Retired general and former Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark on Friday called for World War II-style internment camps to be revived for “disloyal Americans.” In an interview with MSNBC’s Thomas Roberts in the wake of the mass shooting in Chatanooga, Tennessee, Clark said that during World War II, “if someone supported Nazi Germany at the expense of the United States, we didn’t say that was freedom of speech, we put him in a camp, they were prisoners of war.”
He called for a revival of internment camps to help combat Muslim extremism, saying, “If these people are radicalized and they don’t support the United States and they are disloyal to the United States as a matter of principle, fine. It’s their right and it’s our right and obligation to segregate them from the normal community for the duration of the conflict.”
The comments were shockingly out of character for Clark, who after serving as supreme allied commander of NATO made a name for himself in progressive political circles. In 2004, his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination was highly critical of the Bush administration’s excessive response to the 9/11 terror attacks. Since then, he has been a critic of policies that violate the Geneva Convention, saying in 2006 that policies such as torture violate “the very values that [we] espouse.”
In a memoir written the following year, he also famously alleged that the White House under Bush had developed a massively imperialistic plan for the Middle East, which would see the administration attempt to “take out seven countries in five years,” beginning with the invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Earlier this year I spoke with Clark at the annual Lewis and Clark University Symposium on International Affairs in Portland, Oregon. The subject of our discussion was how to deal with the potential threat of foreign fighters returning from armed conflicts abroad. At the time, Clark spoke out strongly against “the politics of fear” and eroding democratic institutions and norms, while reiterating his criticism of the excesses committed by Bush-era neoconservatives under the banner of fighting terrorism.
But on Friday, he was advocating the revival of a policy widely considered to be among the most shameful chapters in American history: World War II domestic internment camps. Aside from the inherent problems in criminalizing people for their beliefs, Clark’s proposal (which his MSNBC interlocutor did not challenge him on) also appears to be based on the concept of targeting people for government scrutiny who are not even “radicalized,” but who the government decides may be subject to radicalization in the future. That radicalization itself is a highly amorphous and politically malleable concept only makes this proposal more troubling.
“We have got to identify the people who are most likely to be radicalized. We’ve got to cut this off at the beginning,” Clark said. “I do think on a national policy level we need to look at what self-radicalization means because we are at war with this group of terrorists.” And he added that “not only the United States but our allied nations like Britain, Germany and France are going to have to look at their domestic law procedures.”
Despite an outcry about his comments on social media, Clark has not responded publicly. As of Monday morning, his latest tweet was from Friday, encouraging his followers to watch his interview.
Tune in now to @msnbc @ThomasARoberts to hear my thoughts on today's pressing issues.
— Wes Clark (@GeneralClark) July 17, 2015
Update 07/21/15 11:12AM EST:
General Clark did not respond to subsequent requests for comment on the story, although a spokesperson for his office did reach out to raise questions about the title. On his Twitter feed however, Clark appeared to reiterate his comments for detaining “seditious” individuals at home who might be connected to ISIS:
#ISIS is the enemy. US Citz who choose #ISIS are spies, enemy combatants or both. Govt should separate them from the rest of us.
— Wes Clark (@GeneralClark) July 20, 2015
We’re at war with #ISIS – Frustrated w/ argument that sedition is free speech. Homegrown ISIS cells are a threat.
— Wes Clark (@GeneralClark) July 20, 2015
Never said “muslim”, “internment” or called for new camps. Blogosteria. See: http://t.co/OS7bVzhq7L
— Wes Clark (@GeneralClark) July 20, 2015
read this excellent analysis by James Petras from May 1999:
USA-NATO vs. Yugoslavia: The Empire’s Impunity
http://www.envio.org.ni/articulo/2244
This makes no sense. He’s the one who went around doing interviews saying all the wars were planned since the 90s. There’s a Democracy Now interview from 2007 that talks about 9-11 and how seven countries would be “taken down.” Countries: Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, and Iran. It looks like someone got to him. NDAA is the worst thing that has ever happened to the U.S. Thanks Obama.
Don’t be stupid. He was promoting his memoir. In that very interview that you mention, he pretends to have been a naive military leader. Listen to/Watch the interview again. Pay attention to his language. Note his faux naif account of the meetings he participated in. He’s long been in the know about what the imperialists want. He’s made a career of it. Clark isn’t the boy scout that many progressives mistake him to be.
from 1999:
USA-NATO vs. Yugoslavia: The Empire’s Impunity
http://www.envio.org.ni/articulo/2244
So…interned until the end of an endless war. What a swell guy
I’m glad Clark clarified that he intends fascist Konzentrazionslagern for EVERYONE, not just Muslims. I feel so much better hearing that. But once we end up there, can we get distinctive lapel pins which denote WHY the fascists hate us so much? I believe the designs have already been done.
Some people on here have a reading comprehension problem – “Radicalized” Americans, That means anyone who the government deems as a radical.
Also the camps are already complete of course they are called FEMA camps. And some at the top call everyone who thinks they are future concentration camps conspiracy theorist. You decide
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12078.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxIoMWS2B0g
We could start with a moratorium on immigration from countries that produce radical extremists.
So you want to stop Americans from emigrating from America to immigrate to America?
This article certain pissed off the anti-Muslim bigots.
I support Wesley Clark’s opinion on the revival of internment camps to assist in combating Muslim extremist. Radicalization threatens the peace of the nation and must be contained. Already the mess has been felt, and hence this proposal by Wesley Clark can serve the country right. It really help deal with such a menace that puts the lives of innocent citizens at jeopardy.
Thanks for making sense. I cant believe so many people in this forum are against it. First time I’ve ever been to the Intercept, but it must be a leftist/liberal website to have so many Islamic terrorist sympathizers posting comments here.
One doesn’t have to be supportive and/or sympathetic to Muslim extremists (or any other extremists, for that matter), to realize that the revival of Internment camps here in the United States could and more than likely would be used against anybody who is considered “too extreme” not to be dangerous for the American mainstream. There have to be other ways to upstage and neutralize extremism, and the only real way to do that is to change society.
Once they’ve rounded up the Muslims, they’ll need another target to keep their minions in employment. Not enough Gypsies in the US to really bother with. Jews are reasonably safe. Athiests. Everyone hates them and they’re nothing but troublemakers and radical. Or…
General Clark is right about the need to intern Muslim radicals and I’ll take the definition of a radical Muslim a step further. Anyone who takes the Quran literally and seeks to act on it is a radicalized Muslim, because the Quran is a war manual with more text about hating and killing Jews than Hitler’s “Mein Kampf.” http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Mein_Kampf
“The amount of anti-Jewish text in Mein Kampf adds up to 7% in total, whilst the largely non-abrograted Medinan verses of the Qur’an contain more than double that amount, standing at almost 17%”
The US Military explains here how radicalized terrorists are Muslim –
http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/osg/terrorism/radicalization.htm
“Muslim” appears eight times in the article.
I like how the US Govt acts like an innocent victim of unprovoked hatred and terrorism. Terrorism from the Middle East was never an issue until we went over there with our tanks and guns and bombed the place all to hell.
Radicalization is a reaction. If the US wants to end the Islamic terrorist era – stop getting all up in their grill. The US has no business being over there.The fact is, the US is killing people and destroying countries to ensure ongoing access to their treasures (oil).
Oil! We have alternative energy solutions, but prefer to suck the blood from the earth’s veins and destroy anyone that gets in the way.
The US Govt has already violated the Bill of Rights with the NSA’s habit of spying on citizens without due cause in the name of security – Snowden was deemed a traitor for revealing what the US Govt was doing to it’s own citizens – and now the idea of not only incarcerating citizens for their thoughts – but also those who may possibly arrive at similar thoughts sometime in their future.
And have the American citizens pay the tab for it all.
How would Americans react? Stand still and take it from a dry running start, or radicalize in reaction?
There. Now you can put me in your potential radicalized terrorist folder for review as soon as the Mystical Psychic Mind Reader Agency is in place.
Asshole.
Love,
A Christian American Citizen
@PictureThis > You are insane for saying US aggression caused Islamic terrorism. The 9/11 Islamic terrorist attacks happened BEFORE we invaded Afghanistan and we did it because the Taliban aided and abetted Al Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks by giving them sanctuary and training bases.
You are no Christian and I doubt you are even American.
Really? Gulf War ring a bell, at all? Iran-Contra? Palestine? Colonialism, imperialism, WWII…Have you EVER EVEN HEARD OF HISTORY? Get a clue, honey, because until you realize this stuff doesn’t happen in a vacuum, you will continue to be the biggest part of the problem.
Clark is very open ended in his comments on the “who”
He states, “This group of terrorists…” “Self-radicalized…”
No mention of an exclusive group like ISIS.
He mentions the US and Allies need to, “take a look at domestic laws…” This aligns with Cameron’s “extremism task force”
From the guardian:
“…The orders, the product of an extremism task force set up by the prime minister, were proposed during the last parliament in March, but were largely vetoed by the Liberal Democrats on the grounds of free speech. They were subsequently revived in the Conservative manifesto.
