The U.S. Army director of resource management has confirmed the validity of a memorandum relating to the establishment of a civilian inmate labor program under development by the Department of Army. The document states, "Enclosed for your review and comment is the draft Army regulation on civilian inmate labor utilization" and the procedure to "establish civilian prison camps on installations."

Civilian internment camps or prison camps, often referred to as concentration camps, have been the subject of much rumor and speculation during the past several years in this country. Various publications, Internet threads and some radio talk programs have focused on the issue.

However, I found it significant when Rep. Henry Gonzalez, D-TX, clarified the question of the existence of these civilian detention camps. In an interview Hank said, "the truth is yes -- you do have these standby provisions, and the plans are here ... whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism ... evoke the military and arrest Americans and put them in detention camps." Heck, we did it before (to Americans of Japanese descent), we could do it again.

This is not anything new. This is not a partisan Democrat/Republican, or Conservative/Liberal issue. It may have just recently been actually acknowledged, but it has a history.

Most even modestly educated folks know that Hitler did it, and Stalin did it. However, you should know that the venerable Franklin Delano Roosevelt also developed a plan for the United States. In fact, on Aug. 24, 1939, ole FDR met with FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover to develop the detention plan for us. Five months later, Hitler opened the Auschwitz detention center in Poland.

Hoover met with Attorney General J. Howard McGrath on Aug. 3, 1948 to detail a plan whereby President Truman could suspend constitutional liberties during a national emergency. The plan was code-named "Security Portfolio" and, when implemented, it would authorize the FBI to summarily arrest up to 20,000 persons and place them in national security detention camps. Prisoners would not have the right to a court hearing or habeas corpus appeal. "Security Portfolio" allowed the FBI to develop a watch list of those who would be detained as well as detailed information on their physical appearance, family, place of work, etc. This was long before sub-dermal bio-chip implants, retinal scans and other biometrics.

Two years later, Congress approved the Internal Security Act of 1950. This pre-FEMA puppy contained a provision authorizing an emergency detention plan. It is real interesting that Hoover was not satisfied with this law because it did not suspend the Constitution and it guaranteed the right to a court hearing (habeas corpus). For two years, while the FBI continued to secretly establish the detention camps and work out detailed seizure plans for thousands of individuals, Hoover kept badgering Attorney General McGrath for the official permission to ignore the 1950 law and move on with the more aggressive 1948 program.

As evidence that we have waaaay too many laws, codes, rules and regulations, it wasn't until the Senate held hearings in December of 1975 (25 years later) that it was revealed the ongoing internment plan had never been terminated. The report, entitled, "Intelligence Activities, Senate Resolution 21," exposed the covert agenda. In a series of documents, memos and testimony by assorted government informants, the reality emerged of the designs by the federal government (our government) to monitor, infiltrate, arrest and incarcerate a potentially large segment of American society. That Senate report also exposed the existence of the Master Search Warrant (MSW) and the Master Arrest Warrant (MAW) which, by the way, are currently STILL in force today.
The MAW document, authorized by the attorney general of the United States, directs the head of the FBI to: "Arrest persons whom I deem dangerous to the public peace and safety. These persons are to be detained and confined until further order." Please note the language, "Whom I deem dangerous." Who might a Janet Reno choose to arbitrarily and capriciously "deem dangerous"? Constitutional Conservatives? Patriots? Conservative Republicans? Radio Talk Show Hosts? Joe Farah and everyone on the administration's enemies list?
 

The MSW also instructs the FBI director to "search certain premises where (1) it is believed that there may be found contraband, prohibited articles, or (2) other materials in violation of the Proclamation of the President of the United States. It includes (3) such items as firearms, shortwave radio receiving sets, cameras, propaganda materials, printing presses, mimeography machines, membership and financial records of organizations or groups (4) that have been declared subversive, or may hereafter be declared subversive by the Attorney General."
I added the numbers for ease of the following:
1. "it is BELIEVED that there MAY be" -- Hell-o?!?!? No probable cause needed. Just Because. Because they can by brute force.
2. "other materials in violation of the Proclamation of the President of the United States" -- Huh? Proclafreakingmation?!?!?
3. "such items as firearms ..." -- The EXACT reason we have the Second Amendment is to preclude this kind of neutering. The framers WANTED us armed to prevent abuse of power under the color of authority. "shortwave radio receiving sets" -- Silence the critics, and deny INFORMATION to the people. "cameras" -- To prevent the dissemination of abuses of power? "propaganda materials" -- Like Thomas Paines' "Common Sense" or a contemporary WorldNetDaily. "mimeography machines" -- Expect that to turn into fax machines, computers and modems.
4. "that have been declared subversive, or MAY hereafter be declared subversive by the Attorney General." -- In other words, "facts which contradict the administration's preconceived opinions" or anything which does not conform with the politically correct government sanctioned view.
< End of Part 1 >
Monday, May 18, 1998
Geoff Metcalf
Exclusive commentary
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/metcalf/980518.comgm.html

Hidden threats -- part 2
c1998, WorldNetDaily.com
Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film. Last week, I reluctantly shared with you part one of some of the hidden threats "We the People" face from our government leaders. Despite the remarkable response from readers, I want to underscore that none of this is really new. All this information, and more, has been circulating in the constitutional conservative community for years. Much of this kind of documented, factual information is pooh-poohed as the paranoid ramblings of the radical right- wing wackos by "the controllers" who would treat us like mushrooms.

I have often noted that some people just don't want to be confused with facts which contradict their preconceived opinions. The director of resource management for the U.S. Army has confirmed the validity of a memorandum relating to the establishment of a civilian inmate labor program under development by the Department of Army. The document states, "Enclosed for your review and comment is the draft Army regulation on civilian inmate labor utilization" and the procedure to "establish civilian prison camps on installations." (Chereith Chronicle, June 1997)

In the wake of Senate hearings in 1975, the steady development of highly specialized surveillance capabilities, combined with the exploding computerized information technologies, have enabled a massive data base of personal information to be developed on millions of unsuspecting American citizens. It is all in place awaiting only a presidential declaration to be enforced by both military and civilian police.

In 1982, President Ronald Reagan issued National Security Directive 58 which empowered Robert McFarlane and Oliver North to use the National Security Council to secretly retrofit the Federal Emergency Management Agency to manage the country during a national crisis. In 1984 "REX exercises" simulated civil unrest culminating in a national emergency with a contingency plan for the imprisonment of 400,000 people. REX '84 was so secretive that special metal security doors were installed on the FEMA building's fifth floor, and even long-term officials of the Civil Defense Office were prohibited entry. The alleged purpose of this exercise was to handle an influx of refugees created by a war in Central America, but a more realistic scenario was the detention of American citizens.

STATE OF EMERGENCY
Under REX, the president could declare a state of emergency, empowering the head of FEMA to take control of the internal infrastructure of the United States and suspend the Constitution. The president could invoke executive orders 11000 through 11004 which would:
 

1) Draft all citizens into work forces under government supervision;
2) Empower the postmaster to register all men, women and children;
3) Seize all airports and aircraft;
4) Seize all housing and establish forced relocation of citizens.
FEMA, with a black budget allegedly provided by the Department of Defense, has worked closely with the Pentagon in an effort to avoid the legal restrictions of Posse Comitatus. While FEMA may not have been directly responsible for these precedent-setting cases, the principle of federal control was seen during the Los Angeles riots in 1992 with the federalization of the National Guard and during the siege at Waco, where Army tanks were involved in the final conflagration.

GOVERNMENT VIOLENCE IS "LEGITIMATE"?

The deputy attorney general of California commented at a conference that anyone who attacks the state, even verbally, becomes a revolutionary and an enemy by definition. Louis Guiffreda, who was head of FEMA, stated that "legitimate violence is integral to our form of government, for it is from this source that we can continue to purge our weaknesses."

It is significant to note that the dictionary definition of terrorism -- "the calculated use of violence" -- corresponds precisely to the government's stated policy of "the use of legitimate violence." Hold on, a reasonable person who can read might ask: Who are the real terrorists? Guiffreda's remark provides a revealing insight into the thinking of those who have been charged with oversight of the welfare of the citizens in this country. Apparently, if one's convictions or philosophy do not correspond with the government's agenda, that individual may find himself on a government enemy list thereby making him/her a "target" to be "purged" by the use of "legitimate violence."

The stories of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence are the stories and sacrifices of the American Revolution. These were not wild-eyed, rabble-rousing ruffians. They were soft-spoken men of means and education. They had good lives, which included security, but they valued liberty more. Despite the comfort of their life style they pledged: "For the support of this declaration, with firm reliance on the protection of the divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor." Honor ... honor is not and should not be an anachronism. Sadly, it is a principle and concept fading into obscurity.

History books don't tell us much of what happened in the Revolutionary War. We didn't just fight the British. We were British subjects at that time and we fought our own government! No wonder our founding fathers had a hatred for standing armies, and allowed, through the second amendment, for everyone to be armed.

Philosopher George Santayana once noted, "He who does not learn from history" (Russia, Germany, Czechoslovakia, China, et al.) "is destined to repeat it."

< End of Part 2 >
Geoff Metcalf can be heard Monday-Friday on:
KSFO, 560AM in Northern California.
His web site and newsletter information is at:
http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/GM.htm
E-mail Geoff at:metcalfksfo@earthlink.net

See more of Geoff Metcalf's columns
Go to the front page of WorldNetDaily: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/
c1998, Western Journalism Center

**COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ]