CliqueClackDoes Homeland serve as a commentary on U.S. homeland security laws?
Could it be that Showtime’s ‘Homeland’ isn’t really just about preventing one terrorist’s attack on the United States, but is instead about what powers the country has — and doesn’t have — in these matters?
This thought didn’t come to mind until watching the “Q&A” episode. As the newcomer to the show, Peter, is grilling Brody, he notes that he’s able to keep Brody there because of the laws put in place by his department of government.
“I’m a United States Congressman. You can’t just kidnap me and shackle me to the fucking floor!” – Brody
“Actually, we can. Thanks to your colleagues in Congress, we have very broad powers to detain and interrogate.” – Peter
It’s ironic, but then it occurred to me that it could be the whole point of the show.
Another rather direct example has been the placement of video and audio surveillance placed on Brody, even before he had concrete evidence against him. There have been a few other instances on the show that weren’t so spelled out. There have been scenes in airports that have shown the usual TSA stuff going on, for example. That doesn’t seem so unusual, since anyone who’s air-traveled recently has gone through all of that. So why go through showing it off? The same came with Brody having to go through scanners to enter a government building — why bother pointing it out?
What’s more interesting than whether or not the show’s serving as a commentary on the power the CIA and other government agencies have in regards to homeland security: what point are they trying to make? Are they for or against them? So far it seems most likely that the show’s not picking sides. Instead, it’s presenting these things to the viewers for them to make up their own minds, and in a way that doesn’t lean in any direction; it is what it is. Though Homeland is about fictional events, it seems to be taking time to point out procedures for how homeland security is — and may very well be, behind the scenes — carried out in this country.
It will be interesting to see if Homeland continues to follow this rather subtle trend, growing to become more obvious as the series rolls on. How will Brody’s position with the CIA play into that?
2 Comments on “Does Homeland serve as a commentary on U.S. homeland security laws?”
‘Could it be that Showtime’s ‘Homeland’ isn’t really just about preventing one terrorist’s attack on the United States, but is instead about what powers the country has — and doesn’t have — in these matters?’
Nope. Its really just about preventing one terrorist’s attack on the United States
Keith: I thought last episode was a pretty obvious reference to provision 1021 of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) :
“SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF
THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS
PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY
FORCE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the
President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to
the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40;
50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces
of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection
(b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section
is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided
the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,
or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported
al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged
in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,
including any person who has committed a belligerent act or
has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy
forces.
(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposition of a
person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may
include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until
the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for
Use of Military Force.”
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540enr.pdf
It’s a disgusting piece of legislation that gets next to no media coverage because Obama signed it, and Republicans love it.