Fascist America, in 10 easy steps.
John A. Quayle
blueoval57 at VERIZON.NET
Fri Nov 30 16:09:23 MST 2007
At 12:22 PM 11/30/2007, William White wrote:
>Armed with an left-wing agenda, this former
>operative for Al Gore is grinding away with the
>all-too familiar whine: America is going fascist.
Looked up her bio on Wikipedia, Bill and
you are most definitely correct. She IS
unquestionably leftist. In fact, she was involved
in the Clinton/Gore re-election bid in 1996.
>Her analogies are all shady distortions of what
>is so. The Libertarians have joined with the
>socialists in this fascist anxiety chant, and
>they share the same sources and the same mental fog.
This is the main problem I have with Ron
Paul..................the "Paulists" won't hear
of any criticism of the doctor, either - no
matter what. Dr. Paul has been touting the
virtues of Dennis "Cuckoo" Kucinich (as Jim Nantz
can verify this being reported on the Jim Quinn
morning show) as a possible running mate - can you imagine?!?
>I saw her on O'Reilly recently. The voice, the
>manner, the message all contrived to produce a
>sense of quiet, insistent urgency - a stylistic
>trip wire for those who border on Rosie's brand of hysteria.
Thanks for the clarification, Bill.............
>"John A. Quayle" <blueoval57 at VERIZON.NET> wrote:
>The following are the ten steps that were
>outlined by Ms Naomi Wolf in her video,
>"Fascist America, in 10 easy steps."
>I hope everyone will take the time to read
>this. For those who say that time is on our
>side, remember that there will be no one to save
>us as we saved the Germans, and then only after
>the deaths of over 6,000,000,000 people!
>As you look at this, realize that this was NOT
>published in the continental United States; it
>was published in the UK. Naomi Wolf is right on
>in her assessment of whats happening in America.
>Lynn M Stuter
>Fascist America, in 10 easy steps
> From Hitler to Pinochet and beyond, history
> shows there are certain steps that any would-be
> dictator must take to destroy constitutional
> freedoms. And, argues Naomi Wolf, George Bush
> and his administration seem to be taking them all.
>Tuesday April 24, 2007 | Guardian
>Last autumn, there was a military coup in
>Thailand. The leaders of the coup took a number
>of steps, rather systematically, as if they had
>a shopping list. In a sense, they did. Within a
>matter of days, democracy had been closed down:
>the coup leaders declared martial law, sent
>armed soldiers into residential areas, took over
>radio and TV stations, issued restrictions on
>the press, tightened some limits on travel, and
>took certain activists into custody.
>They were not figuring these things out as they
>went along. If you look at history, you can see
>that there is essentially a blueprint for
>turning an open society into a dictatorship.
>That blueprint has been used again and again in
>more and less bloody, more and less terrifying
>ways. But it is always effective. It is very
>difficult and arduous to create and sustain a
>democracy - but history shows that closing one
>down is much simpler. You simply have to be willing to take the 10 steps.
>As difficult as this is to contemplate, it is
>clear, if you are willing to look, that each of
>these 10 steps has already been initiated today
>in the United States by the Bush administration.
>Because Americans like me were born in freedom,
>we have a hard time even considering that it is
>possible for us to become as unfree -
>domestically - as many other nations. Because we
>no longer learn much about our rights or our
>system of government - the task of being aware
>of the constitution has been outsourced from
>citizens' ownership to being the domain of
>professionals such as lawyers and professors -
>we scarcely recognise the checks and balances
>that the founders put in place, even as they are
>being systematically dismantled. Because we
>don't learn much about European history, the
>setting up of a department of "homeland"
>security - remember who else was keen on the
>word "homeland" - didn't raise the alarm bells it might have.
>It is my argument that, beneath our very noses,
>George Bush and his administration are using
>time-tested tactics to close down an open
>society. It is time for us to be willing to
>think the unthinkable - as the author and
>political journalist Joe Conason, has put it,
>that it can happen here. And that we are further along than we realise.
