Shutting down a democracy

[REASON]

She is a very impassioned speaker, but her logic is no more compelling than the Bible's predictions of the apocalypse. She is in fact taking several of the steps she cautions about in her rhetoric, her method, and her stated purpose. But she is the good guy, so that is all right. :hyper:

 

Beware! Slippery Slope Ahead!

 

Bill

 

Bill,

 

One obvious difference I would point out is that Naomi is basing her observations on actual occurrences in the past by other governments. There is no precedence for the apocalypse; nor could there ever be.

 

Would you be willing to elaborate a bit about your comments? Out of her list of 10 items, 1, 7 and maybe 9 (as Orb listed them) are the only ones I can see her potentially guilty of, and those would be required in order to legitimately establish her position. Do you see more than that?

 

Where does the slippery slope lead that you are concerned about? If it leads toward honoring the Constitution, restoring Habeas Corpus and the Rule of Law, more oversight and accountability, shinning a light on massive secrecy, abolishing state sponsored torture programs, limiting the "Unitary Executive" to restore co-equal branches of government, upending vast corruption, etc., than I'm ready to strap on a snowboard. :)

 

What do you think?

[Pyrotex]

...Re: Pyrotex - This is just one course of action that could be taken in face of the growing evidence of a corrupted, disfunctional, and--frankly--dangerous government....

HERE IS A POTENTIALLY CONSTRUCTIVE COURSE OF ACTION:

 

What if we ALL demanded that WE be put on the "list" of dissidents.

 

What if HALF or even a THIRD of all American adults demanded to be put on that list?:

"We are terrorists and we pose a potential threat to this administration!"

 

Then start making up "flag burning" kits: one American flag and a small lighter.

 

Organize "The March of a Million Dissidents" in Washington DC.

 

Bring your flag kits and force the gestapo to arrest US ALL! :):):):):P

 

Bring the system to its knees.

[TheBigDog]

Bill,

 

One obvious difference I would point out is that Naomi is basing her observations on actual occurrences in the past by other governments. There is no precedence for the apocalypse; nor could there ever be.

 

Would you be willing to elaborate a bit about your comments? Out of her list of 10 items, 1, 7 and maybe 9 (as Orb listed them) are the only ones I can see her potentially guilty of, and those would be required in order to legitimately establish her position. Do you see more than that?

 

Where does the slippery slope lead that you are concerned about? If it leads toward honoring the Constitution, restoring Habeas Corpus and the Rule of Law, more oversight and accountability, shinning a light on massive secrecy, abolishing state sponsered torture programs, limiting the "Unitary Executive" to restore co-equal branches of government, upending vast corruption, etc., than I'm ready to strap on a snowboard. :)

 

What do you think?

Another obvious difference is that the regimes listed by Ms. Wolf were in fact bent on imperialism and world domination. In any of the countries that currently host US troops, Afghanistan and Iraq included, all the host must do is ask the US to leave and it will. Was the same true of those countries who "hosted" the Soviet Union, Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, or any of the other despot regimes that she has the audacity to compare the US to?

 

My reference to the Apocalypse is how predictions of its imminent arrival are justified by comparing the language and symbolism of countries and current events to prophesies in the bible and turning those coincidences into factual proof. Utter hogwash, just as her seeing a clear path based upon precedent in those other countries to dictatorship and abolishing democracy in the US is utter hogwash.

 

I have a big problem with the whole of her argument and with many of her supporting premises. Part of that is a habit that she repeats over and over in her lecture. The Bush administration is guilty of hypothetical acts that they have not committed, and this is often the basis of her argument. Insinuations about everything from the 2000 election counts, to the accusation of "legalizing torture" to accusations of using thugs to harass citizen groups. The leap that she made to connect Jeb Bush to the tasering of a student at a Florida University was particularly impressive. So much so that she did it at two different points during the lecture. Imagine what a powerful Governor Jeb must have been to have coordinated the tasering of that student some eight months after leaving office.

 

General accusation: Bush did too little to help after Katrina.

New accusation: Bush is guilty of hiring private firms to help after Katrina.

 

General accusation: Bush is running a gulag where people are held without cause - everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

New accusation: Security firm is guilty of attocities, despite no fact finding or investigation.

 

Old accusation: Bush used fake documents (yellowcake from Africa) to promote cause for war. (The documents in question are hardly proven as fake or otherwise).

New accusation: Bush took out innocent reporter Dan Rather who was using proven forged documents to attack President Bush. This is pure paranoia that Bush took him out. Rather screwed up and was taken out by his own stupidity, the fact that he is suing his employer is hardly an indication of his vindication (as implied by Ms. Wolf).

