BEg2 ch30 paragraph 6

[Thomas Eckhardt]

I have not seen this but it is indeed exactly what I am talking about
and, more to the point, what I suggest Pynchon is talking about.

The Wiki entry to Rex 84:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84

Peter Dale Scott has written about CoG extensively. I also recommend
Christopher Ketcham's "The Last Roundup":

https://web.archive.org/web/20080831101327/http://www.radaronline.com/from-the-magazine/2008/05/government_surveillance_homeland_security_main_core_01.php



Am 02.06.2022 um 17:55 schrieb rich:
> you may seen this, Thomas but some pretty relevant stuff contained here
> and having just re-read Vineland, whoa...
>
> rich
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/26/us/internet-president-emergency-orders.html?searchResultPosition=16
> <https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/26/us/internet-president-emergency-orders.html?searchResultPosition=16>
>
> “The bottom line is that these documents leave no doubt that the
> post-9/11 emergency actions documents have direct and significant
> implications for Americans’ civil liberties,” said Elizabeth Goitein
> <https://www.brennancenter.org/experts/elizabeth-goitein> of the Brennan
> Center for Justice at New York University. “And yet, there is no
> oversight by Congress. And that’s unacceptable.”
>
> Even though it is unclear how the directives have evolved since the
> later stages of the Cold War, Ms. Goitein said they have likely expanded
> to include other scenarios beyond a devastating nuclear attack. The
> documents show that later versions extended from one category to seven,
> although their topics remain secret, and fall within the jurisdiction of
> agencies with different areas of focus.
>
>
> More is public about 1950s and 1960s versions of the draft emergency
> action orders because some have been mentioned or described in memos
> that have since been declassified. For example, they included directives
> <https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/Federal%20Emergency%20Plan%20D-Minus%20%28Apr.%201959%29.pdf> imposing
> versions of martial law, censoring information crossing the border and
> suspending court hearings for detained people. It is unclear whether the
> current set includes similar actions.
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 4:17 AM Hübschräuber via Pynchon-l
> <pynchon-l at waste.org <mailto:pynchon-l at waste.org>> wrote:
>
>
>     Am 01.06.2022 um 09:01 schrieb Michael Bailey:
>
>      > Some militarization occurring, and while the tone isn’t evincing or
>      > recommending a “thrilled about it” attitude, it doesn’t seem to
>     me to be
>      > either surprised or greatly disapproving - except of the bus loads of
>      > racially profiled arrestees, and I’m reading that into it mostly,
>     based on
>      > the previous paragraph and the reference to “civic imagination.”
>      >
>      > A Mobile Command Center near a tense locality doesn’t seem like a
>     terrible
>      > idea, does it?
>
>     No, but...
>
>     I keep reading BE against the background of VL and its explicit,
>     thematic references to REX 84 and COINTELPRO, i.e. Continuity of
>     Government and counterinsurgency measures.
>
>     As CoG features in BE just like it did in VL, I again point to
>     the fact that CoG or Continuity of Operations measures were
>     implemented on September 11. To the best of my knowledge they have
>     not been rescinded. The specifics are, of course, classified:
>
>     "The George W. Bush administration put the Continuity of Operations plan
>     into effect for the first time directly following the September 11
>     attacks."
>
>     "On July 18, 2007, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), a member of the U.S. House
>     Committee on Homeland Security at that time, requested the classified
>     and more detailed version of the government's continuity-of-operations
>     plan in a letter signed by him and the chairperson of the House Homeland
>     Security Committee, which is supposed to have access to confidential
>     government information.
>
>     The president refused to provide the information, to the surprise of the
>     congressional committee. As of August 2007, efforts by the committee to
>     secure a copy of the plan continued."
>
>     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuity_of_Operations_Plan#Continuity_of_Operations_plan_activated
>     <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuity_of_Operations_Plan#Continuity_of_Operations_plan_activated>
>
>     (We might remember that Oliver North testified about REX 84 only in
>     closed
>     session.)
>
>     Perhaps more to the point, I read this passage specifically against
>     the background of the Patriot Act which looms in
>     the near future of the narrative present:
>
>     "The Patriot Act was enacted following the September 11 attacks and the
>     2001 anthrax attacks with the stated goal of dramatically tightening
>     U.S. national security, particularly as it related to foreign terrorism.
>     In general, the act included three main provisions:
>
>     - expanded surveillance abilities of law enforcement, including by
>     tapping domestic and international phones;
>     - easier interagency communication to allow federal agencies to
>     more effectively use all available resources in counterterrorism
>     efforts; and
>     - increased penalties for terrorism crimes and an expanded list of
>     activities which would qualify for terrorism charges.
>
>     The law is controversial due to its authorization of indefinite
>     detention without trial of immigrants, and due to the permission given
>     to law enforcement to search property and records without a warrant,
>     consent, or knowledge."
>
>     https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act
>     <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act>
>
>     This, I suggest, is the general political/historical background
>     Pynchon evokes (this is, looking into the future of the narrative
>     present - looking
>     into the past we get DARPA, the RAND corporation, McCarthyism from
>     Ernie, as well as the Cold War Command and Control Centre in the
>     Dark Web).
>
>     In the passage at hand, Pynchon describes the subtle implementation of a
>     permanent state of emergency - or at least steps taken into that
>     direction: Detention and imprisonment without charges, surveillance,
>     roadblocks, the military patrolling the
>     streets. These measures may be seen as reasonable under the
>     circumstances but it is well known that once civil rights are
>     curtailed they hardly ever are reinstituted once the immediate
>     danger is over. Relatedly, like the whole concept of national
>     security, the measures are of dual use as instruments of
>     counterterrorism as well as of counterinsurgency.
>
>     In any case, Pynchon seems to emphasise
>     the fact that those "Mobile Police Command Centers" became permanent
>     features.
>
>     I like it how seamlessly the material from this
>     context, which may be termed "parapolitical", "deep political" or simply
>     "pertaining to the machinations of the national security state", blends
>     in with the observational and indeed, as you say, not "surprised or
>     greatly disapproving" tone of the passage. At the very least, however,
>     the dangers of the counterterrorist paradigm are hinted at - not in the
>     text at hand, but if one takes the historical context and Pynchon's
>     various takes on the
>     national security state into account.
>
>     The door of the mouse trap in Maxine's dream closes "not that loudly"...
>     --
>     Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>     <https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l>
>