>Conason eloquently warned of the danger of
>American authoritarianism. I am arguing that we
>need also to look at the lessons of European and
>other kinds of fascism to understand the
>potential seriousness of the events we see unfolding in the US.
>1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy
>After we were hit on September 11 2001, we were
>in a state of national shock. Less than six
>weeks later, on October 26 2001, the USA Patriot
>Act was passed by a Congress that had little
>chance to debate it; many said that they
>scarcely had time to read it. We were told we
>were now on a "war footing"; we were in a
>"global war" against a "global caliphate"
>intending to "wipe out civilisation". There have
>been other times of crisis in which the US
>accepted limits on civil liberties, such as
>during the civil war, when Lincoln declared
>martial law, and the second world war, when
>thousands of Japanese-American citizens were
>interned. But this situation, as Bruce Fein of
>the American Freedom Agenda notes, is
>unprecedented: all our other wars had an
>endpoint, so the pendulum was able to swing back
>toward freedom; this war is defined as
>open-ended in time and without national
>boundaries in space - the globe itself is the
>battlefield. "This time," Fein says, "there will be no defined end."
>Creating a terrifying threat - hydra-like,
>secretive, evil - is an old trick. It can, like
>Hitler's invocation of a communist threat to the
>nation's security, be based on actual events
>(one Wisconsin academic has faced calls for his
>dismissal because he noted, among other things,
>that the alleged communist arson, the Reichstag
>fire of February 1933, was swiftly followed in
>Nazi Germany by passage of the Enabling Act,
>which replaced constitutional law with an
>open-ended state of emergency). Or the
>terrifying threat can be based, like the
>National Socialist evocation of the "global
>conspiracy of world Jewry", on myth.
>It is not that global Islamist terrorism is not
>a severe danger; of course it is. I am arguing
>rather that the language used to convey the
>nature of the threat is different in a country
>such as Spain - which has also suffered violent
>terrorist attacks - than it is in America.
>Spanish citizens know that they face a grave
>security threat; what we as American citizens
>believe is that we are potentially threatened
>with the end of civilisation as we know it. Of
>course, this makes us more willing to accept restrictions on our freedoms.
>2. Create a gulag
>Once you have got everyone scared, the next step
>is to create a prison system outside the rule of
>law (as Bush put it, he wanted the American
>detention centre at Guantánamo Bay to be
>situated in legal "outer space") - where torture takes place.
>At first, the people who are sent there are seen
>by citizens as outsiders: troublemakers, spies,
>"enemies of the people" or "criminals".
>Initially, citizens tend to support the secret
>prison system; it makes them feel safer and they
>do not identify with the prisoners. But soon
>enough, civil society leaders - opposition
>members, labour activists, clergy and
>journalists - are arrested and sent there as well.
>This process took place in fascist shifts or
>anti-democracy crackdowns ranging from Italy and
>Germany in the 1920s and 1930s to the Latin
>American coups of the 1970s and beyond. It is
>standard practice for closing down an open
>society or crushing a pro-democracy uprising.
>With its jails in Iraq and Afghanistan, and, of
>course, Guantánamo in Cuba, where detainees are
>abused, and kept indefinitely without trial and
>without access to the due process of the law,
>America certainly has its gulag now. Bush and
>his allies in Congress recently announced they
>would issue no information about the secret CIA
>"black site" prisons throughout the world, which
>are used to incarcerate people who have been seized off the street.
>Gulags in history tend to metastasise, becoming
>ever larger and more secretive, ever more deadly
>and formalised. We know from first-hand
>accounts, photographs, videos and government
>documents that people, innocent and guilty, have
>been tortured in the US-run prisons we are aware
>of and those we can't investigate adequately.
