Give Me Liberty

Naomi Wolf, author of the incredibly critical The End of the America, declared in this video that the United States government is preparing to enact Martial Law. To put simply, this means: United States troops standing guard on American soil to help protect the peace. Since Oct 4th, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has found "sources that the Bush administration is putting the final touches on a plan that would see martial law declared in the United States with various scenarios anticipated as triggers." And a few days ago, Brad Sherman, a congressman, recently spoke publicly about various congresspeople that were told that Martial Law would be enacted, without the permission of congress, if the Bailout Plan for Wallstreet was not accepted by congress.

Now interpret this as it may, this does mean that a measure for Martial Law, "to respond to certain triggers", has been pushed forward in private. This isn't unprecedented, but it's yet another sign that the framework for political authoritarianism in the United States continues to grow, as Wolf discusses in her latest book Give Me Liberty. In it she describes a plan for action in response to the signs that fascism in the US is becoming a reality.

Now, I'm going to stray from conspiracy theorizing here and simply discuss H.R. 1955, the “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007″, which was passed into law last year. The bill aims to protect the US government - and it's people apparently - from:

`(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization’ means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

`(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

`(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual’s political, religious, or social beliefs.

Even congress-hopeful BJ Lawson, a Republican, asked these legitimate questions about the bill:

• Why is it necessary to define Homegrown Terrorism, or Ideologically Based Violence, based upon a person’s thoughts or beliefs? Why are current criminal laws insufficient?
• What defines “extremist” belief? Was Rosa Parks “extremist” when she thought she deserved a seat at the front of the bus?
• Why does “ideologically based violence” include “planned use” or “threatened use” of “force or violence”, in addition to “use”?
• Can “use” of violence really be equivalent to the “planned” or “threatened” use of violence, and who defines what is a “plan” or a “threat”?

For now I have nothing much to conclude. I simply must say that I have fears for the outcome of this following US presidential election, considering that the last two were likely fraudulently stolen, and that the plans for political repression of dissent are in place. I'd check out award winning journalist Greg Palast's website about how the Republicans are planning to steal this election as well.