Naomi Wolf claims we are under a coup 10/4/08

[TheEvilDetector]

Check it out:

Interview - Naomi Wolf - Give Me Liberty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XgkeTanCGI

Whether or not there is cause for urgency as per the video above,
I think (given the current economic circumstances and laws on the books) it is prudent for those
that have not done so, to consider making preparations in the areas of
Food/Water/Shelter/Protection etc.

If the video is correct in its urgency and gravity and you have not made preparations above, life will get 'difficult' for you,
on the other hand, if it is a false alarm, you just have some goods, that you can use/consume/trade/sell/return as the case may be.

[smileylovesfreedom]

I know scary video - thanks for sharing it.

[TheEvilDetector]

I know scary video - thanks for sharing it.

It's a case of 'fear she is right, hope she is wrong'

[Fox McCloud]

unfortunately, she is a left-wing gate-keeper :(

[TheEvilDetector]

unfortunately, she is a left-wing gate-keeper :(

Not quite sure what you mean, but if it means she is wrong, great!

:)

[Fox McCloud]

Not quite sure what you mean, but if it means she is wrong, great!

:)

I'm not saying she's wrong, but just from her lingo (Democracy this and Democracy that, etc) so far (only 13 minutes in), she seems to blame this all on the GOP/Republicans...she mentions the RNC and what they did, but makes no mentioning of the DNC and what went on there....and well, if you look at wikipedia, you'll easily see that she is, in fact a liberal (who campaign for Clinton in '96..yuck). Granted, while some liberals are for our cause, not every single one is, and some fall for the false left-ring paradigm (oh Obama is good!)--as Ron Paul pointed out in his 1988 interview "American Power Structure" it's ultimately members of both parties that control the nation's policies, and it's not one particular person that can be blamed.

So, while her points may be sound, I'd be willing to bet her solutions are probably not.

*rolls eyes* -> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/why-barack-obama-got-my-v_b_89017.html figures....

[ladyliberty3]

So what solutions would you suggest?

[RockEnds]

Eh, sounds like the 3rd amendment may be on its way out, too. At least we still had that.

[Fox McCloud]

So what solutions would you suggest?

some of her 'solutions' are ok, but others are not, such as "we can't turn a blind eye to Democracies abroad" (interventionism anyone?), not to mention a few other things she was saying.

I really don't have all the solutions; I tend to agree with Ron Paul's model, more than anything else, with a few other things on the side, but also, we have to be extremely careful who we listen to in times like these; there will be those who sound good, and may want to solve 1 atrocity in society, while conveniently letting other atrocities take place. (ie: enhance civil liberties while crushing economic freedoms, or visa versa).

[Mini-Me]

I'm not saying she's wrong, but just from her lingo (Democracy this and Democracy that, etc) so far (only 13 minutes in), she seems to blame this all on the GOP/Republicans...she mentions the RNC and what they did, but makes no mentioning of the DNC and what went on there....and well, if you look at wikipedia, you'll easily see that she is, in fact a liberal (who campaign for Clinton in '96..yuck). Granted, while some liberals are for our cause, not every single one is, and some fall for the false left-ring paradigm (oh Obama is good!)--as Ron Paul pointed out in his 1988 interview "American Power Structure" it's ultimately members of both parties that control the nation's policies, and it's not one particular person that can be blamed.

So, while her points may be sound, I'd be willing to bet her solutions are probably not.

*rolls eyes* -> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/why-barack-obama-got-my-v_b_89017.html figures....

I don't think she's a "gatekeeper." Rather, I think she's just a liberal who's let her anti-gun and anti-capitalist biases get in the way of the truth. Like most, she's just been misled into indeed believing the false left-right paradigm. I remember reading posts from Paul supporters who met her, and I recall them saying she seemed very open, and that she might be starting to wonder if we might be actually right (on the issues we disagree on). In any case, I highly doubt she's one of "them." In the end, she may even come around...especially after Obama disappoints the hell out of her.

[TheEvilDetector]

I'm not saying she's wrong, but just from her lingo (Democracy this and Democracy that, etc) so far (only 13 minutes in), she seems to blame this all on the GOP/Republicans...she mentions the RNC and what they did, but makes no mentioning of the DNC and what went on there....and well, if you look at wikipedia, you'll easily see that she is, in fact a liberal (who campaign for Clinton in '96..yuck). Granted, while some liberals are for our cause, not every single one is, and some fall for the false left-ring paradigm (oh Obama is good!)--as Ron Paul pointed out in his 1988 interview "American Power Structure" it's ultimately members of both parties that control the nation's policies, and it's not one particular person that can be blamed.

So, while her points may be sound, I'd be willing to bet her solutions are probably not.