>But Americans still assume this system and
>detainee abuses involve only scary brown people
>with whom they don't generally identify. It was
>brave of the conservative pundit William Safire
>to quote the anti-Nazi pastor Martin Niemöller,
>who had been seized as a political prisoner:
>"First they came for the Jews." Most Americans
>don't understand yet that the destruction of the
>rule of law at Guantánamo set a dangerous precedent for them, too.
>By the way, the establishment of military
>tribunals that deny prisoners due process tends
>to come early on in a fascist shift. Mussolini
>and Stalin set up such tribunals. On April 24
>1934, the Nazis, too, set up the People's Court,
>which also bypassed the judicial system:
>prisoners were held indefinitely, often in
>isolation, and tortured, without being charged
>with offences, and were subjected to show
>trials. Eventually, the Special Courts became a
>parallel system that put pressure on the regular
>courts to abandon the rule of law in favour of
>Nazi ideology when making decisions.
>3. Develop a thug caste
>When leaders who seek what I call a "fascist
>shift" want to close down an open society, they
>send paramilitary groups of scary young men out
>to terrorise citizens. The Blackshirts roamed
>the Italian countryside beating up communists;
>the Brownshirts staged violent rallies
>throughout Germany. This paramilitary force is
>especially important in a democracy: you need
>citizens to fear thug violence and so you need
>thugs who are free from prosecution.
>The years following 9/11 have proved a bonanza
>for America's security contractors, with the
>Bush administration outsourcing areas of work
>that traditionally fell to the US military. In
>the process, contracts worth hundreds of
>millions of dollars have been issued for
>security work by mercenaries at home and abroad.
>In Iraq, some of these contract operatives have
>been accused of involvement in torturing
>prisoners, harassing journalists and firing on
>Iraqi civilians. Under Order 17, issued to
>regulate contractors in Iraq by the one-time US
>administrator in Baghdad, Paul Bremer, these
>contractors are immune from prosecution.
>Yes, but that is in Iraq, you could argue;
>however, after Hurricane Katrina, the Department
>of Homeland Security hired and deployed hundreds
>of armed private security guards in New Orleans.
>The investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill
>interviewed one unnamed guard who reported
>having fired on unarmed civilians in the city.
>It was a natural disaster that underlay that
>episode - but the administration's endless war
>on terror means ongoing scope for what are in
>effect privately contracted armies to take on
>crisis and emergency management at home in US cities.
>Thugs in America? Groups of angry young
>Republican men, dressed in identical shirts and
>trousers, menaced poll workers counting the
>votes in Florida in 2000. If you are reading
>history, you can imagine that there can be a
>need for "public order" on the next election
>day. Say there are protests, or a threat, on the
>day of an election; history would not rule out
>the presence of a private security firm at a
>polling station "to restore public order".
>4. Set up an internal surveillance system
>In Mussolini's Italy, in Nazi Germany, in
>communist East Germany, in communist China - in
>every closed society - secret police spy on
>ordinary people and encourage neighbours to spy
>on neighbours. The Stasi needed to keep only a
>minority of East Germans under surveillance to
>convince a majority that they themselves were being watched.
>In 2005 and 2006, when James Risen and Eric
>Lichtblau wrote in the New York Times about a
>secret state programme to wiretap citizens'
>phones, read their emails and follow
>international financial transactions, it became
>clear to ordinary Americans that they, too, could be under state scrutiny.
>In closed societies, this surveillance is cast
>as being about "national security"; the true
>function is to keep citizens docile and inhibit their activism and dissent.
>5. Harass citizens' groups
>The fifth thing you do is related to step four -
>you infiltrate and harass citizens' groups. It
>can be trivial: a church in Pasadena, whose
>minister preached that Jesus was in favour of
>peace, found itself being investigated by the
>Internal Revenue Service, while churches that
>got Republicans out to vote, which is equally
>illegal under US tax law, have been left alone.
