that we cannot say that humanity is meant to exist? No. In other words, rationality outside of science is quite possible, and has been around for a long time. How do you think humanity invented science in the first place? We surely did not do it scientifically. Science as we know it is the product of millennia of philosophical debate -- from Aristotle to Lakatos. Science depends upon phi