War Without End

hateliars

Congressman: American Concentration Camps "On The Books"
Texas Representative urges repeal of neo-fascist laws in America before it is too late

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Monday, November 13, 2006

Re-elected Texas Republican Congressman Ron Paul joined Alex Jones on air last week to discuss the fallout of the midterm elections and what he sees transpiring over the next two years. He ended by ominously warning that if something is not done soon to overturn legislation such as the Military Commissions act, the law officially allows for citizen concentration camp facilities.

Beginning with the positives to come out of the election, Ron Paul stressed that it has provided an important indication to the rest of the world that the people of America are unhappy with the usurpers that have seized control of their government and are trying to initiate change. The Congressman was quick to point out that this may not be carried into policy however:

"Not a whole lot will change because the leadership on the Democratic side, even if they had their way, don't have a different foreign policy. They have been supportive of an interventionist foreign policy in the middle east, and they are not about to back away from that... They are willing to criticize the policy but only as a means to get power."

As we have seen over the past week, leading Democrats are all towing the party line, unreservedly dismissing any notion of the possibility of impeaching the President over Iraq.

The Congressman also stated that monetary policy will stay the same, which can only mean bad news for the American economy.

" They all believe in the federal reserve, they are not going to get rid of the IRS and the income tax. I think the dollar is going to keep sliding, which means prices are going to rise, when currencies self destruct, the end goes quickly. There are no signs that there is anything being done in Washington to correct the problem. Spending is going to continue and probably going to get worse, the deficits are going to stay high if foreign policy is not going to change."

The Congressman agreed that the elite globalists within the US government may not care about this too much because it means they can blow out the economy and then come back and buy it up very cheaply. These Internationalists care not about preserving and protecting American sovereignty when there is a quick buck to be made.

"That's also part of the foreign policy to be in position to hold onto natural resources, that's one of the major reasons why we're in the middle east, so yes if there is a financial crisis, they're going to have the guns, and they have control of the natural resources... It's not a good scenario, because what usually happens when you wipe out a currency is that you wipe out the middle class, and we already see this happening. The standard of living is going down." Paul asserted.

Ron Paul's comments echo those of Former World Bank Vice President, Chief Economist and Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz, who two weeks ago predicted a global economic crash within 24 months - unless the current downturn is successfully managed. Asked if the situation was being properly handled Stiglitz emphatically responded "no," and also drew ominous parallels to the development of the NAFTA Superhighway and the North American Union.

What real Conservatism there was left in the House, to block such moves, as well as Bush's amnesty program for illegals, is gone. With Pelosi at the helm Ron Paul sees it as a forgone conclusion that such policies will sail through.

"I think that's right, although I complain about the two parties being exactly alike, I would say on this amnesty issue and what's happened with the election, there probably was a difference between the two. It is more likely with the Democrats in charge, and Judiciary and the other major committees, and with the President not really fighting for our national borders, he's always argued for some type of worker program, yes I think there's a much greater danger that that is going to be coming in the next session."

Commenting on strategies to defeat the North American Union, the Congressman urged a continuance of educating people on the real issues and reaching more and more Americans who care about preserving their national sovereignty:

"You have to keep doing what you are doing, you are reaching a lot of people, and they have to get to their members of congress, and in many ways the current House has been pretty good with this. With the new House we don't know exactly what is going to happen, but I had something very encouraging come to my attention just this week. I had a call from a young lady that won in Kansas as a Democrat, and in her literature she put my whole article on the NAFTA super corridor in there... She is not going to vote with Nancy Pelosi."

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, The Congressman spoke on the issue of going about demanding a repeal of freedom crushing legislation such as the Patriot act and the Military Commissions act and the Defense Authorization Act which essentially wipes out Habeas Corpus.

"We might have to hope that our Supreme Court helps us out a little. The Court has been better than the executive branch and a heck of a lot better than the Congress, because we've given the President everything he's asked for and the President has been begging for all this authority, so immediately we have to hope that the courts will save us on some of these things. But once again ultimately its only when the people wake up and say they don't like this... sometimes the people wake up to late. Right now we don't have concentration camps, but like you have pointed out, the authority has been given so that concentration camps can come without Habeas Corpus . I have heard the argument that there is nothing else left in the Bill of Rights. If they can lock you up, what good is freedom of speech or what good is a gun? That is now part of the books, part of the law."

Take Ron Paul's suggestion up and contact your new or re-elected members and demand a move to repeal legislation paving the way for fascist government control in America today.

