More on

[barbara100 at jps.net]

Malign:
> In any case, the argument that the passage alludes to
> 9/11 seems largely to hang on the word "homeland,"
> that P's choice of that term forces the parallel.  
> is that necessary or true?

I never even noticed the "homeland" correlation until Paul N pointed it out last week. But I still drew the comparison to 9/11.  It's not just in the word "homeland." What triggered it for me was, "those among us who remain all too ready to justify any government action, whether right or wrong." That certainly brought my attention into the present.  And then "the moment enemy bombs begin to fall…all this sort of thing becomes…subversive."  I immediately thought of the White House Press Secretary telling us all to watch out.  From then on it was plain as day, with "strong leadership" and "no one is likely to be listening" because they're all scared shittless a Saddam's gonna sell AlQaida a dirty bomb. And right on down the line to the last section of the last sentence which was the real cincher for me: "…subordinating civil liberties to self-defined wartime necessity."  Not even a real wartime necessity, but a "self-defined" one.  It's 'slap in the face' obvious as far as I'm!
  concerned, "homeland" or no.