The measures would give the police powers to apply to the high court for an order to limit the “harmful activities” of an extremist individual. The definition of harmful is to include a risk of public disorder, a risk of harassment, alarm or distress or creating a “threat to the functioning of democracy”.
The aim is to catch not just those who spread or incite hatred on the grounds of gender, race or religion but also those who undertake harmful activities for the “purpose of overthrowing democracy”.
They would include a ban on broadcasting and a requirement to submit to the police in advance any proposed publication on the web and social media or in print. The bill will also contain plans for banning orders for extremist organisations which seek to undermine democracy or use hate speech in public places, but it will fall short of banning on the grounds of provoking hatred.
It will also contain new powers to close premises including mosques where extremists seek to influence others. The powers of the Charity Commission to root out charities that misappropriate funds towards extremism and terrorism will also be strengthened.”
Clark’s comments echo recent ones, that most of you are likely familiar with, made by conservative Cameron in the UK,
“For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. It’s often meant we have stood neutral between different values. And that’s helped foster a narrative of extremism and grievance.”
So it seems the Allies are effectively in sync this summer distributing their pre-crime memes.
Aha, man. God I love old, white people.
Condescending, racist, ageist, and blasphemous at the same time. Well done.
Only if you are a far-left Islamic terrorist sympathizer.
Just more proof anyone from the US government or connected the the government, has completely lost any idea of what being American mean. He sound like someone from Israel not the US
“We must recognize that we cannot depend on the governments of the world to abolish war, because they and the economic interests they represent benefit from war. Therefore, we, the people of the world must take up the challenge. And although we do not command armies, we do not have great treasuries of wealth, there is one crucial fact that gives us enormous power: the governments of the world cannot wage war without the participation of the people. Albert Einstein understood this simple fact. Horrified by the carnage of the First World War in which 10 million died in the battlefields of Europe , Einstein said: “Wars will stop when men refuse to fight.”
“That is our challenge, to bring the world to the point where men and women will refuse to fight, and governments will be helpless to wage war.
“Is that utopian? Impossible? Only a dream?
“Do people go to war because it is part of human nature? If so, then we might consider it impossible to do away with war. But there is no evidence, in biology, or psychology, or anthropology, of a natural instinct for war. If that were so, we would find a spontaneous rush to war by masses of people. What we find is something very different: we find that governments must make enormous efforts to mobilize populations for war. They must entice young people with promises of money, land, education, skills. Immigrants are lured with promises of green cards and citizenship. And if those enticements don’t work, government must coerce. It must conscript young people, force them into military service, threaten them with prison if they do not comply.
“Woodrow Wilson found a citizenry so reluctant to enter the First World War that he had to pummel the nation with propaganda and imprison dissenters in order to get the country to join the butchery going on in Europe .
“The most powerful weapon of governments in raising armies is the weapon of propaganda, of ideology. It must persuade young people, and their families, that though they may die, though they may lose arms or legs, or become blind, that it is done for the common good, for a noble cause, for democracy, for liberty, for God, for the country.
“The idea that we owe something to our country goes far back to Plato, who puts into the mouth of Socrates the idea that the citizen has an obligation to the state, that the state is to be revered more than your father and mother. He says: “In war, and in the court of justice, and everywhere, you must do whatever your state and your country tell you to do, or you must persuade them that their commands are unjust.” There is no equality here: the citizen may use persuasion, no more. The state may use force.
“This idea of obedience to the state is the essence of totalitarianism. And we find it not only in Mussolini’s Italy , in Hitler’s Germany , in Stalin’s Soviet Union , but in so-called democratic countries, like the United States.”
– from Howard Zinn’s essay, “The Enemy Is War,” found in “A Power Governments Cannot Suppress”
“Wars will stop when men refuse to fight.” this would make you is “disloyal American.” in the eyes of these nut cases
Internment camps looks an awful lot like internet camps, which kinda sounds like social media. Then you got your surveillance. Goodness, it’s already covered.
The only way citizens are allowed to imagine living in peace in this country is to support candidates that are willing to be more aggressive and sneaky than this country was the day before. We’re regressing with issues of survival. Its like if we’re trying to cure diseases with sacrifices to the gods. US foreign policy for homeland security is what leeches are for curing diseases.
Well I guess if he doesn’t mean “internment camps” then he must be talking about prison. As we know they already have special prisons for terrorists. Sounds to me like they want to legitimize the use of these horrific special prisons.
Wesley Clark has been terrorized
What has obviously escaped Clarke is that the US today is, in particular to several Muslim countries, the Nazi Germany of yesteryears.
When fascist let their hair down, they say the darndest things.
The powers that be are lucky that the attack in Chattanooga was against government personnel rather than private contractors. Had the attacks targeted corporate entities of the military-industrial complex, public reaction would probably have been quite different.
Notice how Mr. Clark made no mention of this blonde-haired-blue-eye devil who killed all this people in their own church? Roof is a true poster child for which Clark could made the strongest argument.
Or that NAVY yard shooter with ELF carved into his assault tifle? The FBI spent years infiltrating right wing racist groups. Thats where Mike German earned his wings. I’m the grandson of a blind swedish evangelical baptist minister and am in full posession both (blonde blue) those recessive traits. Nobody was entrapping Mr Clark. Nobody was carefully grooming him to be arrested before performing a false flag terrorist attack.
He was just a messed up white boy with a bad haircut who didnt see african american men as equals. This also made him uncomfortable competing with brothers for feminine companionship in an open dating pool. Given all this background the fact he focused his rage on the african american parishioners of local church is lost in me.
Yep. Just like they do in Russia.
The time machine, it keeps pinging and telling me that you’re way overdue to make your return to your Cold War 80s parallel timeline. What shall I tell it?
Open Letter to Fascist Former Brigadier General Wes-lie Kanne
Dear Wes-lie:
What this nation really needs is a concentration camp for fascists like you and your colleagues, retired and corporate advisors and those still active at the Pentagon, NSA and CIA, as well as the private contractors hired to assist these government US fascists aligned with corporate donors, to the detriment of interests important to the majority of US citizens! It is thanks almost solely to people like you and your fellow fascists, whose terrorist and imperialist actions have virtually bankrupt the nation, while destroying every vestige available for US citizens to rise in american society, that we have such economic disparity between those who do virtually all the work in this country, irrespective of the claims made by Mutt Rummey and USA Jub or is it Jub USA, and those who command vast sums of money with little or no meaningful effort.
At few other times in Western world history have the people of a nation suffered so fully at the hands of its political leaders and its military leaders. Toward the end of Emperor Bonaparte’s regime in the early 1800s, his imperial efforts so taxed the revenue of France, reportedly 80% went to the military, and his Grand Armee had so heavily decimated French families that the decline of his empire was assured. Later Germany had a leader who twice led that country into disaster as a result of its imperialist greed! However, these efforts by Napoleon and Adolph pale to the accomplishments of the United States during its history.
You might do well to recall the words of Brigadier General Smedley Butler upon his retirement from service in 1931: “I spent 33 years in the Marines, most of my time being a high-class muscle man for big business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for Capitalism.” Butler fought every major war and minor skirmish for the US from the Spanish American War through World War I and beyond, receiving the Medal of Honor twice!
Puny and detrimental military leaders like yourself are not fit to carry on the traditions and valorous leadership skills Smedley Butler established as a military leader of this nation and certainly not competent to advise anyone on how this nation should proceed!
Sincerely,
Stuart MacGregor
California
Sieg Heil, general Fuhrer. Do the “internment” camps come with chimney’s?
Well said, laddie. Building these fascists camps would eliminate unemployment and the bells of prosperity would ring throughout the land.
Now, if you read the United States National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) .. a fella by the name of John McCain, aka United States Senator from Arizona, in 2012, slipped in NDAA 12, a Indefinite Detention Clause of American citizens, for nothing more then belligerent acts. no trial, no official charges, No due process. Incidentally, that Indefinite Detention Clause, has been renewed in every years re authorization of NDAA .. Not to mention Section 802 of the Patriot Act, which is now the Freedom Act ..
General Wesley Clark (Ret) is now calling for the Internment of “Unloyal” Americans.
What’s the Federal Government’s definition of:
-Belligerent
-Unloyal
Anyone who takes a stand in defense of the Constitution? Is considered “Radical”.
Anyone, who takes a stand against police brutality? Is considered to be “Radical”.
Basically, anyone who dare take a stand against tyranny .. Is considered to be “Radical” / “Belligerent” / “Domestic terrorist” …
Clearly, the Federal Government is at war with “We the People” ..
I agree with retired general dick for a head. Let’s lock the little bastards up. We can send them to the building in Chicago and force feed them Ensure up the chocolate speedway.
Make them stand up for the pledge of alegiance, three times a day.
Water board them until they sputter Lincoln wasn’t pro slave.
We have to bring them back… back into the great enormous cluster fuck.
They too can have the enjoyment that through a bully mentality and global hegemonic endurance. We the United States of Walmart. Can fuck up the whole Universe.
Little commie pinko, slime buckets… lock em up. Make em wear American flag jumpsuits with feeding hoses in their bums….the bums!
Sounds good to me. Let’s lock up every white male. Prevent another Charleston, Sandy Hook, Aurora, Columbine, Oklahoma City, the list goes on. Also, lock up those traitorous animals in the South who’s families also committed treason against the US. They betrayed the US once, their descendents would do it again.
So “young people who are alienated” are the pool of folks that we’re going to apply increased scrutiny and pressure upon. I wonder how they’ll react.
Exactly.
Ted,
Adversely.
I ask everyone who reads this to look up the conspiracy theory of FEMA camps that were set up during the Bush Administration. Another term is FEMA coffins. If the gov’t is always a step ahead, then the timing would have been perfect. Now that many ‘theories’ have come true like the spying on citizens, maybe this will be another. My guess is thatthis is leading to civil war. But, either way, FEMA camps and FEMA coffins. There are two videos Ive seen that come back to me. The camps had the barbed wire facing inward as to keep people in and they reside close if not on railways. There are two in the state of Colorado that exist in that manner. The barbed wire thing was the most curious, and I think is a clue. But see for yourself.
How about internment camps for politicians who swear an oath then sell our country out?
Brilliant!
Clark goes off the rails. But if Glenn is right (which I think he is) and attacks on military targets in the U.S. are just part of the same low-intensity conflict, then the Govt will be jailing people as they have already done. But how a ‘camp’ fits into this is beyond me. “Camps’ are for mass groups of prisoners, which can either be based on actual facts or anti-foreigner hysteria. The problem is there aren’t enough ISIS supporters to merit a ‘camp.’ Oh wait, we have Guantanamo already.
Clark’s comments parallel similar views of senior Obama officials (whom he probably interacts with). I saw an Army Field Manual dated in 2010 that prescribed these camps to house civilians and US military deserters. Why would they desert? Because they would refuse to fire on their own people. Remember Obama was mentored by Communist and Marxist radicals. Totalitarianism is their main attribute. If you do not think like them, you go to prison. Besides, if the US borders were secured and our immigration policies were tightened to drastically reduce the inflow of immigrants from Islamic countries and the third world generally, all these camps would not be necessary.
Way to throw a big softball MSNBC! Are you hoping to get in on the decision making of exactly who is labeled ‘Radicalized’? People standing up for the Constitution of the United States have been call radical at times. Do not jump on this guys band wagon. Stick with the Constitution if you know what it is.
Let’s start by locking up radical, war mongering, assholes from the Defense Department. It’s the only way we will ever have peace in the world.
This clown Clark belongs in jail, along with FBI COINTELPRO STASI. They have abused technology to spy on innocent US civilians. Used no-touch chemicals on them.
Tell yourself the US would never that.
MK ULTRA here by the CIA.
STASI scum.
Please don’t slander the STASI. They may have used unacceptably authoritarian methods in trying, ultimately unsuccessfully, to prevent capitalist counter-revolution, but they were not part of that counter-revolution.
read:
Wesley Clark’s internment proposal: The specter of military dictatorship
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/07/22/pers-j22.html
An aside to the article’s main point. This assertion was made without pointing to any independent proof:
Have you seen any proof that these practices in particular are actually part of the Jade Helm exercises? I ask without having made any assumptions or judgements about whether or not such activities are indeed happening. I ask because I think it irresponsible to make such an inflammatory statement without at least offering a link to proof.
Thanks for any enlightenment you may be able to provide.
Pedinska:
no enlightenment here, but my reading of the excerpt was slightly different than yours; specifically, the elaboration that “assassination, detention and internment of civilians are all being practiced” in Special Operations Command (rather than in Jade Helm 15)
Poor analogy — In WWII we had a declared war with German, Japan and Italy which allowed sympathizers to be labeled as an enemy. With ISIS we have no declared war (maybe we should), so to pick ‘sympathizers’ out could be arbitrary. I’m not saying its a bad thing but it could turn into a witch hunt.
How touchingly cute, that you think it’s necessary to “declare” a war for that action to be happening.
How would we know when a war against ISIS was concluded?
Actually, Clark did declare it a war against “this group of terrorists” (ISIS?)…
*Idk, if this is a ‘new’ war against ‘these terrorists’?
… and, to answer your question, the war on terror ain’t got no end, Mona.
ps. also, I think a 3,000-5,000 word essay from Glenn on the definition of ***war***, and whats it’s good for, would not be uncalled for given the U.S. is engaged in so many of them now.
Arbitrary. Hmmm. Could be…
That’s kind of wimpy. I vote we just mow ’em down with some pig blood drenched bullets. Every last one of them.
Oh, by Jingo!
I agree Muslims are anti American & it would be appropriate in fact if they shot Muslims connected with Isis & other terror groups it would be ok with me they are sadistic monsters that hate the US.
Mike. This is not a pro Neo-Nazi website. Your kind of evil belong somewhere else. Fuck back to Fox news.
The Japanese internment was shameful. Worse, it was based on a lie:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-japanese-americans-20110525,0,3517138.story
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/05/31/the-japanese-internment-and-the-betrayal-of-the-progressives/
Clark obviously does not know his precedent is such a weak reed. But he’d probably lock me up anyway.
No, I’m no ISIS spy (etc.) I was born an American and will die one. The trouble is, my country isn’t there any more, it’s been replaced by a rogue state.
But, This time and place it isn’t based on a lie, It is based on the actions of Muslims and their Cult Theology, That gives them the right to attack the Kafir and punish them because of a perceived insult against them, the Ummah, Mohammed , the Quran, and Allah, They do not need to have permission for anyone else, Thye can declare Jihad and then go out and murder anyone they wish.
Right you are bobfrommmosinee (if that is your real name). US DOJ and DoD approved wars of aggression based on fabricated intel and dronesassinations of children at wedding parties by semi-secular military personnel from air conditioned office stateside possess no such moral ambivalence as ‘permission’ from (redacted) was obtained from ‘unidentified’ (redaction notation) officials as part of a broadly unconstitutional policy sanctioned by secret (EO12333) OLC memos.
I was going to leave a comment along the lines of so many others here, something like “OMG Clark has gone off the rails, Oh, the outrage!!”
But something came up and I thought about it and now it occurs to me, Clark is simply reiterating 2008 Obama. Remember when Obama was going to “close” Guantanamo. Then Republicans and some Democrats and progressives were all outraged because, by “close Guantanamo”, Obama meant “move Guantanamo to mainland USA”.
Clark is simply reiterating long-standing aspirations of Obama and certain Democrats to move uncharged, non-convicts, held in Cuba, where they are one of the most embarrassing symbols of the war of terror, to a less conspicuous location in an American prison.
– “Obama administration moves to purchase empty Illinois prison that was once at the center of Guantanamo military prison controversy
The Obama administration has gone around Congress to buy an empty state jail once eyed for use in relocating Guantanamo Bay detainees — renewing GOP suspicion about its plans.
In 2009 President Obama set out to close the controversial military prison in Cuba and move prisoners to the Thomson Correctional Facility in Illinois. Congress slammed the door, outlawing the transfer stateside of foreign terrorists and insurgents.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/obama-prison-buy-reignites-gitmo-controversy-article-1.1173284
One of the more interesting comments I’ve read on this story JLocke. But the question remains then is the “closing” of Git (through the method you describe here) along with Clarke’s comments, a plan for expanding such facilities? -rather say than simply moving one such facility, Git, stateside. It seems that Clarke’s stated vision clearly answers the question.
He obviously has a new Boss, retired or not, wonder who it is.
LOL. The guys whose bright-bright idea is American internment camps should go first.
I mean they should pack up all their belongings, surrender all their real-estate, their cars and their citizenship status and go work for free in an American detention center indefinitely.
This is his idea he should stand by it. He should live it.
This old ghoul clearly has dementia.
Well, I guess then the first to go in the detention camp, head first, would be the people who break the constitution and put soldiers at risk. Bush Cheney would be great cell mates.
Question the bombing of children and endless useless war created by Generals like Clark and all his war pigs in the United Armed forces, and they will round us all up, monitor us 24 hours a day, put us in massive debt, drain our resources and smear our name for their profits and death games. Wait a minute..we are already basically living that.
Perverted, small penis, morons, who never grew up or knew how to be real warriors or Americans in the first place. The fantasize war like porno, and live to fight or beat their wives and families.
Just left a comment
Well, the General must long for the days when, Pres. Wilson had people jailed and or deported people for simply speaking freely against our entry into WWI, called the Great War before we knew we’d have to number them, I believe Emma Goldman was right. Wilson deported her to Russia while they were in the middle of their revolution. Clark is a reactionary Fucktard.
We have Jails for radicals who break laws. Internment is meant for people like Wesley Clark who are so insane as to not even know what our Constitution is about. Give an unstable man a few bars and stars and suddenly we have another little Hitler on our hands. I’m a conservative and a vietnam vet.
