24 *OFFICIAL* thread

[ballz2wallz]

LOL Olby says 24 is propaganda

[motivez]

If what Drudge said was right and Fox is trying to use a popular television entertainment show with no basis in reality to "wake up the country" to the threat of terrorism, then he's not really wrong.

It's going to piss me off if they try to make it into some sort of political statement, it should be left as entertainment.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

It's going to piss me off if they try to make it into some sort of political statement, it should be left as entertainment.

I think they're just bringing the reality of the threat to our land. Is it that far off?

[motivez]

I'm sorry but 24 is not a realistic show. The whole premise is based on the 'ticking time bomb' scenario, which has not happened and will likely never happen.. and all similar situations have been resolved without the methods employed by people like Jack Bauer, etc.

It's great fiction, great entertainment, but it should be left there. Trying to use the show to promote conservative politics (or liberal politics) just ruins the ability to enjoy it as entertainment.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

I'm sorry but 24 is not a realistic show. The whole premise is based on the 'ticking time bomb' scenario, which has not happened and will likely never happen.. and all similar situations have been resolved without the methods employed by people like Jack Bauer, etc.

Not quite what I was referring to; the way the show is set up, and the issues it deals with are two different issues. You know which one I was referring to.

So let me rephrase the question so as not to be mired with semantics:

Do you not think the prospect of terrorist attacks going off in our country (ie bombs in the subways) or even small nuclear bombs going off is a realistic scenario?

[motivez]

That's not really the point

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

That's not really the point

It's absolutely the point, as that's the 'wakeup call' that Drudge and the producers of the show are talking about.

And why don't you want to answer the question?

[motivez]

I guess I deleted that sentence from my post before hitting submit, but, my problem isn't realistic scenarios as far as nuclear bombs or biological or whatever, that's happened in every other season.

However, the article makes it sound like they're taking it from what happens in a fictional, television entertainment show based on potentially realistic scenarios, to being some sort of real world political statement about things that are actually happening, like people being tortured, domestic spying, etc..

In other seasons even though it existed, they didn't push it on people as trying to make a statement either for or against, it just was.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

I guess I deleted that sentence from my post before hitting submit, but, my problem isn't realistic scenarios as far as nuclear bombs or biological or whatever, that's happened in every other season.

I don't think a nuke has ever been dropped on the US before in a show like this. I think what's even more realistic is that it has very real, present-day implications. Sure, in Terminator a nuke might go off, but everyone knows how fictional a situation that is. But just how fictional is the scenarios they present? That in and of itself is very real, and definitely pushing the limits of what's been done.

[motivez]

I remember the White House saying "The Sum of All Fears" was inappropriate and all that jazz when it came out.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

I remember the White House saying "The Sum of All Fears" was inappropriate and all that jazz when it came out.

Wasn't the government responsible for the attacks in that movie?

[motivez]

Uh, no. It's terrorists in that movie as well.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by motivez

Uh, no. It's terrorists in that movie as well.

Yeah but didn't someone in the government help them or something? I can't remember very well.

[motivez]

No, the material was American, given to Israel, who lost it during the war in '67 (Or whatever year) when a plane went down.. then some Arab terrorists found it, and so on and so forth.

[Pro Street]

I was debating with myself on if it's propiganda, until this season

1) it addresses the issue of detainees, and at first they fight it.. then suddenly it becomes a "good thing" because the one dude got intel from there and doesn't want to leave

2) ANOTHER nuclear bomb? This is getting to be too much, and too repetitive.

But while I understand it's CTU, Counter TERRORIST Unit, the arab attacks on US Soil constantly shows that this is pushing the "war on terror" feel.

What I don't like is the made-up bulshit they have. Auto feeds from satallites that update constantly? a ticket stub checker on a SUBWAY?

It's just stupid, repetitive, play on fears bullshit, I've decided not to watch it anymore simply because it's turned into another version of CSI.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

But while I understand it's CTU, Counter TERRORIST Unit, the arab attacks on US Soil constantly shows that this is pushing the "war on terror" feel.

Given that it's a show based on present-day situations, don't you think arab attacks would be most relevant? I don't see how this is so surprising.

a ticket stub checker on a SUBWAY?

Yeah I was wondering the same thing...maybe it was a commuter rail?

[ballz2wallz]

I think it's liberal propaganda; they have had 2 black presidents in the past decade...preposterous!

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I think it's liberal propaganda; they have had 2 black presidents in the past decade...preposterous!

i just had to quote that... joke or not, it makes me kinda

[pkay]

My issue is that 5 years since 9/11 our country is not much safer. Republicans scoff at inspecting or scanning ALL shipping containers coming into the U.S. (for say, radiation). Yet Hong Kong has been doing this for quite awhile now. Another talking point they'll tell you is "Even is we were to, where would the money come from (to do so)?" Well, there's the rub...isn't it? If we hadn't spent close to $1 Trillion dollars on Bush's war, we'd have the money to - instead - to have concentrated on beefing up security at our ports, along our borders and at our chemical and nuclear plants.

Bottomline: The scenario in 24 could happen and IMHO thanks to Mr. Bush it is even more likely to occur. Why? 1) As the Democrats say, they (Bush and the Republicans) have not inacted all of the 9/11 reccommendations; and 2) Starting a war in Iraq, (blundering it miserally) - thereby stirring up a hornets nest in the M.E., creating enormous hatred for the U.S., which in turn has created hundreds if not thousands of new terrorists. Failed policy both at home and abroad has made ALL of us less safe, regardless of your political views. This is a FACT. All 16 U.S. Intelligence Agencies have issued a report that the U.S. is at a greater risk today (from further attacks) due to our current Foriegn Policy.

And it's just too bad.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

i just had to quote that... joke or not, it makes me kinda

The path to my conclusion is simple; there aren't enough black men in politics to allow for 2 black presidents within a decade.