*rolls eyes* -> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/why-barack-obama-got-my-v_b_89017.html figures....

Ok, I skimmed the article and understand your point about her appearing to be a democrat with blinders on.

However, I can still see alot of validity in what she says in the video above, her apparent subscription to the false left-right political paradigm notwithstanding.

[humanic]

Ok, I skimmed the article and understand your point about her appearing to be a democrat with blinders on.

See also: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1677553#post1677553

[porcupine]

So what solutions would you suggest?

The same thing I always suggest

[Fox McCloud]

I can still see alot of validity in what she says in the video above, her apparent subscription to the false left-right political paradigm notwithstanding.

oh don't get me wrong, I think some of the things she's saying is accurate, it's just that the overall ideology she holds could influence her opinion one what the solutions could be.

for example, if Bush were to do something like she mentions (it wouldn't surprise me), then if some leftist leader comes along later to "save us" (who's really only a wolf in sheeps clothing), I'd bet you anything she'd fall for that individual hook, line, and sinker.

I could be entirely off-base, however.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

I'm not saying she's wrong, but just from her lingo (Democracy this and Democracy that, etc) so far (only 13 minutes in), she seems to blame this all on the GOP/Republicans...she mentions the RNC and what they did, but makes no mentioning of the DNC and what went on there....and well, if you look at wikipedia, you'll easily see that she is, in fact a liberal (who campaign for Clinton in '96..yuck). Granted, while some liberals are for our cause, not every single one is, and some fall for the false left-ring paradigm (oh Obama is good!)--as Ron Paul pointed out in his 1988 interview "American Power Structure" it's ultimately members of both parties that control the nation's policies, and it's not one particular person that can be blamed.

So, while her points may be sound, I'd be willing to bet her solutions are probably not.

I agree, but I can see plenty of value in her. She reaches people that are harder to reach, like middle aged and older women. She at least helps them identify the problems.

[Anti Federalist]

unfortunately, she is a left-wing gate-keeper :(

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.;)

[D.H.]

You are falling for the left/right paradigm folks....this thread is a perfect example of why nothing will ever change.

People have said they agree with what she said but are paranoid about which side she came from.

It's only been a year...have people forgotten that the beauty of the Ron Paul campaign was that he managed to draw people from the far left and the far right of the political spectrum TOGETHER?

[constituent]

some of her 'solutions' are ok, but others are not, such as "we can't turn a blind eye to Democracies abroad" (interventionism anyone?), not to mention a few other things she was saying.

I really don't have all the solutions; I tend to agree with Ron Paul's model, more than anything else, with a few other things on the side, but also, we have to be extremely careful who we listen to in times like these; there will be those who sound good, and may want to solve 1 atrocity in society, while conveniently letting other atrocities take place. (ie: enhance civil liberties while crushing economic freedoms, or visa versa).

+1

[s35wf]

she does bring attention to the problems ahead of us to us women. her & connie fogal from cap were very influential to me while finding ron paul.

yes, shes behind obama? why, who knows? but atleast shes right on most points and brings out awareness to the issues to the masses. we need this awakening in this country. hopefully after a person sees her books & videos they will begin to at least think about shit instead of american idol or football!

and she does say in the end that both the left and right need to be ended and control returned basicly to "we the people" in a form of a constitutional republic. now we need to teach americans the difference between "democracy" and "republic"!

[1000-points-of-fright]

A) She doesn't understand (or is deliberately misrepresenting) the martial law that Sherman was talking about. He was referring to congressional martial law where they can pass a bill without a vote, not actual civil martial law.

B) No mention of the possible necessity of a civilian uprising because that would validate pro-gun reading of the 2A. And of course, being a lefty she can't have that.

But what's this thing about the army changing their oath from the constitution to the Commander in Chief and the mission. That's truly disturbing.

Any military folks able to confirm this?

[RockEnds]

A) She doesn't understand (or is deliberately misrepresenting) the martial law that Sherman was talking about. He was referring to congressional martial law where they can pass a bill without a vote, not actual civil martial law.

B) No mention of the possible necessity of a civilian uprising because that would validate pro-gun reading of the 2A. And of course, being a lefty she can't have that.

But what's this thing about the army changing their oath from the constitution to the Commander in Chief and the mission. That's truly disturbing.

Any military folks able to confirm this?

It was Burgess of TX that spoke of Congressional martial law during the debates on the first vote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7B4laX1E70

Sherman of California spoke of threats of actual martial law during the debates on the second vote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_4zij8

[phoenixrising]

my apologies if this is a repeat--if not watch it now !!

