Leaked U.S. Army Document Outlines Plan For Re-Education Camps In America

This was posted a few hours prior to this "breaking news"....

A lot of good/better responses there/here...

Feel free to add your comments there/here;

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by Jagermeister


Why are people concerned with this effecting them? Not that I am in agreement with some sick desire to have people being brainwashed before being released but is this not talking about prisoners such as ones at Guantanamo Bay?

I am confused

Originally posted by Jameela
reply to post by Jagermeister

 

Why are people concerned with this effecting them? Not that I am in agreement with some sick desire to have people being brainwashed before being released but is this not talking about prisoners such as ones at Guantanamo Bay?

I am confused

No this is talking about the American people. This is talking about camps (basically prisons) that the Government can place anyone they want in without trial or cause. And it says in the document that it can be used in America. This goes right along with the NDAA that was recently passed after Obama said that he would veto it.

I'd also like to note that the source to this article has updated with pics to where it shows where this can be used in America.

What people who buy into this nonsense keep forgetting is that the soldiers have families too.

There is no way the troops would ever go along with something like this, their first concern in a national emergency will be to their families.

Holy hell, this reminds me of the simpsons episode where Flanders is the overlord of the world and everyone has to walk around smiling, or face "re-neducation"

Bookmarked for later. Thanks for sharing.

reply to post by Jagermeister

I'd also like to note that the source to this article has updated with pics to where it shows where this can be used in America.

While not entirely unprecedented (1941 was a memorable year for Japanese-Americans) - it is also very impractical.

The logistical issues, alone, are staggering in their proportions. If you were to add up -all- of the U.S. military service members and -all- state police forces... you might have 1.5% of the population in a country where 50% of the population is armed.

So, good luck with that phase of the operation.

You also have to figure that these people must be detained in an area where there is enough logistical support to transport them, feed them, clothe them, and house them. They will require constant security - not just to prevent escape but also to prevent intrusion (depending upon the nature of the detainment - there may be people out there looking to kill the people in the facilities) and detainee in-fighting.

Diseases will also run rampant. People coming together from geographically distant locations will spike exposure rates and overwhelm immune systems. Rapes between detainees will spread STDs, and the risk of freak outbreaks of small pox, TB, or other "controlled/eradicated" diseases will be very high.

As for why this would be necessary in America... there is one instance we don't think about - invasion. A unit I worked with for a few years had the mission of providing logistic support as part of a troop surge into Korea in the event of an invasion. We were to set up camps for both refugees and detainees to house them as they were pulled from affected areas and awaiting extraction from the country.

In the event America is invaded - camps like those described in the manuals would be used to house refugees and keep them out of the fray.

None of it is exactly what one would call a pleasant thought. But it's better to have some kind of plan going in than just a complete cluster #.

5-15. The use of physical or mental torture or coercion of any kind is absolutely prohibited. Detainees are
not threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disparate treatment because of their refusal to answer
questions. MWDs, contracted dogs, or any other dog in use by a government agency will not be used as
part of an interrogation approach nor used to harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce a detainee for
interrogation purposes. Failure to adhere to these outlined actions constitutes a serious violation of
international laws and the UCMJ. All violations must be stopped by the monitor and reported immediately.

At least it says that



info.publicintelligence.net...

My mother survived WWII. She has told me some scary stories about what it was like to live in Germany as a small child during the war.

In those days they were called work camps. Today they are called "management" camps? Okay...

One thing is for sure. If the situation degrades in this country like it did in Germany, the last thing a wounded animal does is bite at its wounds.

Oh, and what do you suppose this guys "rights" were?
What do you suppose he did wrong?

Emergency Management

They do things very similar to this in George Orwell's 1984. Reading that infowars article instantly made me think of that book.

Originally posted by RealSpoke

5-15. The use of physical or mental torture or coercion of any kind is absolutely prohibited. Detainees are
not threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disparate treatment because of their refusal to answer
questions. MWDs, contracted dogs, or any other dog in use by a government agency will not be used as
part of an interrogation approach nor used to harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce a detainee for
interrogation purposes. Failure to adhere to these outlined actions constitutes a serious violation of
international laws and the UCMJ. All violations must be stopped by the monitor and reported immediately.

At least it says that



info.publicintelligence.net...

You know they don't follow international law... The U.S. Government is a terrorist organization and a committee to manage the affairs of its corporations. International law hasn't stopped the U.S. for the thousands of people they've killed in Cuba via terrorism, not to mention the millions they've killed overseas in the past 50 years. So don't talk to us about morals and ethics, our government has none, they just put those things in there to sound formal and decent.

Originally posted by Jagermeister

Originally posted by Jameela
reply to post by Jagermeister

 

Why are people concerned with this effecting them? Not that I am in agreement with some sick desire to have people being brainwashed before being released but is this not talking about prisoners such as ones at Guantanamo Bay?

I am confused

No this is talking about the American people. This is talking about camps (basically prisons) that the Government can place anyone they want in without trial or cause. And it says in the document that it can be used in America. This goes right along with the NDAA that was recently passed after Obama said that he would veto it.

how do you view this in light of Obama striking down the American people part of the NDAA recently www.abovetopsecret.com... To clarify my question, how do you believe that affects this?

Or do you believe these camps are only for martial law scenario?

Yet Again Infowars come through with the truth.

For all those naysayers about infowars. Wrong again.

