U.S. raids Iranian Consulates in Iraq

[kaiser soze]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/11012007/140/forces-raid-iran-office-iraq.html

Iran's official news agency confirmed the raid had taken place and said the US troops "broke into the office, without giving any explanation
and arrested five employees." The motive for the raid was not known, but it came as tensions remained high between Iran and the United States.

Is this the "Surge"?

Pushing other countries into fighting with us? Did diplomacy ever even cross bush's mind? Now we're waltzing into soveriegn territory of other nations and fucking shit up even more. What is bush trying to prove and how does this secure our safety in the future? Especially when we're killing the mothers and fathers of innocent children, what does this teach them of freedom because it looks more like throwing them into the pit of radicalism. Personally it looks like we have more enemies now than before 9/11 and I don't feel safer from the enemies outside and "within" our borders.

oh...and where's Bin Laden? This should be the question of the day everyday.

Please remember....one day bush won't be president, but we will still have to clean up this massive mess he has made. Remember that.

[drizl]

fuck.

[drizl]

i can smell it now. the administration is going to either provolk iran via iraq, or will blame iran for the chaos in iraq. or maybe israel will attack/provolk iran and then we will get involved.... they'll also push the nuclear weapons issue, which the CIA has already declared they are nowhere near ( i think their analysis was 10 years???) attaining WMD production.

a year or two ago when i had first heard iran was next i couldnt believe they would do it, would have the balls, could accomplish tricking the american public again. each passing day, it seems more likely that something is going to happen.

[kaiser soze]

I hope they don't provolk anything!

But if they are trying to provoke something with Iran well that would suck

[Schmeltz]

Hey now. Don't get ahead of yourself. When the Pentagon drafted plans for the invasion of Iraq they did so on the basis of extremely faulty intelligence and with the complicity of officials like Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld who were apparently willing to dramatically skew the nature of the operations that would be required. But they're gone now. Keep in mind that the American military performed a textbook operation against the foe they were designed to fight in Iraq and that Saddam's army folded up like a paper doll when it was actually committed to battle. The American military has been badly misused by its civilian leadership and I'm willing to bet it won't make the same mistake twice. There's no way the Iranian army would crumple up like its Iraqi counterpart. There's no way the American military would commit itself to another Iraq scenario that would be exponentially harder to deal with at every level and would yield a level of guerrilla or insurgent or irregular (or whatever you want to call it) activity even more vicious and resistant than the enemies it confronts every day in Iraq - which, by the way, is already straining the capacities of the American military almost to the civilian breaking point.

The armed forces of the United States constitute the most sophisticated military machine ever assembled by any civilization anywhere anytime. And its leaders, I suspect, have learned well the lessons of the last five years. There won't be a war in Iran until American society is ready to regressively alter itself to the point where none of its citizens would even recognize it anymore, and that's simply not possible. So just relax; Ahmadenijad is in enough hot water on his own and the Israelis couldn't even take out Hezbollah, let alone deal with Iran. It might get worse before it gets better, but it's not going to get THAT bad.

[drizl]

i disagree. the us and the israelis would go in it together, possible with the help of another "coalition of the willing", and nothing would stop the president from pulling another bullshit war out of his ass. rumsfeld knew exactly what was going on with iraq- he is a part of PNAC. Colin powell was used as a innocent, message-relay to the UN and the american people.

iran IS next. we have known for a long time, that they were the next target. insiders and whistleblowers have been warning of the administrations plans for the past 2-3 years. there are study groups in this country dedicated towards planning the attacks against irans, groups taht have already researched and established targets. israel also has such plans. all they have to do is hit the button. once the war is started, and the missiles have been fired, then sending troops wont even be a question. there are many ways they could get away with this war, the scariest is perhaps, another false-flag operation, or more construing/fabricating of evidence against the regime.

this administration doesnt care about breaking points. they will run the country into the ground, just like hitler did with germany. NPR said yesterday that there are over 900,000 kids from 18-25 on active military reserve. tahts quite a few troops right there. all they need is the leadership, and there are plenty of replaceable folk in command.

you have to also understand the executive orders and provisions put into place by george bush and his father during his presidency. the creation of FEMA and how it can be used along with the national guard to turn a "disaster area" into a giant prison- for example, new orleans after katrina. many of these executive orders are designed to scoot by congress and give the president the power to declare martial law and throw ordinary citizens who are a little too non-compliant and angry into detention "camps" on military bases throughout the country. all in all, these bases can handle hundreds of thousands of people.

so, if the president goes to far, and the people get out of hand- which will probably happen- they will just throw dissidents into concentration camps and put them to work, just like the chinese do.

[drizl]

from the presidential address two nights ago, to the entire country on almost every network tv station:

"Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.
We're also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence-sharing and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region."

DO NOT TAKE THESE WORDS LIGHTLY.

[Schmeltz]

Yeah, I don't think you're being very realistic at all there.

[EN[i]GMA]

Hey now. Don't get ahead of yourself. When the Pentagon drafted plans for the invasion of Iraq they did so on the basis of extremely faulty intelligence and with the complicity of officials like Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld who were apparently willing to dramatically skew the nature of the operations that would be required. But they're gone now. Keep in mind that the American military performed a textbook operation against the foe they were designed to fight in Iraq and that Saddam's army folded up like a paper doll when it was actually committed to battle. The American military has been badly misused by its civilian leadership and I'm willing to bet it won't make the same mistake twice. There's no way the Iranian army would crumple up like its Iraqi counterpart. There's no way the American military would commit itself to another Iraq scenario that would be exponentially harder to deal with at every level and would yield a level of guerrilla or insurgent or irregular (or whatever you want to call it) activity even more vicious and resistant than the enemies it confronts every day in Iraq - which, by the way, is already straining the capacities of the American military almost to the civilian breaking point.

The armed forces of the United States constitute the most sophisticated military machine ever assembled by any civilization anywhere anytime. And its leaders, I suspect, have learned well the lessons of the last five years. There won't be a war in Iran until American society is ready to regressively alter itself to the point where none of its citizens would even recognize it anymore, and that's simply not possible. So just relax; Ahmadenijad is in enough hot water on his own and the Israelis couldn't even take out Hezbollah, let alone deal with Iran. It might get worse before it gets better, but it's not going to get THAT bad.

As always, valuable insight.

[drizl]

just because colin powell (who is innocent in all of this) and donald rumsfeld (who is very much guilty) are gone, doesnt mean there is no threat of further imperialistic invasions in the middle east- that of iran and possibly syria.

we are trying to reshape the entire region in the middle east...not just iraq. there is much more to it than that.


schmeltz, so what exactly would it take to get the american people behind an attack against iran? possibly another false flag terrorist operation on american soil?? or maybe it could be on israeli soil...the american people might take that to heart and support a full on invasion/end to irans "nuclear ambitions". dont be suprised if and when it happens.

[Echewta]

"How can anyone be enlightened, when truth is so poorly lit"

[drizl]

maybe those carriers being brought to the persian gulf, right to irans doorstep might provolk something...bush wants it. hes praying for it.

[Ali]

just because colin powell (who is innocent in all of this) and donald rumsfeld (who is very much guilty) are gone, doesnt mean there is no threat of further imperialistic invasions in the middle east- that of iran and possibly syria. Cheney is still in da House (hopefully Scooter will pimp his ass and get him thrown out!).

And the rhetoric continues... ad nauseum!

[Schmeltz]

just because colin powell (who is innocent in all of this)


Oh, come on.


so what exactly would it take to get the american people behind an attack against iran? possibly another false flag terrorist operation on american soil?


The Bush administration has touted the lack of terrorism within American borders as "evidence" for the success of its Iraq "strategy" for so long now that another such attack would sound the death knell for the Republican Party rather than herald the renewed commitment of Americans to its leadership of the country. I don't think it possible for any government to muster any kind of popular support for a war against Iran that would be exponentially more difficult than the quagmire of Iraq. Even if the American forces already in Iraq attempted something, as soon as it became clear that the Iranian military was actually going to make a stand, instead of withering away like Saddam's army, the casualty lists would start lengthening and the war would be over.

Anyone who thinks the American military can be committed to battle against Iran in the foreseeable future isn't thinking realistically.

[drizl]

colin powell was being used because he was black, because he was a military leader, and as a medium between the administration, the people of america, and the world. he stepped down because he figured this out. he didnt fabricate any evidence, didnt have the motive to fabricate it, and so therefore was innocent. he went before the un that infamous day with evidence that he was handed, that he believed, as we did. no more guilty than you or i if either of us had ever supported the war.

just a feeling i have...maybe he is in on it. but not to the depth and level of evil that cheney, rumsfeld or bush are.

[drizl]

Oh, come on.



The Bush administration has touted the lack of terrorism within American borders as "evidence" for the success of its Iraq "strategy" for so long now that another such attack would sound the death knell for the Republican Party rather than herald the renewed commitment of Americans to its leadership of the country. I don't think it possible for any government to muster any kind of popular support for a war against Iran that would be exponentially more difficult than the quagmire of Iraq. Even if the American forces already in Iraq attempted something, as soon as it became clear that the Iranian military was actually going to make a stand, instead of withering away like Saddam's army, the casualty lists would start lengthening and the war would be over.

Anyone who thinks the American military can be committed to battle against Iran in the foreseeable future isn't thinking realistically.


i think you are totally wrong on that. i think another attack on american soil would be enough, if they were able to "prove" it was iran, as they did to al qaeda with 9-11.
maybe even an attack on an american warship in the persian gulf...
i wouldnt be suprised if bush soon starts blaming all the insurgency on iran and syria, bringing hezbollah into the picture, adding it in with irans "nuclear ambitions" and confusing and clouding the american mind again.
keep in mind bush doesnt give a flying fuck about what anyone says. NO ONE. not congress, not the american people, not the media, NO ONE. he will do whatever he wants until his ass is booted out of office. and whats scarrier is that he has put certain executive orders in place, that could be used in the event of a terrorist attack, or even a MASS UPRISING against him, to declare martial law, jail americans for no reason, hold them indefinitely without trial, even torture them, in prison camps, can suspend all elections, and run the country as a mad tyrant king without anyone or any legal process stopping him.

[Schmeltz]

colin powell was being used because he was black


Of course. He wouldn't know any better - he was only Secretary of State of the most complex political and military unit ever founded. He probably wouldn't be able to see through a clever ploy like that.


i think another attack on american soil would be enough, if they were able to "prove" it was iran, as they did to al qaeda with 9-11.


The implication there is that 9-11 was faked and the government is willing and able to do the same thing again. Again, I implore you to think of the topic for discussion in realistic terms. Recall how Hurricane Katrina so badly damaged the image of the Bush administration at home and abroad (not to mention how it demonstrated the inability of the American security infrastructure to handle a hurricane, let alone the sudden mass imprisonment of millions of their countrymen). A terrorist attack would be even worse, irrespective of who was behind it. It would be the ultimate failure.


keep in mind bush doesnt give a flying fuck about what anyone says. NO ONE.


You might be right, but that doesn't mean he's going to put everyone in concentration camps.


and whats scarrier is that he has put certain executive orders in place


The institution of these orders does not mean Bush has the ability, even if he really wanted, to install himself at the dictatorial peak of a police state in a matter of hours. Again, you're dramatically overstepping the realistic bounds of the situation to create a madcap doomsday scenario with little relevance to a practical discussion.

How's the army going to run prison camps when they're all over in Iraq and Iran?

[drizl]

dont isolate points of my sentences to try and smear me.

read the orders and tell me bush cant do whatever he wants. thats why executive orders exist, to sidestep the american people and congress. the president has an idea, and signs it into being. no interference from anyone.

there is all the reason to think about these things, to fear these things. all the reason to protest NOW, and get this asshole, and all of his men, and all of those who support him in congress, who are failing in their role as representatives of the people, out of office, NOW.

[Schmeltz]

the president has an idea, and signs it into being. no interference from anyone.


That really isn't how government works, as you well know. The enaction of orders depends on the cooperative participation of an enormous body of supporting personnel, equipment, and resources. Bush might be able to sign an order consigning millions of people to concentration camps, but the implementation of that order would depend not only on a great deal of non-interference but on the active cooperation of a significant portion of American society.

There are plenty of very good reasons to dispense with neoconservatism and its incumbent political champions. The prospect of the overnight installation of fascism in a country as heavily populated and as culturally complex as the United States is not one of them.

[drizl]

That really isn't how government works, as you well know. The enaction of orders depends on the cooperative participation of an enormous body of supporting personnel, equipment, and resources. Bush might be able to sign an order consigning millions of people to concentration camps, but the implementation of that order would depend not only on a great deal of non-interference but on the active cooperation of a significant portion of American society
it all depends on the circumstance. you said it yourself, katrina turned new orleans into a prison after the fact. lets say a nuclear device went off in a major city, or mass power outages caused rioting and looting on a scale worse than the LA riots of the early 90's.


when i say the president can declare martial law and imprison its own citizens in internment camps or concentration camps or whatever you want to call them, i dont mean that it will happen tomorrow, or the next day. maybe not even at all. the important point is, is that he has prepared for it just in case. thats all im saying, is it could happen. you are saying it cant, but the very fact that it was written as executive order is possibility enough. the fact that our own president declared that law.

do you remember the chaos that ensued after 9-11? anthrax, al qaeda crop dusters, mail bombs, the implementation of the terror alert system or meter or whatever that stupid fucking thing was? america was driven nuts by fear, by the media, and ultimately, by the government. the anthrax was proven to be US military grade. there were no al qaeda crop dusters. it was all smoke and mirrors to guide us into fear, into spying on our neighbors, into hating muslims and accepting a "war on terror". the invasion of iraq, the invasion of afghanistan, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in both of those countries died because of our fear, because we gave in and gave control to these slimy pricks. it was all unnecessary, and now look, look at what we are responsible for. dont think it is too far to believe that it is possible for our own government to turn on us. given enough fear and desperation, people will follow their orders, they will spy on their neighbors and turn in their friends. it has happened several times in american history, and it can happen again. manzanar, mcarthyism, cold war, now the war on terror.

[drizl]

and the country is already fascist, the american people just havent realized it yet.

[Schmeltz]

the important point is, is that he has prepared for it just in case.


Well... not really. He's theoretically given himself the ability to legally bypass certain of the checks on his authority. If he had actually prepared for the declaration of martial law and the imprisonment of millions of American citizens, he'd have drawn up plans for the construction of a bunch of enormous penitentiary facilities, the appropriation of a vast portion of the American transport infrastructure, and the deployment of some kind of military or paramilitary force able and willing to turn on the very citizenry that makes it up, not to mention compensatory measures to make up for the removal of who knows how many Americans from productive economic life.

I think a lot of the chaos post-9/11 was simply mass hysteria - which had an especially dramatic effect on the government, as incompetent and ideologically radical as it is. Same with Katrina. You give these people too much credit. Americans weren't "guided" into anything by a government bent on perpetuating a massive hoodwinking of public perceptions, they simply reacted to a traumatic event that massively impacted the national psyche. The measures adopted by the Bush administration were performed out of fear and incompetence, the reactionary knee-jerk of arrogant, bungling authoritarians caught in a bewildering situation for which they were completely unprepared.

Anyway, I don't think it likely that Bush is going to start rounding up vast numbers of people for detention. He's got less than two years left to his term. If he's capable of pulling off this enormous reversal of the entire machinery of American society in less than two years, I'm gonna start snorting coke and looking at a career in politics myself.

[drizl]

Well... not really. He's theoretically given himself the ability to legally bypass certain of the checks on his authority. If he had actually prepared for the declaration of martial law and the imprisonment of millions of American citizens, he'd have drawn up plans for the construction of a bunch of enormous penitentiary facilities, the appropriation of a vast portion of the American transport infrastructure, and the deployment of some kind of military or paramilitary force able and willing to turn on the very citizenry that makes it up, not to mention compensatory measures to make up for the removal of who knows how many Americans from productive economic life.

thats one of the things bush's father designed into FEMA schmeltz. you are too shortsighted. and there will be no "economic compensation".
Army Regulation 210–35 (http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf) Civilian inmate labor program (prison camp)

fema was the group who came in and managed new orleans after katrina, using the national guard and police to turn new orleans into a prison.

fema was designed to handle this.

[drizl]

im not saying its likely either, im just saying its last resort, possibility if he doesnt get his way and really really wants to fuck with iran despite an overwhelming public outcry against. if shit hit the fan in the states, fema would come in and clean up. thats their role, to maintain order and government in times of chaos. prison camps are a part of this operation.

[drizl]

the government has no control over the public mind? how did we go to war with iran again? you must not have been paying attention back then, maybe you even supported the idea. its okay, dont be ashamed, its just proof that the government can manipulate your mind via the media to persuade you to follow their agenda. go to sleep, its late.

[Schmeltz]

thats one of the things bush's father designed into FEMA schmeltz.


One would have thought that the reaction to Katrina would have been much more controlled and efficient, in that case. If FEMA is the agency at the helm of the installation of the American police state, you probably don't have a lot to worry about. And how does Bush plan to make up for the economic shortfall that will invariably result not only from the diversion of millions of employees into low-level inmate labour, but from the occupation of massive resources in their suppression and detention? Bush is going to simultaneously launch a colossally complex military operation on the other side of the world while hobbling the economic backbone of his armed forces? This makes less and less sense the more we talk about it.


prison camps are a part of this operation.


Where are they? How has the government managed to construct a detention system big enough to contain millions of people with nobody noticing? Who makes up the enormous numbers of staff and guards that such a system would require? How will so many people be forcibly transferred there without severely disrupting the enhanced transport and distribution needs of an America at perpetual war with Iraq and Iran?


the government has no control over the public mind? how did we go to war with iran again?


I never claimed that the government has no influence over public perceptions, only that the panic and fear occasioned by 9/11 was entirely natural and occasioned by the circumstances rather than by any deliberate action on the part of the government. And certainly a great deal of the misinformation perpetuated as casus belli played dramatically on the residual fear from 9/11 - but that's the point; this mindset wasn't engineered in order to more easily string the public along, but exploited in order to bolster a weak case for war.

Occam's Razor, drizl.

[Ali]

and the imprisonment of millions of American citizens, those are not "American citizens", they are "enemy combatants"

he'd have drawn up plans for the construction of a bunch of enormous penitentiary facilities, the appropriation of a vast portion of the American transport infrastructure, and the deployment of some kind of military or paramilitary force able and willing to turn on the very citizenry that makes it up, not to mention compensatory measures to make up for the removal of who knows how many Americans from productive economic life. and the infrastructure you are referring to already exists overseas (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1357699,00.html).

You don't need to turn millions of American citizens into enemy combatants, just scare (http://www.september11news.com/) them into supporting your War on Terror and classify anybody who criticises you as a terrorist.

Sound familiar?

[Schmeltz]

and the infrastructure you are referring to already exists overseas.


So the government has plans in place to appropriate essentially the entire American civilian air fleet (which is what it would take to move the millions of prisoners the government is apparently going to make out of dissident American citizens) and spend who knows how many billion dollars to ship them to other countries - all in tandem with the mind-boggling military scenario you describe in the 3 000 casualties thread?

The infrastructure required for such a thing does not exist overseas, or anywhere in the world, for that matter.


just scare them into supporting your War on Terror and classify anybody who criticises you as a terrorist.


Don't the mid-term elections and the widely acknowledged diminishment in support for the war prove that this is no longer working? Support for the War on Terror is plummeting thanks to its incompetent mishandling by the buffoons in charge and the days of neocon finger-pointing-while-shrieking-"terrorist!" are pretty much over (one could only hope). This didn't work before, and it won't work again.

[drizl]

Congressman Henry Gonzales (D, Texas) clarified the question of the existence of civilian detention camps. In an interview the congressman stated, "the truth is yes - you do have these stand by 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." (http://www.apfn.org/THEWINDS/archive/government/camp9-97.html)

HISTORY OF CIVILIAN INTERNMENT CAMPS (http://www.apfn.org/THEWINDS/archive/government/camp9-97.html)

""The Rex 84 Program was established on the reasoning that if a mass exodus of illegal aliens crossed the Mexican/US border, they would be quickly rounded up and detained in detention
centers by FEMA. Rex 84 allowed many military bases to be closed
down and to be turned into prisons" (full name is rex 1984, interestingly enough)" (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/camps.html)

excerpt from that article:

"Operation Cable Splicer and Garden Plot are the two sub programs which will be implemented once the Rex 84 program is initiated for its proper purpose. Garden Plot is the program to control the population. Cable Splicer is the program for an orderly takeover of the state and local governments by the federal government. FEMA is the executive arm of the coming police state and thus will head up all operations. The Presidential Executive Orders already listed on the Federal Register also are part of the legal framework for this operation.

The camps all have railroad facilities as well as roads leading to and from the detention facilities. Many also have an airport nearby. The majority of the camps can house a population of 20,000 prisoners. Currently, the largest of these facilities is just outside of Fairbanks, Alaska. The Alaskan facility is a massive mental health facility and can hold approximately 2 million people."

remember nazi germany? all those folks helped hitler participate in concentration camps. remember manzanaar here in the us during our little war with the japanese? amred guards participated in that round up.

now largely, most of the links on the internet regarding this subject, are totally paranoid and some might even be disinformation.

all you need to do, to make a concentration camp is to set up some large fences with razor wire, and put up a bunch of military tents and bunks. and the land? military bases are ripe with plenty of land.

look at this document: (here is the text from the cover letter)
Congress of the United States

March 24, 1997

"Enclosed is the information you requested pertaining to the Army's policy and guidance for establishing civilian inmate labor programs and civilian prison camps on Army installations. This information has not yet been published (it is currently at the printers), however, it has been funded, staffed, and does reflect current Army policy."

-- Bill Hefner
Member of Congress

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990

allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995

allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997

allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998

allows the government to seize all means of transportation, including personal cars, trucks or vehicles of any kind and total control over all highways, seaports, and waterways.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10999

allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000

allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001

allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002

designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005

allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051

specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310

grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049

assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921

allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has broad powers in every aspect of the nation. General Frank Salzedo, chief of FEMA's Civil Security Division stated in a 1983 conference that he saw FEMA's role as a "new frontier in the protection of individual and governmental leaders from assassination, and of civil and military installations from sabotage and/or attack, as well as prevention of dissident groups from gaining access to U.S. opinion, or a global audience in times of crisis." FEMA's powers were consolidated by President Carter to incorporate the...

National Security Act of 1947

allows for the strategic relocation of industries, services, government and other essential economic activities, and to rationalize the requirements for manpower, resources and production facilities.

1950 Defense Production Act

gives the President sweeping powers over all aspects of the economy.

Act of August 29, 1916

authorizes the Secretary of the Army, in time of war, to take possession of any transportation system for transporting troops, material, or any other purpose related to the emergency.

International Emergency Economic Powers Act

enables the President to seize the property of a foreign country or national. These powers were transferred to FEMA in a sweeping consolidation in 1979.

[drizl]

you also need to understand that most of this is not openly public for obvious reasons. you dont hear about these executive orders on the news, and if the masses knew of them, they might actually start to get worried, rightfully so. there is absolutely no reason why these should exist in this country, that is supposed to be so free and open and "constiutional" there is no constitution any more.

[Schmeltz]

most of the links on the internet regarding this subject, are totally paranoid and some might even be disinformation.


Well, that certainly applies to the link you posted above.

As scary as you make that legislation sound, there's a perfectly good reason for enacting it: it describes, in part, the mechanisms that would govern an all-out response to a situation of critical military emergency - just like that which was expected to occur at the height of the Cold War when most of those directives were issued. Probably the reason you don't hear about them on the news is they're really kind of mundane. Anyone can look them up, I just did. Took 0.02 seconds. I certainly don't think they were issued with the mass detention of American citizenry in mind. And even if they were skewed to provide a legal precedent for said mass detention, this would require the cooperation of such a wide sector of American society that it would essentially amount to a renewed civil war. America is not Nazi Germany, where the citizenry is perfectly willing to cooperate in purging the country of enormous segments of the population. It is too varied and complex for the comparison to be drawn.

[drizl]

well, i showed you the evidence, and its your decision to write it off.

it is very possible. and talking about it as a possibility is important because it might be the only thing that prevents it from getting that far.

[drizl]

and i disagree with your statement on it being perfectly reasonable.

[Schmeltz]

If I'd written it off I wouldn't even have bothered looking at it, but I investigated most of the directives you listed (the University of Michigan has lots of them on its website). I simply came to a different conclusion than you did - I think of these directives as the legislative framework governing the federal response to critical emergencies, you think of them as the terrifying precedent for the legal installation of fascist tyranny over the heads of the helpless and unsuspecting American people.

[drizl]

and you think that it is absurd that i find that a very real possibility?

