American Internment Camps For Disloyal Citizens Says Former 4 Star General Wesley Clark

""Retired US Army General Wesley Clark called for the internment of persons deemed “disloyal” to the United States government in an interview with MSNBC last Friday.

Warning of the threat posed by “lone wolf” attacks similar to last week’s mass shooting in Chattanooga, Tennessee, Clark advocated stepped-up surveillance of US communities and pre-emptive detention of persons suspected of ideological or political opposition to US government policies.

“We have got to identify the people who are most likely to be radicalized. We’ve got to cut this off at the beginning,” Clark said.

“On a national policy level, we need to look at what self-radicalization means, because we are at war with this group of terrorists,” the former top military commander added.

“They do have an ideology. 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.”

He continued:

“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, not only in the United States, but our allied nations like Britain, Germany and France are going to have to look at their domestic law procedures.”

Clark’s recommendations, proclaimed openly on national television, amount to a recipe for mass detention of political opponents of the American state.

His assertion of the “right and obligation” of the US government to conduct round-ups and mass internment operations against political opposition, specifically citing as his model the methods employed against ethnic Germans and Japanese during the Second World War, provides a chilling insight into the thinking of powerful sections of the US ruling establishment.

Clark’s insistence, moreover, that such measures remain in force “for the duration” of Washington’s temporally and geographically limitless “global war on terrorism” amounts to advocacy of the permanent imprisonment of individuals deemed guilty of no actual crime, but merely being “radicalized” and “disloyal.”

These are not the ravings of some television talking head or military crackpot. Coming from a figure of Clark’s pedigree, such comments necessarily reflect views widely discussed within the US state.

As supreme commander of NATO, Clark held one of the most senior and politically influential posts in the US military. While serving as Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), Clark oversaw the NATO bombing campaign against Yugoslavia, Operation Allied Force, beginning in March 1999.

In both the 2004 and 2008 presidential campaigns, Clark was considered among the Democratic Party’s leading contenders. He would likely have gained a senior position in the Obama administration had he not backed Obama’s Democratic rival Hillary Clinton after dropping out of the 2008 primary campaign.

His role as a high-profile supporter of Hilary Clinton’s latest presidential bid suggests, however, that Clark’s political ambitions have only been placed on hold. Under a Clinton presidency, Clark could well get the chance to implement his proposals for mass “segregation” of dissidents.

Preparations for the sort of measures advocated by General Clark are clearly well advanced.

In recent weeks, as videos shot in locations from Arizona to New York show, US military units have conducted training exercises, practicing military internment and crowd control techniques at mock internment camps, with military personnel posing as detainees.

Clark’s statements, made last Friday on the major cable news outlet MSNBC, have been met with total silence from the corporate-controlled media, failing to receive even a passing reference in the pages of the New York Times,Washington Post, or the Wall Street Journal.

This silence in the face of an open call for internment of domestic political opponents, issued by one of the country’s leading political generals, underscores the fact that the entire political and media establishment has decisively broken with centuries-old bourgeois democratic norms. The media silence will no doubt serve to encourage forces within the US military and intelligence apparatus to intensify the drive toward dictatorship.

For decades, the military and intelligence bureaucracies have developed the administrative, infrastructural and police components of an embryonic totalitarian state. Congressional hearings in 1987 on the Iran-Contra covert operations conducted by the Reagan administration exposed the existence of a plan developed by the Pentagon, codenamed Rex 84, to detain hundreds of thousands of immigrants and political dissidents and imprison them in militarized prison camps.

One Rex 84 sub-component, Operation Cable Splicer, envisioned the replacement of existing bourgeois political institutions by a shadow dictatorship controlled by a select group of some 100 executive branch cadre.

In the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks, the Bush administration staged a dry run of updated Continuity of Government (COG) plans for a “shadow government, deploying dozens of pre-selected officials to a network of secret command-and-control bunkers across America,” the Washington Post reported in March of 2002.

The George W. Bush administration made further preparations for new prison camps in 2006, signing a $400 million contract with KBR to build up the Department of Homeland Security’s “detention and processing capabilities.”

The Obama administration has expanded the authoritarian legal and policy framework developed under previous administrations. Since taking office, Obama has issued annual decrees renewing the state of emergency declared by the Bush administration after 9/11 and further entrenching emergency powers granted to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

In a series of annual National Defense Authorization Acts, the Obama administration has codified the anti-democratic measures implemented under Bush, asserting unlimited power to indefinitely detain or kill individuals without trial.""