 

I could go on and on, but it is in my opinion a pointless debate. Those who wish to believe Ms. Wolf are welcome to do so. Those who wish to see nationalism as a key indicator of a collapsing government can stay with that. There is nothing like such highly selective dot connecting to make a person like Ms. Wolf seem every bit the smart person that she is. For me it further illustrates her utter fearlessness is pushing her political agenda ahead of all reason. If you listen again to her lecture you will see that she is in fact...

 

Invoking a terrifying internal and external enemy (Bush Administration, "neocons")

 

Creating a gulag (By extrapolating based on hypothetical that this is inevitable, playing on fear)

 

Developing a thug caste (Again, playing on fear to extrapolate what does not exist because it could... "The list" - beautifully abstract and ominous)

 

Setting up an internal surveillance system (I think that stating that "All good reporting is based on classified information" is very telling. There is good work done in secret that is put in jeopardy when revealed. It is not the duty of the press to prevent the government for having secrets.)

 

Harassing citizens' groups (Well, maybe she isn't doing this. :) Although she is very predictable in who she will criticize and who she will condemn.)

 

Engage in arbitrary detention and release (She is not in a position to do this.

 

Target key individuals (Without doubt she does this, only she aims public opinion to wreck people.)

 

Control the press (Of course she is the press)

 

Dissent equals treason (This is an interesting one. She wants to impeach Bush as a criminal and a murderer... because she has political differences with him? Because he has positioned himself to commit hypothetical crimes? Another point I have to make is that this is a frequent accusation that is absolutely foundless.)

 

Suspend the rule of law (Laws are inconveniences when broken by her friends, and too lenient when hypothetically broken by her enemies. Convicting people in the press is he own best solution to suspending the rule of law. Nothing like a rumor from a "legitimate news person" to try and crush a career. Must be nice to be above the law and still be able to whine about it.)

 

I would ask people to go back and listen to her again. When she makes accusations, what exactly is her proof? She sometimes has you make mental models, other times she agrees with off mike words, and there are insinuations about things that are not at all factual. Listen very carefully to how she makes her argument and sits it on a mountain of bullshit.

 

Bill

[Queso]

So you don't think the American Government is repeating history with their lust for control? It appears evident to me . . just look around.

I can see how the USA seems peachy to a guy like you. To each his own, eh?

I see a monster.

[TheBigDog]

So you don't think the American Government is repeating history with their lust for control? It appears evident to me . . just look around.

I can see how the USA seems peachy to a guy like you. To each his own, eh?

I see a monster.

We could lay on a hill looking at the clouds and see all sorts of wonderful and amazing things, or we could just see clouds. One of us is seeing pictures in the clouds, and the other is just seeing clouds. The disagreement is which one of us is seeing which? There is a great deal said in your couple of sentences, my question is around how you arrived at your conclusions. I do not agree with the conclusions drawn by Ms. Wolf. I do draw my own conclusions, and there are plenty of things we need to be working on; peachy is a matter of perspective.

 

Bill

[Queso]

She laid out a blueprint that has been used in the past.

It's a relative algorithm on how to possibly gain control of a massive population.

Why are they doing these things?

I have no idea.

She uses the term echo, I like that.

I see/hear the echoes of a fascist future everywhere.

Especially in the south, and up in NYC.

Will the USA fall into all of those catagories?

It's already filling some.

I have no idea what's going to happen, but I see what direction it could easily go into and looks like it is....

What good are they doing?

Lying their asses off to all the sad monkeys who believe them.

Yuck.

[TheBigDog]

She laid out a blueprint that has been used in the past.

It's a relative algorithm on how to gain control.

Why are they doing these things?

I have no idea.

She uses the term echo, I like that.

I see/hear the echoes of a fascist future everywhere.

Especially in the south, and up in NYC.

Will the USA fall into all of those catagories?

It's already filling some.

I have no idea what's going to happen, but I see what direction it could easily go into and looks like it is....

What good are they doing?

Lying their asses off to all the sad monkeys who believe them.

Yuck.

I only ask one thing, Orb. Apply her blueprint to any country in the world and see what you find. Apply it to any country at any time in history and see what you find. The point is that you will find what you are looking for in every country and at all times in history.

 

Bill

[REASON]

Bill,

 

Wow! I gotta admit that I didn't expect that type of defensive reply to my questions. You make some valid points, but it appears that your position is one of "kill the messenger." Naomi Wolf doesn't have the power that you credit her with. She is someone who has found a pattern of behavior with previous regimes, and then found a correlation with the behavior and policies of our current administration.

 

She is one of countless journalists, political experts, law professors, constitutional scholars, ex-CIA officials, and retired military brass that are drawing similar conclusions and writing books. I'm sure they're all a bunch of vengeful fools without an iota of proof. If she is wrong as you say, she and her work will wither into the void of conspiricy nuthood. But if she is right, she will either be highly regarded for her prescience, or may find herself one day extraordinarily rendered.

 

You are correct on one thing for sure. Based on your post, it would be pointless for us to continue debating the subject. To each his own. Our beliefs are likely products of the breadth of infomation we have consumed. Based on the posts of yours that I have read, I believe you are a very wise man. I only hope that at the critical moment, should it ever arise (assuming it isn't already here), your objectivity will overcome any sense of party loyalty you may possess.

 

And please keep something in mind - In a democracy, nationalism and patriotism are not reserved for those who choose to play follow the leader. :)

[Queso]

I only ask one thing, Orb. Apply her blueprint to any country in the world and see what you find. Apply it to any country at any time in history and see what you find. The point is that you will find what you are looking for in every country and at all times in history.

 

Bill

 

It is disturbing that you can find these characteristics "in every country and at all times in history"

 

:)

[Turtle]

It is disturbing that you can find these characteristics "in every country and at all times in history"

 

:)

 

Yet, somehow it is reassuring that we, in this time & place, have near unprecedented freedom to not only point out these characteristics, but who embodies them, make it public, and take legal & political action to stop/correct the trangression(s).

 

Keep in mind that on the above testimony, the founding fathers established our nation under the same duress and prevailed. "The price of Freedom is constant vigilance," I believe is what Tom said. Ain't it the truth...still. :)

[IDMclean]

HERE IS A POTENTIALLY CONSTRUCTIVE COURSE OF ACTION:

 

What if we ALL demanded that WE be put on the "list" of dissidents.

 

What if HALF or even a THIRD of all American adults demanded to be put on that list?:

"We are terrorists and we pose a potential threat to this administration!"

 

Then start making up "flag burning" kits: one American flag and a small lighter.

 

Organize "The March of a Million Dissidents" in Washington DC.

 

Bring your flag kits and force the gestapo to arrest US ALL! :phones::):cheer::):)

 

Bring the system to its knees.

 

I like the concept, but I have difficulty seeing how to play it out; also, I personally would wave a flag rather than burn it. The flag is, to me, a symbol of the ideals on which this country was founded and the ideal which, I believe, we ought to consider in our pursuit of improvement for all the people of this nation.

 

Dissidence is necessary to the healthy functioning of a democratic nation; thus, dissidence is patriotism in my eyes*. The pilots in the commerical airlines fly by twos for a good reason. one flys the plane and the other questions the decisions of the pilot; thus the dissident pilot serves to keep the other aware, actively engaged and critical of his own decisions making process. Apparently, it saves lives.

 

*Leap of logic, I know but the whole argument is an essay I wrote recently and better served as it's own topic. :D

[TheBigDog]

It is disturbing that you can find these characteristics "in every country and at all times in history"

 

:phones:

That is why it is disturbing that so much meaning is read into it.

[Queso]

That is why it is disturbing that so much meaning is read into it.

 

 

I disagree.

Our country is just now realizing it has been lied to for years by the people that RUN it!

What has happened everywhere else all over world, I can not say.

I can only say what I've seen here in America the short time I've lived here.

[Queso]

You think infringing on my freedom is just standard procedure by the lovely governments all over the world?

You think lying to the people just happens, and it happens all over the place so it's no big deal?

 

This is evil. What will this monster evolve into? Peace and happiness?

 

DOUBT IT.

[Inter.spem.et.metum]

I will create a thread for this question, what is your idea of freedom? Is it that important to you that you allow harm to yourself or others?

 

I don't think we should allow a corrupt government to exist just because it gives us the false idea of freedom.

[Turtle]

...I don't think we should allow a corrupt government to exist just because it gives us the false idea of freedom.

 

Pretty sweeping statement to categorize the entire [Federal] government as corrupt when it is the Executive branch that is under indictment here. :naughty:Do you or any others suggest the Supreme Court is corrupt? :shrug:The entire Legislative branch? Ineptness aside, the very whirlwind around the issue is evidence that there is active challenge underway supported by both the spirit and the law of the US Constitution. Let Freedom ring. :eek_big:

[Queso]

So a branch is dead, sever it.

Let it regrow.

 

What is freedom?

It's subjective to the observer.

That's why everyone thinks they are free. ('cept everyone locked up in Jail)