>Other harassment is more serious: the American
>Civil Liberties Union reports that thousands of
>ordinary American anti-war, environmental and
>other groups have been infiltrated by agents: a
>secret Pentagon database includes more than four
>dozen peaceful anti-war meetings, rallies or
>marches by American citizens in its category of
>1,500 "suspicious incidents". The equally secret
>Counterintelligence Field Activity (Cifa) agency
>of the Department of Defense has been gathering
>information about domestic organisations engaged
>in peaceful political activities: Cifa is
>supposed to track "potential terrorist threats"
>as it watches ordinary US citizen activists. A
>little-noticed new law has redefined activism
>such as animal rights protests as "terrorism".
>So the definition of "terrorist" slowly expands to include the opposition.
>6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release
>This scares people. It is a kind of
>cat-and-mouse game. Nicholas D Kristof and
>Sheryl WuDunn, the investigative reporters who
>wrote China Wakes: the Struggle for the Soul of
>a Rising Power, describe pro-democracy activists
>in China, such as Wei Jingsheng, being arrested
>and released many times. In a closing or closed
>society there is a "list" of dissidents and
>opposition leaders: you are targeted in this way
>once you are on the list, and it is hard to get off the list.
>In 2004, America's Transportation Security
>Administration confirmed that it had a list of
>passengers who were targeted for security
>searches or worse if they tried to fly. People
>who have found themselves on the list? Two
>middle-aged women peace activists in San
>Francisco; liberal Senator Edward Kennedy; a
>member of Venezuela's government - after
>Venezuela's president had criticised Bush; and
>thousands of ordinary US citizens.
>Professor Walter F Murphy is emeritus of
>Princeton University; he is one of the foremost
>constitutional scholars in the nation and author
>of the classic Constitutional Democracy. Murphy
>is also a decorated former marine, and he is not
>even especially politically liberal. But on
>March 1 this year, he was denied a boarding pass
>at Newark, "because I was on the Terrorist Watch list".
>"Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a
>lot of people from flying because of that," asked the airline employee.
>"I explained," said Murphy, "that I had not so
>marched but had, in September 2006, given a
>lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the
>web, highly critical of George Bush for his many
>violations of the constitution."
>"That'll do it," the man said.
>Anti-war marcher? Potential terrorist. Support
>the constitution? Potential terrorist. History
>shows that the categories of "enemy of the
>people" tend to expand ever deeper into civil life.
>James Yee, a US citizen, was the Muslim chaplain
>at Guantánamo who was accused of mishandling
>classified documents. He was harassed by the US
>military before the charges against him were
>dropped. Yee has been detained and released
>several times. He is still of interest.
>Brandon Mayfield, a US citizen and lawyer in
>Oregon, was mistakenly identified as a possible
>terrorist. His house was secretly broken into
>and his computer seized. Though he is innocent
>of the accusation against him, he is still on the list.
>It is a standard practice of fascist societies
>that once you are on the list, you can't get off
>7. Target key individuals
>Threaten civil servants, artists and academics
>with job loss if they don't toe the line.
>Mussolini went after the rectors of state
>universities who did not conform to the fascist
>line; so did Joseph Goebbels, who purged
>academics who were not pro-Nazi; so did Chile's
>Augusto Pinochet; so does the Chinese communist
>Politburo in punishing pro-democracy students and professors.
>Academe is a tinderbox of activism, so those
>seeking a fascist shift punish academics and
>students with professional loss if they do not
>"coordinate", in Goebbels' term, ideologically.
>Since civil servants are the sector of society
>most vulnerable to being fired by a given
>regime, they are also a group that fascists
>typically "coordinate" early on: the Reich Law
>for the Re-establishment of a Professional Civil
>Service was passed on April 7 1933.
>Bush supporters in state legislatures in several
>states put pressure on regents at state
>universities to penalise or fire academics who
>have been critical of the administration. As for
>civil servants, the Bush administration has
>derailed the career of one military lawyer who
>spoke up for fair trials for detainees, while an
>administration official publicly intimidated the
>law firms that represent detainees pro bono by
>threatening to call for their major corporate clients to boycott them.