Interview with Naomi Wolf author of "Give Me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries" given October 4, 2008 on Mind Over Matters, KEXP 90.3 FM Seattle.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XgkeTanCGI

[Vendico]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XgkeTanCGI

[RonPaulVolunteer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XgkeTanCGI

Hmm.....


SHIT ... !!!

[Cowlesy]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=161108&highlight=naomi+wolf

[Ozwest]

I went to have a look and noticed it's 27 minutes.

I've bookmarked it and will return to it later.

Thanks for the link.

[socialize_me]

Link for the thanks.

[Ozwest]

Stuff it!

I'll watch it now.

[anaconda]

Duh. Of course we are under a coup.

[Vendico]

I went to have a look and noticed it's 27 minutes.

I've bookmarked it and will return to it later.

Thanks for the link.

Yeah, watch it now. It goes by very fast.

[Vendico]

A) She doesn't understand (or is deliberately misrepresenting) the martial law that Sherman was talking about. He was referring to congressional martial law where they can pass a bill without a vote, not actual civil martial law.

Any military folks able to confirm this?

Wrong. Sherman was talking about the real thing. The event your speaking of happened earlier that week and was told by someone else.

[pacelli]

A) She doesn't understand (or is deliberately misrepresenting) the martial law that Sherman was talking about. He was referring to congressional martial law where they can pass a bill without a vote, not actual civil martial law.


Sherman was not referring to congressional martial law, it was Burgess (Tx) who was talking about that. Sherman was talking about private conversations he had overhead about civil martial law, which he attributed to fear-mongering and not realistic.

[1000-points-of-fright]

Jesus, ok. I was mistaken. How many people have to correct me? Read the whole thread before posting.

Nobody has answered my question about the military oath and I couldn't find any other sources on the web.

[RockEnds]

Jesus, ok. I was mistaken. How many people have to correct me? Read the whole thread before posting.

Nobody has answered my question about the military oath and I couldn't find any other sources on the web.

I haven't found anything, either.

[D.H.]

We under a coup. Our media will go along with this. Look at the last week with the bailout. Notice the slant that they are almost "against it" now when I was argueing with people last week who were told by the media the bailout HAD to happen to save everybody.

The media is not effectual anymore. Example, Palin has yet to give a press conference. McCain and her told Katie Couric that the media is just about "gotcha" journalism after getting softball questions. They are running the show now, not the media, not us.

I posted on other candidates thread that Palin in one of her latest quotes is bringing the troops and patriotism (if you can get any meaning from her gibberish) into the media filter arguement. The media's asking questions is now "against the troops"?

If she is right about Palin and the theocracy, we are doomed. "Joels army" and the members of the mega churches will be turned against citizens.

The media can't help us anymore. We are on our own. I am expecting the internet to shut down when things get bad.

[Cowlesy]

I have a "Wachovia - Free Checking" ad at the top of my screen.

I love it!

[Ozwest]

Watched the link.

Be on - guard America!

[LibertyEagle]

some of her 'solutions' are ok, but others are not, such as "we can't turn a blind eye to Democracies abroad" (interventionism anyone?), not to mention a few other things she was saying.

I really don't have all the solutions; I tend to agree with Ron Paul's model, more than anything else, with a few other things on the side, but also, we have to be extremely careful who we listen to in times like these; there will be those who sound good, and may want to solve 1 atrocity in society, while conveniently letting other atrocities take place. (ie: enhance civil liberties while crushing economic freedoms, or visa versa).

I agree with what you said.

I think Naomi is right on, on a lot of what she's saying, but I question her solution. I think they're just looking for a reason to declare martial law.

It also seems like she thinks this is all a Bush deal and that "Barack" would be dandy. I'd trust her more, if she understood that Obama and Bush were on the same team.

[Ozwest]

Anyone who speaks with such fervent conviction should be congratulated.

[tropicangela]

OK so she said contact the district attorneys to arrest POTUS. These? http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/offices/index.html

[tropicangela]

OK so she said contact the district attorneys to arrest POTUS. These? http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/offices/index.html

Fast forward to 17:10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XgkeTanCGI

[liberteebell]

I agree, but I can see plenty of value in her. She reaches people that are harder to reach, like middle aged and older women. She at least helps them identify the problems.

Hey, hey, hey! I resemble that remark!:p

Seriously though, you have a good point. The middle aged women I know are mostly all lefties and wouldn't listen to anyone with an R behind his name if their life depended on it. And if they're lesbians, it's even worse. As a collective, they are the most closed minded group of all.

Of course, I've managed to Ron Paul more than a few women; one a very dear friend who has completely changed her way of thinking (at the ripe old age of 60+). :D

[ronpaulforprez2008]

unfortunately, she is a left-wing gate-keeper :(
It's really important for people here to understand that people like Naomi Wolf are funded to confuse the public, generate fear, and promulgate the various frames that divide us.