[Schmeltz]

Yes. Yes I do.

[drizl]

buen viaje

[Ali]

So the government has plans in place to appropriate essentially the entire American civilian air fleet (which is what it would take to move the millions of prisoners the government is apparently going to make out of dissident American citizens) and spend who knows how many billion dollars to ship them to other countries - all in tandem with the mind-boggling military scenario you describe in the 3 000 casualties thread?

The infrastructure required for such a thing does not exist overseas, or anywhere in the world, for that matter.
Like I said, you don't need to do this to millions, just the few who dare question your War on Terror. The Nazis didn't have to do this to everyone, they simply stirred up the majority of Germans into supporting their activities and silenced any dissenters.


Don't the mid-term elections and the widely acknowledged diminishment in support for the war prove that this is no longer working? Support for the War on Terror is plummeting thanks to its incompetent mishandling by the buffoons in charge and the days of neocon finger-pointing-while-shrieking-"terrorist!" are pretty much over (one could only hope). This didn't work before, and it won't work again.All it takes is another 9/11 and they'll have you eating out of their hands again.

[Schmeltz]

The Nazis didn't have to do this to everyone


But they did have to do it to millions of people. Even going by a question of proportions America would have to do it to millions more.


All it takes is another 9/11 and they'll have you eating out of their hands again.



The Bush administration has touted the lack of terrorism within American borders as "evidence" for the success of its Iraq "strategy" for so long now that another such attack would sound the death knell for the Republican Party rather than herald the renewed commitment of Americans to its leadership of the country.

[Ali]

The Bush administration has touted the lack of terrorism within American borders as "evidence" for the success of its Iraq "strategy" for so long now that another such attack would sound the death knell for the Republican Party rather than herald the renewed commitment of Americans to its leadership of the country.What does Iraq or Iran have to do with terror in the US?

Al Queda are still at large and can still strike at any minute.

[Schmeltz]

Neither Iraq nor Iran has anything to do with terror in the USA, but a common Republican talking point is the notion that the Iraq war draws al-Qaeda recruits to fight American troops there, rather than planning and carrying out further terrorist attacks on American territory. If al-Qaeda were to perform another such attack (and I fully agree that the Iraq war would do nothing to stop them at all) then it would harm, not help, the standing of the Republicans - especially the incumbent administration. That's all I'm saying.

[drizl]

its not about republicans or democrats. those two parties just confuse people, distracting them, while others work behind the scenes (very powerful republicans, democrats, labor parties, and other "commissions" and "councils").
i dont know where you were at the start of the iraq war, but america was convinced that saddam and iraq had everything to do with al qaeda, bin laden and 9-11.

there is a word here, it is terror, or terrorist, or terrorism. we label all people who fight against western imperialism, who do not align themselves with american foreign policy, and who fight back, as "terrorists". the civil war in iraq is now being blamed on "terrorists", or the new proxy name, "insurgents". its the language they use, its semantics aimed at the people, to control the people, that is the basis for striking fear into the hearts of americans.

its no longer working, and now iraq no longer is being touted as having WMD's, as aligned with "al qaeda". now the language has shifted towards "insurgence" and back to "terrorists". the shot callers change their language, and their opinions to meet the demands of the american public.

[sam i am]

It appears the evidence is pretty exhaustive, but that the conclusions to be drawn are disparate.

I tend to side with Schmeltz in this case, as the whole PNAC and contigency plans to have a fascist dictatorship are rather far-fetched.

Thank God for the 2nd Amendment and millions of private guns in the US - if the "leadership" of the country ever made serious moves to implement a coup, they'd be met by a vast and active militia with plenty of guns to send bullets flying their way.

[EN[i]GMA]

If Bush and his cronies were going to institute a police state, they would have done it already.

Frankly it's pretty funny, in a pitiful sort of way, that you're scared of a person who's reputably known as a moron, who now has to cower for every single speech he makes because his party got the shit kicked out of them.

If Bush has a plan to take over the world, we have nothing to fear, because it would have to be an even greater failure than Iraq.

[sam i am]

And enigma successfully ends the debate.

Well done!

Cheers!

[Echewta]

Good job U.N.!

[sam i am]

Good job U.N.!

Hopefully stated with tongue firmly in cheek.