>Elsewhere, a CIA contract worker who said in a
>closed blog that "waterboarding is torture" was
>stripped of the security clearance she needed in order to do her job.
>Most recently, the administration purged eight
>US attorneys for what looks like insufficient
>political loyalty. When Goebbels purged the
>civil service in April 1933, attorneys were
>"coordinated" too, a step that eased the way of
>the increasingly brutal laws to follow.
>8. Control the press
>Italy in the 1920s, Germany in the 30s, East
>Germany in the 50s, Czechoslovakia in the 60s,
>the Latin American dictatorships in the 70s,
>China in the 80s and 90s - all dictatorships and
>would-be dictators target newspapers and
>journalists. They threaten and harass them in
>more open societies that they are seeking to
>close, and they arrest them and worse in
>societies that have been closed already.
>The Committee to Protect Journalists says
>arrests of US journalists are at an all-time
>high: Josh Wolf (no relation), a blogger in San
>Francisco, has been put in jail for a year for
>refusing to turn over video of an anti-war
>demonstration; Homeland Security brought a
>criminal complaint against reporter Greg Palast,
>claiming he threatened "critical infrastructure"
>when he and a TV producer were filming victims
>of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana. Palast had
>written a bestseller critical of the Bush administration.
>Other reporters and writers have been punished
>in other ways. Joseph C Wilson accused Bush, in
>a New York Times op-ed, of leading the country
>to war on the basis of a false charge that
>Saddam Hussein had acquired yellowcake uranium
>in Niger. His wife, Valerie Plame, was outed as
>a CIA spy - a form of retaliation that ended her career.
>Prosecution and job loss are nothing, though,
>compared with how the US is treating journalists
>seeking to cover the conflict in Iraq in an
>unbiased way. The Committee to Protect
>Journalists has documented multiple accounts of
>the US military in Iraq firing upon or
>threatening to fire upon unembedded (meaning
>independent) reporters and camera operators from
>organisations ranging from al-Jazeera to the
>BBC. While westerners may question the accounts
>by al-Jazeera, they should pay attention to the
>accounts of reporters such as the BBC's Kate
>Adie. In some cases reporters have been wounded
>or killed, including ITN's Terry Lloyd in 2003.
>Both CBS and the Associated Press in Iraq had
>staff members seized by the US military and
>taken to violent prisons; the news organisations
>were unable to see the evidence against their staffers.
>Over time in closing societies, real news is
>supplanted by fake news and false documents.
>Pinochet showed Chilean citizens falsified
>documents to back up his claim that terrorists
>had been about to attack the nation. The
>yellowcake charge, too, was based on forged papers.
>You won't have a shutdown of news in modern
>America - it is not possible. But you can have,
>as Frank Rich and Sidney Blumenthal have pointed
>out, a steady stream of lies polluting the news
>well. What you already have is a White House
>directing a stream of false information that is
>so relentless that it is increasingly hard to
>sort out truth from untruth. In a fascist
>system, it's not the lies that count but the
>muddying. When citizens can't tell real news
>from fake, they give up their demands for accountability bit by bit.
>9. Dissent equals treason
>Cast dissent as "treason" and criticism as
>"espionage'. Every closing society does this,
>just as it elaborates laws that increasingly
>criminalise certain kinds of speech and expand
>the definition of "spy" and "traitor". When Bill
>Keller, the publisher of the New York Times, ran
>the Lichtblau/Risen stories, Bush called the
>Times' leaking of classified information
>"disgraceful", while Republicans in Congress
>called for Keller to be charged with treason,
>and rightwing commentators and news outlets kept
>up the "treason" drumbeat. Some commentators, as
>Conason noted, reminded readers smugly that one
>penalty for violating the Espionage Act is execution.
