Swordfish: person vs. people

One movie that evokes attention for more than just some good entertainment is the movie Swordfish. One such illustrated in the movie is the idea of the struggle between America's safe keeping versus the values of the Americans which bump each other every time a conflict clouds the country's future. American expect the protection from "... all enemies, foreign and domestic..." However, the "how" execution of our safety has been a constant push and shove by judges, senators, presidents since the beginning of our war history. In the movie, the antagonist Gabriel insists that the need of the many outweigh the need of the few, and following that notion, the violation of certain American rights are an excusable action:

"They bomb a church, we bomb ten. They hijack a plane, we take out an airport ... Our job is to make terrorism so horrific that it becomes unthinkable to attack Americans". - Gabriel

The director's focus on the bold unorthodox methods for killing the American enemy can prove to be a glorified version of Bush's torture allegations. But, why risk criminal prosecution from courts? is the thought of preserving America's rights an act that naturally will go against article's of the constitution. On the other hand, in the end of the movie, Gabriel takes the life of a major terrorist why money he stole from the World Bank. By Gabriel's actions, countless American lives were saved, nevertheless, at the expense of a robbery! Would America condone the act of robbery to save Americans? or in a current application, would America allow torture of certain individuals for the much needed national safety? It is up to us to put our values in action and let future generation judge our decisions.