It seems he cares as long as it is “over there”. The minute it “happens” on our soil, then he submits to the fear campaign.
Mr. Clark is dangerous. Obviously Mr. Clark is not feeling well. He needs to stay retired. He needs a nice padded cell where he can’t harm himself or others. Japanese internment camps are a precedent all right, like the nazi concentration camps were. “NEVER AGAIN”.
” Retired general and former Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark on Friday called for World War II-style internment camps to be revived for “disloyal Americans.” ”
Way to go America! It is campaign season and everyone wants to be counted. Even those not running yet. It’s a zoo out there.
Talking of presidential campaigns, Clark’s views could resonate very well with Trump who now holds a strong 2nd position among his fellow Republicans running for office. And how I wish Trump gets elected ! ” What Iraq? There is no Iraq!” he declared recently on CNN. And if elected President, he will “…bomb the hell out of Iraqi oil fields…” and then give them all ” to Exxon ” ! Way to go !
With such brilliant plans, he is just the man to take this mess to its ultimate conclusion, all with the blessing of the American public that in the polls, apparently adulates him. And with Clark as his advisor, he would get the interment camps up and running faster than you could blink an eye. And a whole bunch of you in here, would have a new residence. Rent free. No grocery bills. No utility bills. Ain’t that cool? And if the polls in support of Trump are any indication, a lot of Americans would agree with their own internment.
And how blissful a state we will all be in! Smoke from the Iraqi oil fields casting a black cloud that would spell perpetual darkness for much of the world. What wonderful things that would mean for economies everywhere. And then Internment camps. Gulags. Concentration camps. Prison farms. Death camps. Detention camps. Killing fields. We will have it all!
And we could look back and say: “Oh, how far we have come! From Abu Ghraib, to Baghram, to Guantanamo; baby steps those were! And now, we are finally there! Our greatest American dream is finally here. ” And the world would surely thank us for it !
But the real question is this: What made Clark switch values? There usually is a very good reason…
“Way to go America! It is campaign season and everyone wants to be counted. Even those not running yet. It’s a zoo out there.”
Wesley Clark and Donald Trump are individuals with their own opinions. Neither one represents the beliefs of a significant number of the nearly 320 million people that now call themselves Americans. If you believe otherwise you are ill informed.
” Wesley Clark and Donald Trump are individuals with their own opinions. Neither one represents the beliefs of a significant number of the nearly 320 million people that now call themselves Americans. If you believe otherwise you are ill informed.”
I am informed by history which is seldom an ill-informer. Few of the 320 million Americans wanted the Iraq war either but it happened, because a few powerful Americans wanted it to happen. And it did. So yet Trump and Clark may have their opinions, but the opinions and wishes of a few translated into the Iraq catastrophe that we know it to be today.
Learn something from history kid.
i agree.lets put all radicals in prison, lets start with every goldman sachs employee, followed, by bill clinton, gw bush, g bush, obama, every employee at j.p. morgan, and every other mass murderer that killed millions in illegal wars. then lets move on to the NSA and CIA for their complicity in murdering JFK, MLK, Bobby Kennedy, and every other leader in the 60s and 70s, as well as their monumental spying on every United States citizen. The crimes are monumental, and this will take a long time, so lets get cracking!
Really no mention of the Klan or organizations that hound Americans because of color or beliefs. No just Americans that disagree with the Agenda. Watch as your freedoms erode right in front of your eyes.
Wesley Clark’s progressive background raises the specter that he’ll follow the Department of Homeland Security’s lead once elected to any position of power and bait-and-switch to incarcerating American citizens for political views which he and DHS would like to criminalize.
American citizens need to stand together on this, for once the First Amendment is trashed because Wesley Clark doesn’t like what other Americans have to say, our right to speedy trial and to all the other protections against arbitrary confinement will go next.
Wesley Clark would be much happier in Russia. Hope he considers going where his ideas are already law.
Muslims collect money for a children’s hospital:
http://www.cheofoundation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/TBT-Fall2013.pdf
“Muslims Raised Over $100,000 To Help Rebuild Black Churches In The South”, at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/muslims-raise-over-100000-to-help-rebuild-black-churches-in-the-south_55ad4be7e4b0d2ded39fac57?
Hopefully, this will be the leading news story on the major news networks today.
“Hopefully, this will be the leading news story on the major news networks today.”
