To Catch an Idiot

Now I've heard it all. Apparently, NBC, in their infinite wisdom, and left-wing media-biased way, has decided it is time to-catch-a-terrorist. They will be broadcasting "The Wanted" on July 20th.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i04af04c7447fd0dce5d83adb5f471a37
Likened unto the "To Catch a Predator" series, they intend to broadcast their efforts to identify and snare wanted international terrorists. Although the premise has a nice appeal, it is an accident waiting to happen. Above all else, people should realize that this is designed solely for ratings and nothing else. Much like the Predator exposé, where men are baited into engaging in sexual meetings with teenage girls as portrayed by adults, nothing good can come from "The Wanted".

Most people don't know that after predators are lured, engaged and confronted, and they experience the eventful multi-manned police tackle to "take them down" and arrest them, (they could have simply told them to "freeze" and "get on the ground" as they do in real life, but then, that wouldn't be riveting television now would it), most, and I'm talking HIGH percentages, have their cases dismissed, overturned, or dropped, because of evidence tampering, entrapment, and other, grossly negligent legal technicalities. And this, after, the police were involved. In Indiana, cases were overturned. Here's the link and an excerpt:

http://reporter.blogs.com/thresq/2009/01/by-matthew-belloni--datelines-to-catch-a-predator-series-always-fascinated-us-and-not-just-because-there-are-still-men-out-t.html

In two separate rulings, courts have overturned convictions of men busted by online stings because there was no actual "victim" in the case. Attempted sexual misconduct with a minor, the courts reasoned, requires an actual minor, not an undercover officer.

So, now that we know this, what can we expect from "The Wanted"? The same thing. Except this time, we will screw up the international legal system and in turn let these very dangerous men go free on technicalities. Where's the justice? Where's the value? Where's the rights?

I am reminded of the late 40's, 50's, and on into the 60's, when Americans "turned in" the "commie pinkos" for investigation...no evidence required. These people may have sympathized with communist beliefs, but were in no way associated with communism or its actions. So how many men, women, and let's not forget, children, are going to be accused and incarcerated, without merit. So I bet you are hung up right now about the "terrorist children", huh? Well, let's be realistic. How many children have been used in "homicide bombings"? How many children have shot at American soldiers in the name of Allah?

So if we keep going in this fashion, we will have a couple things we really don't want. The first is an extreme take-off of "The Running Man" by Richard Bachman, aka Stephen King. If you haven't read the book, go ahead, it's a good read. If all you ever saw was the movie, with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Richard Dawson, it's not bad, but it's not good either. More or less, people are convicted of crimes and then sent to their punishment to "play in a game of life and death". Naturally, Arnold's character reigns triumphant and the evil-doers are killed. That ain't gonna happen! A lot of innocent people will be judged unfairly and killed or imprisoned. It will also spawn and age of "Video Vigilantism" where it is okay to chase after people with a video camera for a conviction, or worse, as long as they are ____________, and you can fill in the blank with whatever group you want. Hey! That sounds familiar. Oh wait, I remember. We had a war about this very same thing, but there were no cameras. Oops, I misspoke, they had cameras back then too. Oh what was his name...the little guy...with the mustache...and the hand-thing. Oh yes, I remember, his name was Adolf Hitler and HIS group was Jews.

Second, and not quite as extreme, would be camps. Now I'm not talking about the wonderful summer camps we went to as children. I'm referring to the concentration camps, like during World War II. You know the ones. A lot of Japanese-American's (and I'm being politically correct when I say this) were rounded up and put in these camps. These people lost their homes, jobs, and valued possessions without any evidence being presented. Their only crime, being of Japanese decent immediately after the Pearl Harbor bombing. You know, now that I think about it, it really was extreme.

So now I ask you, what's wrong with letting the law enforcement community do their jobs. I realize they may not do it very well at times, but they try. They have a very fine line to walk in order to correctly identify, gather evidence, arrest, and submit for judgement. There a so many reasons, and technicalities, to be careful of that conviction and/or release hangs in the balance the entire time. Now we want to let "investigative journalists" botch up the evidence, scare away the suspects, and in general screw up any chance of conviction...all in the name of ratings. I don't think so!