The preparations for mass detention:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/general-wesley-clark-calls-for-putting-disloyal-americans-in-internment-camps/5463715

Federal Government Tactics in Civil War Operations: Preparations by the Elite with Forced Weapons Disarmaments of American Military Units

""I do not like using confidential sources without a strong degree of outside collaboration. However, the information contained in this report is so dire and so immediate, I do not feel that it is prudent to sit on this information any longer. This article will be brief and to the point. I am confident that once I air what I know on this very grim topic, the floodgates are going to open and I will shortly be running more articles with newly revealed information from sources that have not yet gone public.

Briefly, when I run a story based upon confidential, insider information, I almost alway have some degree of independent confirmation which adds to the veracity of the report. However, in this instance my independent confirmation is limited. As far as I know, John Moore and Paul Martin have much of this information as well.

John Moore and I spoke on the phone yesterday and we agreed on the importance of maintaining source anonymity because not only could careers be lost, but so could lives. Therefore, the following report will be purposely vague as to the location of involved bases, unless permission has been given to reveal such, as well as the identity, rank and position of reporting sources.

Will You Fire On American 

People If Ordered to Do So?

Recently, at Fort Bragg, a military security officer was asked if he would fire on American soldiers if told to do so? This information is a little more specific because the firing will soon be made public, so I can be a little more detailed in the reporting. When this officer answered in the negative, he was promptly fired. The source for this information is John Moore. He knows the position of the person involved and much more detail that we cannot reveal at this point. I agreed to this anonymity before publishing this article. This event is less than a week old.

At Fort Carson, I know that at least two officers have been fired who were training with Russian soldiers on the base for answering the question in the negative. This event is about six weeks old.

In another location, a housekeeper for a base commander was told late last year that she should make plans to be as isolated as possible because “troops would soon be on the street”. We now know that this base commander was referencing the upcoming Jade Helm drills. Last December when I was provided this information, the public and the media had never heard of Jade Helm including myself. I was told that the base commander felt personally threatened because he was soon going to be asked to do things that he was not sure that he could carry out. I know the identity of the housekeeper, the base commander and the base. Fox News might give this source up for the sake of ratings, but I will not because of the possible consequences.

A trusted State Department employee told me a close friend that he has in which the person was training with the military in Texas. He was so horrified by what he saw in the training and what was going to be done to the American people that this person is looking to leave the country. He probably knows that when the Blue List carries out actions against the Red List, the Blue List does not live to talk about it.

On April 28, 2015, I published an anonymous letter from a Texas Ranger who said they were bracing for attacks from ISIS and that the Judicial Watch revelations of an ISIS base camp near El Paso was indeed accurate.

About a week after the Texas Ranger revelation, Pam Geller’s “Draw a Prophet” event was attacked by two members of ISIS in Garland, Texas, just at the Texas Ranger predicted.

On July 4th, the FBI announced that it was investigating 56 possible ISIS led terrorist events inside of the United States. Again, this bears out the veracity of the Texas Ranger communication.

This past week, a well-planned and clearly an ISIS motivated attack was carried out in Chattanooga in which five service men were killed. Again, as predicted, ISIS is running rampant. ISIS has promised to murder as man American servicemen as possible.

These events lead to the next set of insider revelations which are highly significant.

Why Are American Military 

Being Systematically Disarmed

Our American soldiers are being made targets for ISIS. More importantly, we are just beginning to see that domestically based American forces are being systematically disarmed unit by unit because they cannot be trusted to not defend American citizens.

John Moore, Paul Martin, two other unidentified sources, and myself, have information that select domestic American military units are being forced to turn in their ammunition. In light of the Chattanooga attacks and the promise of ISIS to murder American servicemen, this is making select members of the military a sitting duck. However, and more importantly, it is the belief of many that I speak with that these units are being disarmed because of the fact that these units would not only refuse to obey illegal orders to fire on American citizens, they would oppose those forces that would. I expect that the number of disarmed American troops will grow as will the purges of officers who will not go along with the subjugation of the American people.

One report that I have been in possession of for six weeks says that American soldiers training with Russians at Ft. Carson have been disarmed while the Russian soldiers have not. It is well known that these Russians, who speak perfect English are being trained for martial law enforcement inside of the United States.""

