ARBEIT MACHT FREI: THE VISION OF CAMP AMERICA
ARBEIT MACHT FREI
THE VISION OF CAMP AMERICA
That is the old America.
It seems that for years that the new America has not been paying attention to the open conspiracy of intimidation that is being waged against the citizenry. The chief reason this is happening is because of pundits and statists that encourage the enabling of officials to intimidate citizens because we are under the impression that government overreach is needed in order to enforce unfair laws.
The idea of a never ending war being waged by our leaders against the enemy of the week has now become so normal for Americans that the predatory option for all people accused of any civil disobedience seems to be the default position by talk show hosts and other pundits that should know better.
Listen to any particular radio show or pay attention to any political pundit on Fox or MSNBC and notice that they hide behind a political party in order to spread their statism or authoritarianism hoping that most Americans have forgotten the lessons learned in civics or social studies classes.
Both the statists and the authoritarians will explain that laws that are passed by governments are for our own good and that any dialogue that entertains a disciplinary approach to corruption in government should be avoided or silenced. Both the statist and authoritarian will seek to silence any and all debate with regard to corruption in government because each needs government in order to justify their existence.
Those who we thought knew better than to court these views in the midst of fascism would remain confident in the idea that sovereignty is now a buzzword of conspiracy theorists and that any dialogue about sovereignty has to include outrageous ideas of rebellion, civil disobedience, and revolt.
On one hand, they claim that government overreach is out of control and then condemn those individuals that wish to rebel against what they see is an oligarchy that uses intimidation to get what they want.
It is then that we hear that sovereignty is not vested in the people but in the nation state and that all citizens and even businesses exist only to enhance the power, prestige and survival of the state. Our government now is already testing the waters to see what the reaction of Americans will be in the face of intimidation. They are taking steps to make sure that you will have no choice but to adapt and be a citizen that will not feel the least bit bothered by the influence and enhancement of power on the state and federal level.
Threat after threat, issue after issue and law after law is announced by your government and the hope is that we all comply. Those that do not comply or disagree with such laws, or expose the so called threats as potential rather than real are told that they are cranks, crackpots or conspiracy theorists.
These terms are being used against Americans in order to shame people into falling in line. Many people realize that governments do not give up power easily, and will use whatever means necessary to make sure they retain their stronghold.
Decades ago, George Orwell demonstrated in the book, 1984, that everyone would be exposed to “programming” provided by the “Ministry of Love.” It was called Newspeak. Anyone who had a thought contrary to the totalitarian state run media was deemed a thought criminal, and being a thought criminal was considered the worst crime you could commit.
The United States Government is now allowing a new “process” to be carried out against its citizens, where the surveillance state is being utilized not only to capture criminals but to also use their medical records as fodder to convince the court of public opinion that their might makes right in all things, thus the constitutional right of due process is circumvented.
Rights to privacy are also circumvented even if you are accused of a crime.
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) has badly bludgeoned the constitutional right of due process. The US has pursued “domestic terrorism” by practicing pre-emptive prosecution that is, going after individuals who have committed no crime but are alleged to possess an ideology that might dispose them to commit acts of “terrorism.” Maintaining that it can -and should – be in the business of divining intent or literally using whatever they can to pre-cog crime.
Back in February it was reported that Chicago Police were currently operating a secret detention facility that mirrors the CIA’s “Black Sites.” The Black Sites or secret torture facilities gave a black eye to public relations during the Iraq and Afghan wars as human rights groups pointed the finger at Americans that were carrying out torture which was changed to the Orwellian Newspeak of “Enhanced Interrogations.”
Now it is terrifying to hear that there is a facility being operated in the United States for use on American citizens. From violations of due process to torture, the revelations raise serious concerns about the deteriorating state of freedom and justice in the United States.
The so called “Black Site” has been located in Homan Square.
According to the reports, suspects are interrogated without lawyers present and in fact, lawyers are often refused entry. Those who have gained access to clients claim that police still withhold information about the suspects.
The detainees are not read Miranda rights or offered due process.
Just like CIA Black Sites, there have been multiple instances of violence during interrogations. In one case in February of 2013, 44-year-old John Hubbard was pronounced dead after authorities at Homan said he was found “unresponsive” in an interview cell.
Americans so far have not decried this miscarriage of Justice.
Meanwhile, General Wesley Clark appeared on MSNBC to comment on the Chattanooga shooting where four Marines and a Navy petty officer were killed at a military recruitment center.
He told MSNBC: “We’ve got to cut this off at the beginning. …In World War II if someone supported Nazi Germany at the expense of the United States, we didn’t say that was freedom of speech, we put him in a camp, they were prisoners of war. So, if these people are radicalized and they don’t support the United States and they are disloyal to the United States, as a matter of principle fine. It’s their right and it’s our right and obligation to segregate them from the normal community for the duration of the conflict. And I think we’re going to have to increasingly get tough on this.”
He also broadened his statements by further stating:
Wesley Clark reveals on MSNBC : TPTB want to put you in a KZ internment camp :0 eat shit & die u nazi in sheep dip clothing ...hey clarky wasn't a mem~ber of the bush clan found "guilty" fer treason during the war ??? (wwii) yea & ALL the trail trans~cripts was in 1 of the "towers" that came down & wasn't 'nother of the bush clan's "loan" cum~in due on sep 12 ??? u's dummmycocks & republipubes ..same fuck~in crowd ...rat bast~erds ah oh yea! somehow a "lone" nut did it, will do it , is gonna do it .. fucking kook ,if we could just lock UP ALL the gov. lone nuts HUH did i say go fuck yer~self ...yea u & yer media ...whores ( fuck! did i say that out loud while i's was reading/listening 2 this article ...nawwww but i bet the nsa has some al~go~rime~in that heard my "inner" voice ..... shit ,fucking nother list ??)
“There are always a certain number of young people who are alienated. They don’t get a job, they lost a girlfriend, their family doesn’t feel happy here and we can watch the signs of that. And there are members of the community who can reach out to those people and bring them back in and encourage them to look at their blessings here.”The terrifying thing is that after Clark made these statements there was no follow up questions as to how General Clark could promote such fascist Orwellian views. What General Clark is advocating is preventive detention. Clark advocates the arrest and detention of anyone that the authorities identify as being insufficiently loyal to the State.
Clark also advocated rounding up Americans and putting them in camps based on what they think or express in public with regard to loyalty or even questioning policies of the U.S. Government.
Once again, without a blink from the reporter who was interviewing him. There was no challenging of the statements, and nothing said about it being unconstitutional.
Back in 2004, General Wesley Clark, the former supreme allied commander of NATO, was harshly critical of what he considered the Bush administration’s excessive response to the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon. You may remember that Wesley Clark also was a former Democratic Party presidential candidate.
Also in 2004, President Clinton supported Clark and said in a statement “We believe America needs a new president. One who can be a voice for common sense and moderation in these dangerous, uncertain times. One with the unquestionable leadership and foreign policy credentials necessary to win in 2004. We believe that General Wesley Clark might just be – the one. That is why we are trying to convince him to seek the Democratic nomination for president.”
In his book, Waging Modern War, General Clark wrote about his fury upon learning that Russian peacekeepers had entered the airport at Pristina, Kosovo, before British or American forces. In the article “The guy who almost started World War III,” published on Aug. 3, 1999, in The Guardian (U.K.) wrote:
“No sooner are we told by Britain’s top generals that the Russians played a crucial role in ending the West’s war against Yugoslavia than we learn that if NATO’s supreme commander, the American General Wesley Clark, had had his way, British paratroopers would have stormed Pristina Airport, threatening to unleash the most frightening crisis with Moscow since the end of the Cold War.”
“I’m not going to start the third world war for you,” General Sir Mike Jackson, commander of the international KFOR peacekeeping force, is reported to have told General Clark when he refused to accept an order to send assault troops to prevent Russian troops from taking over the airfield of Kosovo’s provincial capital.
The Times of London reported on 23 May 2001 in an article titled, “Kosovo Clash of Allied Generals,” that “General Sir Michael Jackson was told that he would have to resign if he refused to obey an order by the American commander of NATO’s forces during the Kosovo war to stop the Russians from seizing control of Pristina Airport in June 1999.”
Now with regard to putting Americans in concentration camps, we need to point out that the public assumes that Clark is talking about only rounding up Muslim Americans. Truth is that his principle of preventive detention would be applied indiscriminately to suspected ISIS supporters and “right-wing extremists” in the Midwest.
Americans assume that law enforcement in the U.S. have only been focusing on aspiring jihadists who align with the Islamic State. But there is more to the story.
Avowed racists, neo-Nazis and anti-government militias have taken a back seat to anti-government groups and a perceived major resurgence of right-wing extremism.
The Southern Poverty Law Center in Montgomery, Alabama, says it has counted more than 30 acts or plots of domestic terrorism or hate-driven rampages since 2010, an increase from the five years before that.
Those include the killings in Kansas last year of three people outside a Jewish community center and Jewish retirement home; a 2011 bomb plot that targeted the route of a Martin Luther King Jr. Day parade in Spokane, Washington; an assault-rifle attack on a Mexican consulate and federal courthouse in Austin, Texas; the murders of six at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, and the slaying of two Las Vegas police officers by a couple with anti-government views who left behind a swastika and a yellow flag bearing the words “Don’t Tread on Me.”
The attacks were not carried out by radicalized Muslims but by what are called right-wing extremists.
What General Clark is proposing is people being placed in concentration camps based on the concept of “thought crime” straight out of George Orwell’s classic novel, 1984. In the New World Order world of General Clark, you don’t have to actually break the law in order to come up against the authorities: you just have to think “hate-thoughts,” or use “hate speech” in order to be a target.
This is “terrorism prevention” according to Clark.
You see, the government is now in the business of promoting – and preventing – the predominance of certain ideas.
One can certainly understand arresting, trying, and incarcerating any person conspiring to commit acts of violence inside the United States; however, Clark’s proposal is chilling and is unconstitutional. He is advocating going after those who are not only not involved in a conspiracy to commit terrorist acts, but who have not even yet been radicalized. Once again he asserts “We have got to identify the people who are most likely to be radicalized, we’ve got to cut this off at the beginning.”
What Clark is proposing echoes what happened during World War II?
Following the bombing of Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, commanding that Japanese Americans be relocated away from the West Coast and into internment camps — without any due process, proof of disloyalty, or regard to American citizenship. This draconian policy led to the eventual incarceration of over 100,000 people, 62 percent of whom were U.S. citizens.
Some of the interned Japanese chose to join the U.S. Armed Forces, ironically to “fight for liberty,” and were sent to the European theater. The bulk of them fought in the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, which emerged from the war as the most highly decorated U.S. military unit of its size, earning the nickname “the Purple Heart division.”
In 1984, President Ronald Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 52, authorizing the mass detention of 400,000 people in the event of “civil unrest” protesting a U.S. invasion of Central America. It was part of a plot, code-named Rex-84 Alpha, created by the National Security Council under the direction of Marine Lt. Col. Oliver North. It called for suspending the Constitution, placing the nation under martial law and canceling the 1984 election.
Rex 84 is short for “Readiness Exercise 1984.” It was originally a classified plan by the United States federal government to accommodate the detention of large numbers of American citizens in case of massive civil unrest or national emergency.
FEMA, in association with 34 other federal civil departments and agencies, conducted civil readiness exercises in April of 1984. It was conducted in coordination and simultaneously with a Joint Chiefs exercise, Night Train 84, and Garden Plot a worldwide military command post exercise including Continental U.S. Forces or CONUS.
The drills and operations were based on multi-emergency scenarios operating both abroad and at home. In the combined exercise, Rex-84 Bravo, FEMA and DOD led the other federal agencies and departments, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Secret Service, the Treasury, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Veterans Administration through a gaming exercise to test military assistance in civil defense.
The exercise anticipated civil disturbances, major demonstrations and strikes that would affect continuity of government and or resource mobilization. To fight subversive activities, there was authorization for the military to implement government ordered movements of civilian populations at state and regional levels, the arrest of certain unidentified segments of the population, and the overturning of the Posse Comitatus Act, an action which makes the military a police force.
There is a frightening emotional investment that we put into things here in this country. I say that it is frightening because Nationalism never is a substitute for common sense and what we are seeing around us with the increased Military desensitization is what victimization does to logic and what mental torture does to the intellect. How it seems that we are so hopeful that things will change that we ignore that they really haven’t.
There is also a rumor going around that Wesley Clark is thinking about being the VP running mate with Hillary Clinton if she clenches the nomination from her party.
Well, maybe he should reconsider what he is thinking.
No comments:
Post a Comment