In fact, most of the people that get attention and mind share are people who are well funded with specific agendas. People need to start watching what these people say and finding ways to identify them, as it is getting more and more challenging.

But you should know that the Internet is littered with them.

[damania]

Get your city council not to accept homeland security money. They're up for election.

[angelatc]

Of course, I've managed to Ron Paul more than a few women; one a very dear friend who has completely changed her way of thinking (at the ripe old age of 60+). :D

Most of my encounters with that age group ended up "He sounds great but he won't win." :(

[Conza88]

She's a gatekeeper... whether she means to be or not.

It's the same with Chomsky.

A coup? :rolleyes: The elite staged their coup ages ago.. all she does is blame the republicans, blame the gop.... Democrats get off scott free. She SUPPORTS THE FALSE LEFT / RIGHT PARADIGM.

How The Elite Control Politics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTahZE4q90U

[Ozwest]

She's a gatekeeper... whether she means to be or not.

It's the same with Chomsky.

A coup? :rolleyes: The elite staged their coup ages ago.. all she does is blame the republicans, blame the gop.... Democrats get off scott free. She SUPPORTS THE FALSE LEFT / RIGHT PARADIGM.

How The Elite Control Politics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTahZE4q90U

I understand where you are coming from.

But...

I admire her sincerity, and her earnest attempts to warn others of impending danger.

Perhaps she will inspire others to do the same, regardless of political ideology.

[anaconda]

It also seems like she thinks this is all a Bush deal and that "Barack" would be dandy. I'd trust her more, if she understood that Obama and Bush were on the same team.

Yes. How come the "progressives" never understand this?

[raiha]

for example, if Bush were to do something like she mentions (it wouldn't surprise me), then if some leftist leader comes along later to "save us" (who's really only a wolf in sheeps clothing), I'd bet you anything she'd fall for that individual hook, line, and sinker.

oi Foxie...Don't forget that many rightist individuals went the Bush/cheney way. Theres too much collectivist BS on this forum sometimes. You know the polarized thing. All socialists are evil and all capitalists are good. Left is left and neer the twain shall meet. You get good bastards and bad bastards right across the political spectrum. To me collectivist thinking is the scariest thing ever and the great precurser to fascism.

And you may even want to get Jeffersonian about it and judge humans by their actions as opposed to the kind of lapel pins they may be sporting!

[notbornyesterday]

I met her about 6 months ago at a book-signing and had a chance to talk to her for maybe 90 seconds. She was very approachable and knows that something is really amiss.

I read her book and she seems to be "awake" to all the manipulation, etc.
I do think she could come around to seeing things a different way & don't see as the typical "gatekeeper."

-NBY

[angelatc]

Again, it is easier to win over the hearts and minds of people if you focus on issues that you agree on.

The danger in that is we don't have strong leaders on place.

[freelance]

Originally Posted by LibertyEagle
It also seems like she thinks this is all a Bush deal and that "Barack" would be dandy. I'd trust her more, if she understood that Obama and Bush were on the same team.

I go out to Daily Kos daily, and I'm astounded at the passes they keep giving Obama. He votes against everything they believe in, and they just don't get it. They are in for a rude awakening next year.

[angelatc]

I go out to Daily Kos daily, and I'm astounded at the passes they keep giving Obama. He votes against everything they believe in, and they just don't get it. They are in for a rude awakening next year.

You'd think that they would have learned with Pelosi....

[Channing]

bump.

[Vote Waterman 2028]

Am i the only one that think she is overhyping the situation. I to tend to over think a lot of the situations we are put in by our governement and the bush admin. But i am pretty sure that when Rep. Sherman was speaking of martial law, he had meant martial law within the congress, which is suspension of some rules. It is far different from regular martial law. If you read her other books/reviews on them, she overhypes her data and she takes it out of context to make it sell better. It's like you guys forgot we lived in capitalism or something ;) lol

[ClockwiseSpark]

Am i the only one that think she is overhyping the situation. I to tend to over think a lot of the situations we are put in by our governement and the bush admin. But i am pretty sure that when Rep. Sherman was speaking of martial law, he had meant martial law within the congress, which is suspension of some rules. It is far different from regular martial law. If you read her other books/reviews on them, she overhypes her data and she takes it out of context to make it sell better. It's like you guys forgot we lived in capitalism or something ;) lol

Watch the video. He says "threatened with Martial law in America".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_4zij8

[Vote Waterman 2028]

interesting. I guess only time will tell though

[Indy Vidual]

Wow...
Starting ~5:00 the Naomi Wolf video gets pretty amazing. :eek: