Mainsteam Media Confirms Privatly Owned Detention Camps and Authority to Declare Martial Law

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article... />
Rule by fear or rule by law?
Lewis Seiler,Dan Hamburg
Monday, February 4, 2008

"The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgment of his peers, is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government whether Nazi or Communist."
- Winston Churchill, Nov. 21, 1943

Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law, arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of "an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."
Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within the United States. The government has also contracted with several companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped with shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees.
According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR contract is part of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which sets as its goal the removal of "all removable aliens" and "potential terrorists."
Fraud-busters such as Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, have complained about these contracts, saying that more taxpayer dollars should not go to taxpayer-gouging Halliburton. But the real question is: What kind of "new programs" require the construction and refurbishment of detention facilities in nearly every state of the union with the capacity to house perhaps millions of people?
Sect. 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies," gives the executive the power to invoke martial law. For the first time in more than a century, the president is now authorized to use the military in response to "a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack or any other condition in which the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain public order."
The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on a list of "terrorist" organizations, or who speaks out against the government's policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and noncitizens alike.
Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), to ensure "continuity of government" in the event of what the document vaguely calls a "catastrophic emergency." Should the president determine that such an emergency has occurred, he and he alone is empowered to do whatever he deems necessary to ensure "continuity of government." This could include everything from canceling elections to suspending the Constitution to launching a nuclear attack. Congress has yet to hold a single hearing on NSPD-51.
U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice (Los Angeles County) has come up with a new way to expand the domestic "war on terror." Her Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (HR1955), which passed the House by the lopsided vote of 404-6, would set up a commission to "examine and report upon the facts and causes" of so-called violent radicalism and extremist ideology, then make legislative recommendations on combatting it.
According to commentary in the Baltimore Sun, Rep. Harman and her colleagues from both sides of the aisle believe the country faces a native brand of terrorism, and needs a commission with sweeping investigative power to combat it.
A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who "engage in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name of animal rights" as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights supporters ... the list goes on and on. According to author Naomi Wolf, the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of roughly 775,000 "terror suspects" with the number increasing by 20,000 per month.
What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own citizens?
The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the president to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by law.
Lewis Seiler is the president of Voice of the Environment, Inc. Dan Hamburg, a former congressman, is executive director.

So, what's your point?   I hope you are saying that you are sleeping more soundly.

---

Not with the borders open and Bush sending money to Mexico to protect their southern border. Leaving our border wide open.

Just wait till the democrates take hold of H.R. 1955 and use it against conservatives

Wait a minute....don't you usually condemn what the MSM says and does?  Know you're taking as gospel their "confirmation"??  BTW, presidents have always had the power to declare martial law, not by that name, but the same effect.  Check Article 1, Sections 8 and 9 for using the militia and suspending habeas corpus.

---

minderbinder said: Not with the borders open and Bush sending money to Mexico to protect their southern border. Leaving our border wide open.

 

And your anwer to my question ties into the subject how?

Is this the Bush bashing site then, or shall we believe the MSM agenda, period?

---

Just keep your head in the sand and enjoy the unfolding POLICESTATE

Oh good, we are back on subject comrad.

---

Should I summon the "Men in Black"? they can declare Martial Law also. But then you wouldn't remember would you?

---

MINDBENDER thanks for the info.  The link isn't working, though.  Elaina sounds like someone sent from the New World Order itself,  trying to confuse and subvert the fact that the GAME'S UP. Maybe she's just so new she hasn't had a chance to see this is not about bashing anyone, it's about educating people so we can keep the USA a sovereign nation. And if Bush cared anything about protecting the world from terrorism he would have secured our Open Borders and Enforced our Laws and Deported All Illegal Aliens LONG AGO.

minderbinder said: Not with the borders open and Bush sending money to Mexico to protect their southern border. Leaving our border wide open.

 

Not about bashing?  On subject Marcele?

 

---

Any president who will not close our borders, wants to let illegals remain here, and actually let them come and go at will, doesn't care about the crime and gangs they bring, doesn't care that it is costing billions of american dollars to give them healthcare and other freebies, deserves to be bashed.

---

Icon said: Any president who will not close our borders, wants to let illegals remain here, and actually let them come and go at will, doesn't care about the crime and gangs they bring, doesn't care that it is costing billions of american dollars to give them healthcare and other freebies, deserves to be bashed.

 

All right already, I agree.  And yes, Bush should be locked up along with most of our politicians.  

Let me ask again though, what does that have to do with this thread?  And what does it have to do with my original question?

Minderbinder posted this thread to get a conversation going, but when asked about his own thought behind it, all I get is a Bush bashing concert.

Let's start a Bush thread so I can weigh in as well.

That's all.   

---

elaina said:

minderbinder said: Not with the borders open and Bush sending money to Mexico to protect their southern border. Leaving our border wide open.

 

Not about bashing?  On subject Marcele?

 

 

This is what they are training for!  If you listen to what is going on you will see that they are in essence lining up the people to be transported to camps!  I happen to live in a state where they are in the process of building a brand new detention center!  There are many more throughout the U.S.  and Canada!  Open up and do the research... Who are these detention centers for? 

Should I summon the "Men in Black"? they can declare Martial Law also. But then you wouldn't remember would you?

Don't bother, SP.  The "Men in Black" are busy flying around leaving chemtrails to poison us all.  And no, we won't remember a thing when we wake up in Treblinka Amerikkkana.
  

---

I hope they are building some detention centers.  With all the calls to close GITMO, and the complains about sending those beloved terrorists overseas, someone has to keep 'em in line.  Perhaps Sheriff Joe can send his posse.

---

Now THERE"S a good idea.   I LOVE Sheriff Joe!!

---

Yeah, that's what the Germans and others said about the Jews, until they came for them....

Lady Jane said: Yeah, that's what the Germans and others said about the Jews, until they came for them....

 

So what do you suggest we do with those who want to do us harm?  Invite them to dinner?

---

That's right, LJ.  And just because one is paranoid doesn't mean they are NOT out to get 'em.  What do they need detention camps to hold us in for?  I thought the conspiracy plan was they are going to kill off 80% of us.  Isn't that nutjob Alex Jones' Endgame theory?  Wouldn't it be easier to just kill us, instead of locking us up and then killing us?  Would certainly be more efficient.  Oh, wait, this is the government and they don't do anything efficiently, right?  Especially when there's a buck to be made.  Okay, got it! 

---