Conclusion:

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2015/07/19/some-american-military-units-are-being-disarmed-in-preparation-for-civil-war/

Big Pharma Propaganda Threatens to Destroy Careers of Doctors Who Question Totalitarian American Medical Boards

""The American Medical Association (AMA) is upping the ante in pursuit of total control over the medical industry. Outraged that acclaimed physicians like Dr. Mehmet Oz of The Dr. Oz Showwould dare to speak on national television about issues that go untouched by many conventional doctors, the AMA has proposed new "ethical and professional guidelines" for physicians that threaten to censor doctors who deviate from what the AMA deems as medical gospel.

A group of medical students joined by residents and fellows from the AMA recently introduced a proposal before the AMA's House of Delegates that outlines how physicians are to conduct themselves when speaking through mass media. Because they have the power to influence millions of people when speaking on television and radio, physicians like Dr. Oz "cannot function under the same guidelines as a physician counseling individual patients," the group contends.

So in order to maintain control of the conversation, the AMA is developing a new set of guidelines to govern what it has dubbed "mass medicine," disparagingly referring to people like Dr. Oz as "quacks" who will "no longer ... be able to benefit from a lack of specific standards and professional codes." And doctors who fail to abide by the new guidelines, which are technically just recommendations, could face discipline for allegedly "violating medical ethics in the media."

"The AMA will create a document clarifying what disciplinary actions may be taken against a physician who uses the media unethically," reports the site Doctors in Oz, which is an obvious play on words referencing Dr. Oz. "There are avenues for redress available through the legal system, licensing boards, and the medical societies to name a few."

AMA represents only 17 percent of physicians, but believes it should control 100 percent of them

Doctors in Oz is apparently directly connected to the medical students who pioneered the AMA initiative, as the writer of the announcement from which the aforementioned quote was extracted added that he plans in future articles on the subject to speak directly to those involved - or as he puts it, "who made this happen."

Even though the AMA represents as little as 17 percent of all practicing MDs - and this number continues to decrease - the organization seems to think that it deserves full authority over what doctors say and how they advise the public on the latest food and medicine science. And it spends a pretty penny to maintain this medical monopoly, shelling out nearly $20 million annually to lobby Congress to do its bidding.

"Keep in mind that the AMA is not the voice of the medical profession," warns the Alliance for Natural Health USA (ANH-USA), a health freedom advocacy group that is standing up in defense of medical free speech.

"Its membership has slipped to the point where it represents only 17 percent of MDs, and many of those are free memberships given to medical students, yet it remains the fifth most powerful special interest on Capitol Hill ... This gives it the clout to influence Medicare prices, make recommendations that shape national policy, and rake in about $218.8 million a year from its government-granted CPT medical code monopoly."

AMA membership represents who's who of drug industry pimps and whores

What the AMA is attempting to do here represents nothing short of medical tyranny. One of the resolution's authors, a medical student from the University of Rochester, actually referred to the AMA in the media as "organized medicine," which ironically sounds a whole lot like organized crime. How can this membership-based organization, which holds no actual legal authority over the medical profession, get away with trying to assume control over what doctors say and do in the media?

The answer to this question is that the AMA operates much like the mafia, backed by an extensive network of crony allies in the pharmaceutical and vaccine industries. AMA member doctors are notorious for accepting payouts from drug reps to push the latest pills and jabs on patients, even when safer, more natural, alternatives are widely available.

This is part of what got Dr. Oz in so much trouble with the medical cartels - he openly talks about natural remedies on his show and during media interviews, and isn't afraid to call out industry kingpins like Monsanto for poisoning the planet and the food supply with deadly chemicals like Roundup (glyphosate). So, to silence him and any others who might try to follow in his footsteps, the AMA is now playing hardball.""

http://www.naturalnews.com/050423_totalitarian_medicine_AMA_free_speech.html

Speech Police in Full Force Across American Academia

""Generally speaking there are no bigger champions of free speech than journalists and academicians; after all, members of both groups earn their livings publishing news and information.

But a disturbing new trend is taking root in America that promises to chill freedom of speech and, indeed, is already having a stifling affect.

As reported by The Daily Beast here and by NaturalNews here, the University of California– whose president, Janet Napolitano, is President Obama's former Homeland Security chief – has implemented a new speech code that at once aims to celebrate America's diversity while essentially tearing at the fabric of its traditions, culture and heritage.

'That's racist and sexist'

The DB report notes the irony thusly:

Fifty years after the birth of the free speech movement at the University of California, Berkeley, officials across the UC system are encouraging faculty and students to purge mundane, potentially offensive words and phrases from their vocabularies.