Infowars has been shouting very hard and rightly so, shout loud anough and people will hear you. Russia Today have also picked up the article and are running with it now. They are crediting infowars.com with the ground breaking story.

Originally posted by DankKing420
infowars.....lol

2nd

I don´t get responses like this.

Debunk the information given, you know sort of like the saying: 'don't shoot the messenger'.

If infowars reported there are red apples as well as green ones, would you're comment be the same?

'lol, infowars..... 2nd'

take a look at this thread to see this stuff is very real.

reply to post by DankKing420


What do you mean?

Originally posted by RealSpoke

5-15. The use of physical or mental torture or coercion of any kind is absolutely prohibited. Detainees are
not threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disparate treatment because of their refusal to answer
questions. MWDs, contracted dogs, or any other dog in use by a government agency will not be used as
part of an interrogation approach nor used to harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce a detainee for
interrogation purposes. Failure to adhere to these outlined actions constitutes a serious violation of
international laws and the UCMJ. All violations must be stopped by the monitor and reported immediately.

At least it says that

info.publicintelligence.net...

The question is will the US adhere this?

Given their trackrecord i'm inclined to say; no.

reply to post by Unity_99


Slightly off-topic, but I really loved your post. I hope that any police officers that may be reading this fully understand what you wrote. I can't tell you how many times my friends that are officers quote these ridiculous laws and consider people breaking them to be absolute scum criminals. Blinded by the power they are granted, perhaps? Just consider the prohibition of certain, now, indigenous plants and the way swat teams are called into private citizens homes and people are shot, even murdered, because of it. They are not criminals, yet the police act like they are. Could you ever see the Police NOT enforcing unjust laws? I can't, ever. Unjust laws are unjust. If the police really cared, they would arrest practically a quarter of those on Wall Street. Think about the searches police now do for routine. Think about forced ID checks for those not even under arrest and then if not shown ID, which you shouldn't have to in America, you get thrown in jail. They search cars and even cellphones at their own discretion. Personal property does not exist anymore and the police have ultimate power to violate your rights that protect you from things such as unwarranted searches. You think a cop, after pulling someone over for a speeding ticket, got a warrant to search your car or search your intimate information on your phone? No evidence what so ever or probable cause should allow them to search anything you own without a warrant. Since the rulebook has been "rewritten," many cops see no problem searching what is yours because of what some politician wrote and voted on, as well as justification through believing the brainwashing media and their ominous threats of spooky terrorists.

I can certainly see - Based on evidence from how the police behave towards or civil rights - where the military would follow unjust orders and place people in camps or whatever mechanisms of control or coercion. Let's not forget about the Kent State massacre and the college students that were murdered by National Guardsmen. Surely, any rational and sane human being would not fire live rounds of ammunition into a crowd of college student protesters? Or are they absolved of any wrong doing since they were just following orders?

What about the Japanese internment camps in America during WWII? They were called "War Relocation Camps." They took American citizens of Japanese heritage and threw them in a giant prison. What the military did was declare the entire west coast as a military area and then those areas were considered "exclusion zones" and they were allowed to remove any and all people from the area. They used the law to imprison innocent Americans. What is there to stop them now? Is the situation any different? There are multiple examples of unjust U.S. laws allowing these atrocities to occur in America. The precedent is there and the justification is there and I would take this article and the military papers seriously, for it can happen and it already has happened in some form or another through the use of unjust laws.

reply to post by RadioactiveRob

You know they don't follow international law...

Hello, Radioactive Rob; AT2 [Aim]; MAREXSECRON 11, USN.

We train specifically in the handling of civilian personnel in both foreign countries and domestic territories. We have some very specific guidelines that mandate how watch-standers and their departments are to respond to various situations - from people trying to sell us DVDs at the front gate to a platoon sized assault with air support to someone found with an IED during personnel inspection.

We train like we fight - and have recently completed a fairly rigorous set of exercises testing our ability to respond to a variety of benign and aggressive activity within the established guidelines.

What would you like to know?

So don't talk to us about morals and ethics, our government has none, they just put those things in there to sound formal and decent.

Our government may not necessarily have morals or ethics - but it does have law.

Recently, during one of our exercises, we had a junior sailor shoot a person with an IED found on their person during an inspection. Sounds all well and good, yes?

There's a catch. The person had already been restrained and was complying with orders to remain on the ground. Had it been real - he would have sent the entire chain of command to jail pending an investigation and court martial hearing - right up to the Chief Warrant Officer in charge of the operation.

They pulled him from that spot on the watch and made sure he understood just how serious the act of shooting a foreign national is and ensured he had a seat for the upcoming IED training with the marines - so he could see an IED the size of a deck of cards was not going to blow up the whole base (not that shooting the individual would have made the IED inert).

The -ONLY- reason you shoot someone with an IED is to prevent them from placing more people in danger by getting closer to assets. That's it. If they aren't moving, holding a hostage, or something along those lines - you will go to jail for a very long time if you shoot them - and may even be turned over to the host nation for trials.

Why? Because it's the law.

We can argue all day about the ethics or morals that may have influenced the legislating of a law - but the law is the law.

Security operations are a completely different ball game compared to offensive tactical situations. Even then - any person you kill in any situation ... you must be able to articulate why it was you killed them. If you can't - you may or may not find yourself under investigation (depending upon the situation and the chain of command) - but any investigation done on someone who cannot articulate their reasons for pulling the trigger will most certainly be spending time in jail and be discharged from service.