Hijexx wrote:
Naomi Wolf has an interesting take on what could possibly constitute a "war zone." If you think of the global war on terror including the United States, we are now part of the "war zone."

Note: I have not vetted Naomi Wolf, really only heard about her yesterday with this video. She has a book to sell about America becoming a police state. Fear will help it move. Still, interesting points raised in this 27 minute video:

I've heard of her before. I don't have an impression of her one way or the other but I believe she is generally well regarded. A summary of her views on Wikipedia makes her sound interesting and controversial. Not sure what I think about all of it, but she is obviously not an authoritarian, so maybe I'd like her. Interesting for a feminist to have taken her thinking into this realm. Certainly outside the box.

I haven't heard the video (will do so tonight) but I read a summary of her ten points on Wikipedia. Let me address each:

1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy.

Yeah, but the GWOT is basically over. More in a minute.

2. Create secret prisons where torture takes place.

They certainly have demonstrated that they can detain US citizens without trial for years.

3. Develop a thug caste or paramilitary force not answerable to citizens.

OK. Blackwater. The Army deployment is, however, answerable to us.

4. Set up an internal surveillance system.

OK. Its not clear to what extent this is going on but the infrastructure and legal loopholes are there, at least for widespread monitoring of transactional data, which might be going on.

5. Harass citizens' groups.

This is not going on. Not systemically.

6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release.

This is not going on.

7. Target key individuals.

This is not going on.

8. Control the press.

The Republicans have managed to convince a large swath of the population that the press is politically biased, which allows them to simply lie to their supporters. Their supporters will believe those lies no matter what contrary evidence is presented.

The proof is in the pudding with regard to Sarah Palin. They've been able to get away with presenting VP candidate who is not at all qualified to be president. They've tried to hide this fact by not making her available to the press in general, which is unprecedented in modern American history. The few times she has been interviewed have been disasters, but neither her refusal to hold a press conference nor her failure to perform well when she does take questions has deterred her supporters, as they don't believe anything the press tells them if it conflicts with the talking points of their political party.

This fact is extremely dangerous, but it does not amount to "control" of the press. People have the freedom to point out inconsistencies in Sarah Palin's public statements. You are allowed to decide what you want to believe. However, were the Republicans to become sufficiently powerful, crackdowns on the freedom of the press would be tolerated and applauded by many of their supporters, who already believe that the press is a part of the problem.

Frogs are only medium warm here, as well.

9. Treat all political dissidents as traitors.

Republican partisans do, but the government does not. Were this to turn into policy it would be a problem, just like the last point.

10. Suspend the rule of law.

Obviously, this has not occurred.

So, basically, the frogs are not boiling. The water, however, has become much warmer in the past few years. The economic cataclysm could push things down this direction, and the stage has been set.

The reason I don't think it will happen is that the GWOT is basically over. AlQ made a big mistake fermenting a sectarian conflict between Sunni and Shai muslims. They lost. We're really in the end game now, AFAIK.

However, none of the present political candidates can admit that. If Obama admits it, it means admitting that Bush did, in fact, win the GWOT, something he cannot allow Republicans to take credit for this close to the election. If McCain admits it, it means admitting that the economy has to take a front seat now, which undermines his potential value as a candidate with strong foreign policy credentials and little economic knowledge.

History will credit Bush with defeating AlQ, and that will be his legacy. The question is, when. If we get a ways down the road here and the administration is still fear mongering about terrorism ... perhaps as a distraction from the economic problems facing the country. If they start to use military spending as a fiscal policy. Well, thats when its time to worry. We've got a ways to go before we end up there.

We're not out of the woods yet. In fact, we've got a ways to go. These things are usually the product of economic, and not political, problems, and boy-o-boy have we ever got one of those.

I tried video url="URI" in preview mode, didn't seem to work.

Shrug, works for me. Reply to this. Maybe you use of the slash before the closing bracket?

RE: LAist: Martial Law was Threatened if Bailout Didn't Happen