>Conason is right to note how serious a threat
>that attack represented. It is also important to
>recall that the 1938 Moscow show trial accused
>the editor of Izvestia, Nikolai Bukharin, of
>treason; Bukharin was, in fact, executed. And it
>is important to remind Americans that when the
>1917 Espionage Act was last widely invoked,
>during the infamous 1919 Palmer Raids, leftist
>activists were arrested without warrants in
>sweeping roundups, kept in jail for up to five
>months, and "beaten, starved, suffocated,
>tortured and threatened with death", according
>to the historian Myra MacPherson. After that,
>dissent was muted in America for a decade.
>In Stalin's Soviet Union, dissidents were
>"enemies of the people". National Socialists
>called those who supported Weimar democracy "November traitors".
>And here is where the circle closes: most
>Americans do not realise that since September of
>last year - when Congress wrongly, foolishly,
>passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 -
>the president has the power to call any US
>citizen an "enemy combatant". He has the power
>to define what "enemy combatant" means. The
>president can also delegate to anyone he chooses
>in the executive branch the right to define
>"enemy combatant" any way he or she wants and then seize Americans accordingly.
>Even if you or I are American citizens, even if
>we turn out to be completely innocent of what he
>has accused us of doing, he has the power to
>have us seized as we are changing planes at
>Newark tomorrow, or have us taken with a knock
>on the door; ship you or me to a navy brig; and
>keep you or me in isolation, possibly for
>months, while awaiting trial. (Prolonged
>isolation, as psychiatrists know, triggers
>psychosis in otherwise mentally healthy
>prisoners. That is why Stalin's gulag had an
>isolation cell, like Guantánamo's, in every
>satellite prison. Camp 6, the newest, most
>brutal facility at Guantánamo, is all isolation cells.)
>We US citizens will get a trial eventually - for
>now. But legal rights activists at the Center
>for Constitutional Rights say that the Bush
>administration is trying increasingly
>aggressively to find ways to get around giving
>even US citizens fair trials. "Enemy combatant"
>is a status offence - it is not even something
>you have to have done. "We have absolutely moved
>over into a preventive detention model - you
>look like you could do something bad, you might
>do something bad, so we're going to hold you," says a spokeswoman of the CCR.
>Most Americans surely do not get this yet. No
>wonder: it is hard to believe, even though it is
>true. In every closing society, at a certain
>point there are some high-profile arrests -
>usually of opposition leaders, clergy and
>journalists. Then everything goes quiet. After
>those arrests, there are still newspapers,
>courts, TV and radio, and the facades of a civil
>society. There just isn't real dissent. There
>just isn't freedom. If you look at history, just
>before those arrests is where we are now.
>10. Suspend the rule of law
>The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of
>2007 gave the president new powers over the
>national guard. This means that in a national
>emergency - which the president now has enhanced
>powers to declare - he can send Michigan's
>militia to enforce a state of emergency that he
>has declared in Oregon, over the objections of
>the state's governor and its citizens.
>Even as Americans were focused on Britney
>Spears's meltdown and the question of who
>fathered Anna Nicole's baby, the New York Times
>editorialised about this shift: "A disturbing
>recent phenomenon in Washington is that laws
>that strike to the heart of American democracy
>have been passed in the dead of night ... Beyond
>actual insurrection, the president may now use
>military troops as a domestic police force in
>response to a natural disaster, a disease
>outbreak, terrorist attack or any 'other condition'."
>Critics see this as a clear violation of the
>Posse Comitatus Act - which was meant to
>restrain the federal government from using the
>military for domestic law enforcement. The
>Democratic senator Patrick Leahy says the bill
>encourages a president to declare federal
>martial law. It also violates the very reason
>the founders set up our system of government as
>they did: having seen citizens bullied by a
>monarch's soldiers, the founders were terrified
>of exactly this kind of concentration of
>militias' power over American people in the
>hands of an oppressive executive or faction.