Administrators want members of campus to avoid the use of racist and sexist statements, though their notions about what kinds of statements qualify are completely bonkers. "America is a melting pot," "Why are you so quiet?" and "I believe the most qualified person should get the job," are all phrases that should raise red flags, according to the UCspeech police.

Such phrases, we are being led to believe, constitute "microaggressions" - defined as "everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership."

So, the "solution" to ensuring freedom of speech, UC style, apparently is to limit speech.

One such microaggressive phrase: America is the land of opportunity. That's "racist" and "sexist."

So far the UC speech code "rules" are merely requests - but because they come from Napolitano, that gives them much more weight. As The DB reported:

On January 5, Napolitano dispatched letters to UC deans and department chairs inviting them to attend seminars "to foster informed conversation about the best way to build and nurture a productive academic climate." That's bureaucrat-speak for learn to keep your mouths shut.

As further noted by The College Fix, seminars were held on nine of the 10 UC campuses throughout the past school year. One professor who chose not to attend shared some of the details and education materials with the publication.

The "microaggressions" were contained in a handout entitled, "Recognizing Microaggressions and the Messages They Send." They were adopted from a book byColumbia University Psychology Prof. Derald Wing Sue, which lists dozens of examples of ordinary statements pertaining to America's founding heritage that are now, somehow, offensive.

Saying, "There is only one race, the human race," is offensive, for example, because it denies "the significance of a person of color's racial/ethnic experience and history."

"America is the land of opportunity," really implies that "people of color are lazy and/or incompetent and need to work harder."

Asking an Asian, Latino, or Native American "why are you so quiet?" is like giving the order "assimilate to dominant culture."

And so on.

Oh, it's a curb on free speech, alright

The really problematic issue here is how such insanity bodes for the country's future. The California university system is attended by tens of thousands of students every year - students whose minds are filled with this ridiculousness and who carry it forth as they begin their professional lives.

Ironically, in response to an inquiry into the seminars by The College Fix, UC spokeswoman Shelly Meron said in an email that, "These seminars are not an attempt to curb open dialogue, debate or classroom discussions."

That, of course, is patently false; if you are accusing someone of committing a "microaggression," are you not then, by process, requesting that said offender not make such statements in the future?""

http://www.naturalnews.com/050401_free_speech_universities_microaggression.html

As if Our Current Slave Labor Nation Wasn't Enough Today, a New Executive Order to Authorize Government-dictated American Slave Labor Force

""When President Obama signed Executive Order 13603, entitled, "National Defense Resources Preparedness," in 2012, many immediately saw it for what it certainly can be: An order mobilizing a huge force of American slave labor.

The 10-page document is essentially a blueprint for a complete federal takeover of the entire U.S. economy, an act that dwarfs, by far, what Obamacare has successfully taken over (the entire health insurance market, for starters).

In particular, the plan calls for taking control of:

-- "all commodities and products... that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals";

-- "all forms of energy";

-- "all forms of civil transportation";

-- "all usable water, from all sources";

-- "health resources... drugs, biological products, medical devices, materials, facilities, health supplies, services and equipment"; and

-- forced labor (or "induction" as the Executive Order delicately refers to military conscription).

Unlimited power

In addition, federal officials will be permitted to "issue regulations to prioritize and allocate resources" (what gets taken first, in what amounts, and who gets them). And each government department and agency "shall act, as necessary and appropriate" (meaning, they will pretty much get to do whatever they deem as necessary and appropriate).

Granted, a lot of this language had appeared in prior Executive Orders that were periodically issued during the Cold War.

However, more than previous national security-related EOs, 13603 reads more like a document created by a totalitarian administration intent on, and obsessed with, controllingeverything.

The order, for example, doesn't bother to even discuss the (negative) implications to personal liberty and constitutional processes. There is no attempt to explain, moreover, how full government control over the economy and governing processes would enable officials to effectively deal with the various trappings of disaster: cyber attack, suicide bombings, sniper shootings, chemical warfare, nuclear missiles or any other threat.

More likely, the government's responses would be more inefficient, ineffective and feckless (think Hurricane Katrina or Superstorm Sandy, on a much larger scale), because that is the nature of massive bureaucracy: inertia, in-fighting and bureaucratic red tape.Nothing gets done in a timely, cost-effective manner.

But Obama, via his EO, has essentially guaranteed such a response, and what's more, he's prepared to force Americans into "service" in the process.