Shamgar · Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:42 pm Post subject:

I heard about the "concentration camps" about 15 years ago. . . .in fact. . .on some anti-Christ news sites about a year ago they had ads talking about jewish concentration camps in America. . . . fear mongering. . . . .

hateliars · Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:57 pm Post subject:

This is an American congressman talking and he well aware of what legislation has been passed. Paul is also not one given to exaggeration. He's not some hysterical ninny who screams in order to get power. He's warning the American people.

shorty · Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:15 pm Post subject:

Fear mongering? So thats why there are hundreds, all fully staffed, across the US then?..

skid · Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:01 am Post subject:

The so called "threat of terrorism" is Fear mongering, American concentration camps are a reality.
While Reagan was in office, the first of these camps were built under the false pretence that Nicaraguans might invade America, one of the original congressional documents for the order can be seen HERE

After the alleged threat of invasion ended, the construction of concentration camps continued. Today there are over 800 prison camps in the United States, all fully operational and ready to receive prisoners. They are all staffed and even surrounded by full-time guards, but they are all empty. These camps are to be operated by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) should Martial Law need to be implemented in the United States.
See LOCATIONS

This is still happening today, I recently read the following brief story in the news paper:

hateliars · Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 6:49 am Post subject:

DanielDives · Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:25 am Post subject:

Thanks, Skid and welcome aboard Very Happy

PSCM USCGR · Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 10:57 am Post subject:

Where are these camps? Has anyone actually seen them? On the subject of fear-mongering, I'd say that rumors and false statements about camps would fit into the category of fear-mongering. I'm not saying that the government has not thought about them, but I have yet to see a facility dedicated solely for the purpose of detaining civilians in CONUS. In all reality, the military does not ever like taking custody of non-affiliated civilians. In my experience, the military jumps through hoops to turn over civilians to the local authorities as soon as they can. There are all kinds of liability issues and jurisdiction issues when taking a civilian into custody.

Top · Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 11:40 am Post subject:

Masterchief,

I think these sites primarily refer to all the low security detention centers we have on federal property all around the country.

I was stationed at maxwell for 2 years and saw the facility there. basically a low threat place for minor thieves, drug users, etc. Usually they do 6 mos to 5 yrs.

I think the impression is the facility is considered very nice for prisoners and thery spend much of their day outside providing free labor, grass cutting, construction, etc.

You may also know about the other one at Eglin, where congressmen do their time...

PSCM USCGR · Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 11:54 am Post subject:

Top...I've seen a few bases where they had facilities for short term detention of civilians. But these were mostly for those that are arrested for demonstrating on Federal property or some sort of civil misconduct directed at a military installation. The federal detention facilities located on military installations are usually run by DOJ and they either lease the land from the military or they are entered into an ISSA agreement with DOD for use of the facility. But as far as the military holding prisoners in military facilities, I've never seen it except for isolated cases where the civilian authorities either do not want to take custody of a prisoner or there is a delay in having US Marshals take custody of prisoners. There are of course times when military dependents living in on-base housing have been held in military facilities, but this is usually only long enough for a magistrate to decide what action to take. Of course when you are OCUNUS, thinks change. Most people would much prefer a US Military Detention Facility over the local jail offerings any day.
One of the things that BRAC has changed is the layout of many military installations. Some bases have signed long-term leases with various non-DOD agencies so that they can utilize some of the abandoned facilities that were closed by various BRAC's. One of the drawbacks of BRAC was the fact that there was no real thought given to the logistics of closing down only some parts of a military installation. There have been many cases where only some functions were moved and this left big empty spots in the middle of these bases in which the only viable alternative was to lease this space to other federal agencies. This was due in part to security issues since getting to these closed facilities required basing through still active sections of the base. Unfortunately this eliminated any possibility of turning this property over to the local civilian community. So once again, the government paints itself into a corner all in the name of cutting DOD costs.
A study showed that since the first BRAC's of the 90's....DOD has yet to see a savings. As a matter of fact, clean-up costs have actually caused even greater expenses for the good old DOD.
Oh yeah, back to detnetion facilities. I have yet to see a single installation set up solely for the long or mid term detention of non-military affiliated prisoners.

War Without End

The global war against terror, news about the illegal invasion of Iraq, the corporate puppet presidents, the war criminal Tony Blair, September 11th 2001, the USS Liberty and New World Order crimes against humanity.

American Concentration Camps "On The Books"