I didn't like it much, not because I thought the subject matter was implausible, but rather because the plausibility of any argument is reduced in my mind to the extent that hyperbole is brought to bear. Dramatic music, outraged questions, portentous voices ... if an argument is any good, who needs this horseshit? Doesn't hyperbole open the argument, however good it is, to counterattacks based on the hyperbole rather than on the substance of the issues raised? Doesn't hyperbole force even those who agree with the premise to sift through the drama and outrage in order to assess the issue? Doesn't hyperbole, in the end, detract from the argument being made. I think it does.
Anyway, as I say, I watched the clip and tack it on here because I think it is part of the warp and weft of the times we live in. Police states may sound like extreme overstatements ... right up until they become a reality.
But what the hell -- I'm probably just paranoid.
But as a point of curiosity, I wonder why the "National Emergency Centers Establishment Act" (HR 645 ... which was never enacted) was conceived of as eventually being directed by the Department of Homeland Security rather than the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the group most usually responsible for national emergencies? And more generally, who thought this up and for what reason(s)?