>Of course, the United States is not vulnerable
>to the violent, total closing-down of the system
>that followed Mussolini's march on Rome or
>Hitler's roundup of political prisoners. Our
>democratic habits are too resilient, and our
>military and judiciary too independent, for any kind of scenario like that.
>Rather, as other critics are noting, our
>experiment in democracy could be closed down by a process of erosion.
>It is a mistake to think that early in a fascist
>shift you see the profile of barbed wire against
>the sky. In the early days, things look normal
>on the surface; peasants were celebrating
>harvest festivals in Calabria in 1922; people
>were shopping and going to the movies in Berlin
>in 1931. Early on, as WH Auden put it, the
>horror is always elsewhere - while someone is
>being tortured, children are skating, ships are
>sailing: "dogs go on with their doggy life ...
>How everything turns away/ Quite leisurely from the disaster."
>As Americans turn away quite leisurely, keeping
>tuned to internet shopping and American Idol,
>the foundations of democracy are being fatally
>corroded. Something has changed profoundly that
>weakens us unprecedentedly: our democratic
>traditions, independent judiciary and free press
>do their work today in a context in which we are
>"at war" in a "long war" - a war without end, on
>a battlefield described as the globe, in a
>context that gives the president - without US
>citizens realising it yet - the power over US
>citizens of freedom or long solitary incarceration, on his say-so alone.
>That means a hollowness has been expanding under
>the foundation of all these still- free-looking
>institutions - and this foundation can give way
>under certain kinds of pressure. To prevent such
>an outcome, we have to think about the "what ifs".
>What if, in a year and a half, there is another
>attack - say, God forbid, a dirty bomb? The
>executive can declare a state of emergency.
>History shows that any leader, of any party,
>will be tempted to maintain emergency powers
>after the crisis has passed. With the gutting of
>traditional checks and balances, we are no less
>endangered by a President Hillary than by a
>President Giuliani - because any executive will
>be tempted to enforce his or her will through
>edict rather than the arduous, uncertain process
>of democratic negotiation and compromise.
>What if the publisher of a major US newspaper
>were charged with treason or espionage, as a
>rightwing effort seemed to threaten Keller with
>last year? What if he or she got 10 years in
>jail? What would the newspapers look like the
>next day? Judging from history, they would not
>cease publishing; but they would suddenly be very polite.
>Right now, only a handful of patriots are trying
>to hold back the tide of tyranny for the rest of
>us - staff at the Center for Constitutional
>Rights, who faced death threats for representing
>the detainees yet persisted all the way to the
>Supreme Court; activists at the American Civil
>Liberties Union; and prominent conservatives
>trying to roll back the corrosive new laws,
>under the banner of a new group called the
>American Freedom Agenda. This small, disparate
>collection of people needs everybody's help,
>including that of Europeans and others
>internationally who are willing to put pressure
>on the administration because they can see what
>a US unrestrained by real democracy at home can mean for the rest of the world.
>We need to look at history and face the "what
>ifs". For if we keep going down this road, the
>"end of America" could come for each of us in a
>different way, at a different moment; each of us
>might have a different moment when we feel
>forced to look back and think: that is how it
>was before - and this is the way it is now.
>"The accumulation of all powers, legislative,
>executive, and judiciary, in the same hands ...
>is the definition of tyranny," wrote James
>Madison. We still have the choice to stop going
>down this road; we can stand our ground and
>fight for our nation, and take up the banner the founders asked us to carry.
>It's time to assume the Patriots Task
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database:
>269.16.10/1160 - Release Date: 11/29/2007 8:32 PM
>Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends
>inside Yahoo! Mail.
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database:
>269.16.10/1160 - Release Date: 11/29/2007 8:32 PM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.10/1160 - Release Date: 11/29/2007 8:32 PM
More information about the Rushtalk