Others noted that complete authoritarianism coupled with chronic inefficiency would more than likely trigger the formation of underground resistance and other movements and networks aimed at circumventing and even undermining the national authority. Talented people with various, critical skills might even be tempted to flee the country for pockets of freedom close by (Canada) or elsewhere in the world.

And again, there is nothing in Obama's order ensuring protection of constitutional rights. Indeed, there is plenty in his order that guarantees usurpation of constitutional rights – privacy, speech, assembly, private property, due process, state's rights.

In the past, presidents pushing to expand their power past constitutional limitations have often used "emergencies" to do so. The most current "emergency" was declared by President George W. Bush on Sept. 14, 2001, and it continues to remain in effect to this day.""

Obama's order has no time table, 

timeline or constraints on government

Read On:

http://www.naturalnews.com/050397_Obama_Executive_Order_slave_labor_force.html

American's Confidence in Anything Normal Starting to Waver as Negative Outlook on Banks, Government, Religion, Police, and Media at an All Time Low

""An explosive new Gallup poll shows Americans have lost confidence in almost every major institution – from the U.S. presidency, Congress and the Supreme Court to banks and organized religion.

“Americans’ confidence in most major U.S. institutions remains below the historical average for each one,” a Gallup spokesman said.

Only the military (72 percent) and small business (67 percent) have Americans’ increasing confidence, both of which are now rated 4 percentage points higher than their historical norms, according to the poll.

Congress – which plunged 16 points from its average of 24 points – is the lowest ranking institution at just 8 percent.

Just as numerous presidential candidates attempt to convince America that they have the answers to the nation’s problems, the poll shows only one-third, or 33 percent, of Americans have confidence in the presidency, a nosedive from the historical average of 43 percent.

Likewise, just 32 percent said they have confidence in the Supreme Court, which is down from an average of 44 just before the court announces its decisions on landmark issues such as same-sex marriage and Obamacare subsidies to states without insurance-exchange websites.

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/06/gallup_2015.jpg

“Americans’ confidence in most major institutions has been down for many years as the nation has dealt with prolonged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a major recession and sluggish economic improvement, and partisan gridlock in Washington,” a Gallup spokesman said. “In fact, 2004 was the last year most institutions were at or above their historical average levels of confidence. Perhaps not coincidentally, 2004 was also the last year Americans’ satisfaction with the way things are going in the United States averaged better than 40 percent. Currently, 28 percent of Americans are satisfied with the state of the nation.”

In 2004, President George W. Bush was re-elected and the U.S. transferred sovereignty and control of Iraq back to the Iraqi people.

At the beginning of 2004, the U.S. economy was booming. Four middle-class tax cuts were extended, including a $1,000-per-couple child tax credit, expansion of the lowest (10 percent) tax bracket, exceptions for the alternative minimum tax, and relief from the “marriage penalty” for two-income families. Another $140 billion in tax relief was granted to U.S. business. Unemployment dropped from 5.7 percent to 5.4 percent.

Regarding the latest poll numbers, the Gallup spokesman added, “From a broad perspective, Americans’ confidence in all institutions over the last two years has been the lowest since Gallup began systematic updates of a larger set of institutions in 1993.”

In the last two years, Americans have seen President Obama begin his second term of office. Amid an explosion of legalized same-sex marriage in numerous U.S. states, the Supreme Court declared the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional.

Americans witnessed the debt-ceiling crisis in October 2013, which resulted in the shutdown of the federal government and furlough of federal workers.

By 2014, the Obama administration had announced its plan to shrink the military budget to $522 billion and slash the Army to a size unseen since before World War II. The nation also saw Americans impacted by a West African Ebola outbreak and revelations that the Veterans Administration had covered up exceedingly long wait times for veterans seeking medical attention.

The year 2014 also saw the rise of terrorist group ISIS and racial riots in Ferguson, Missouri, and St. Louis after the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown in August. By 2015, riots had broken out in Baltimore, Maryland, over the shooting of Freddie Gray.

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/06/Gallup_2015b.jpg

According to the Gallup poll, 28 percent of Americans now have confidence in banks, compared to the historical average of 40 percent.

Twenty-one percent said they have confidence in big business, down from 24 percent.

Twenty-four percent have confidence in organized labor, down from 26 percent.

Twenty-four percent have confidence in newspapers, down from 32 percent.

Twenty-one percent have confidence in TV news, down from 30 percent.

Fifty-two percent have confidence in police, down from 57 percent.

Forty-two percent have confidence in organized religion, down from 55.""

Broader Dissatisfaction:

http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/poll-americans-lose-confidence-in-everything/