Keyword being hope. The few times I check network news or CNN hoping for actual news, other than how Sweat broke out of prison or the next provocative utterance of Trump, I’m left disappointed. The priorities of TPTB are so out of whack with efforts to create a world of compassion for all. Where amassing wealth is NOT the goal, and having the biggest, baddest military is no longer a desirable goal. If this world breaks my heart, how much more must god be weeping?
“The comments were shockingly out of character for Clark, who after serving as supreme allied commander of NATO made a name for himself in progressive political circles.”
And what political persuasion was the president who interred his fellow Americans?
Interned or interred? I don’t know if that was deliberate or not, but it’s a great way to point out how this is as much of a life-or-death issue today as ever, so well done.
“Top Ten Ways Islamic Law Forbids Terrorism” by Juan Cole, at http://www.juancole.com/2013/04/islamic-forbids-terrorism.html
Four points:
1. Since most of the victims of violence that is committed by those who call themselves Muslims are Muslims, the religion of the victims count more than the religion of the violent ones.
Therefore, if one wants to stereotype Islam, it’s more accurate to call it a religion of victims, and the victims do deserve acknowledgement of their religion and sympathy.
Malala is a Muslim and her religion of peace needs to be part of the conversation too.
2. A religious or a non-religious path will not yield peace unless, and until, its adherents interpret and apply it through the higher self, instead of through the lower self.
I have listed the attributes of the higher and the lower self often. So I don’t need to repeat them here.
3. It’s not that difficult to notice that the political situation is an important piece of the puzzle. By focusing on religion takes the attention away from the underlying political causes of violence.
4. It’s not that difficult to refute some people’s claim that it’s the religion of Islam that is the primary cause of violence. All one needs to do it is to see if certain actions fit within the framework that has been set by Islam’s primary source, the Qur’an, or if they conflict that framework.
“if someone supported Nazi Germany at the expense of the United States, we didn’t say that was freedom of speech, we put him in a camp, they were prisoners of war.”
Except that never happened. The only people put in interment camps in the US were there because their eyes were too slanted and their skin was too yellow.
“Except that never happened. The only people put in interment camps in the US were there because their eyes were too slanted and their skin was too yellow.”
Factually incorrect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_German_Americans#World_War_II
“A total of 11,507 people of German ancestry were interned during the war. They comprised 36.1% of the total internments under the US Justice Department’s Enemy Alien Control Program.”
Ah, the viperous troll omits a most salient fact:
Louise, do try to keep up. The adults are discussing the atrocity of interning U.S. citizens.
You are, again, embarrassing yourself.
The factually incorrect claim I was responding to – that “The only people put in interment camps in the US were there because their eyes were too slanted and their skin was too yellow” – is demolished by presenting even *1* German American or Italian American citizen interned during WWII. There were far more than that:
http://www.foitimes.com/gasummary.htm
http://expelledgermans.org/germaninternment.htm
http://encyclopedia.densho.org/German_and_Italian_detainees/
You sometimes truly do sound as dumb as a box of rocks.
We need a German-American camp. We’ll just set a trap. We’ll send cocktail notices to all the Hydra Klan with their euro-society entitlement papers up-to-date. Advertise separate “entertainment” rooms for the men complete with hookers and coke as stolen from Meixcan cartels (so they can chuckle and think they won something), bottle service and limos. When they show up, just draw down the gates. Put them in boxes and send them to central Sudan. They’ll make it. No one will miss them wandering around out there, the color of half-boiled Maine lobsters. Their new job will be in “dune redistribution”. The only job they get- Granular quartz accountant. Good luck!
No, it’s not. Some 75,00 Japanese-Americans were rounded up and put into internment camps. The numbers of European-Americans interned were smaller by many magnitude — the reason is, as Maximum Overtroll said, that their skin was yellow and they looked different from us.
And now Gen. Clark proposes to do the same to others who again do not usually look like us and who practice a different religion.Maximum Overtroll’s point is indeed solid.
“No, it’s not. ”
Yes, it is. To demonstrate that a claim of the form “X never happened” is not true, it is sufficient to produce 1 (one) instance of X.
You are – again – showing that you suffer from some serious comprehension issues when it comes to understanding even the most basic logic.
You should really ask for your money back from that kindergarten where you got your Thinking 101 License, sweetie.
Sure, and if *I* had been arguing that “X never happened,” you’d have a point, but your hand-waving is a ploy to detract from my actual argument. And that argument is, again:
Taking Maximum Overtroll’s rhetoric literally as you do is unsophisticated nonsense ; the essential argument s/he makes is supported by the gross disparities in internment rates of citizens who were Japanese-American on the one hand, and those who were citizens hailing from Europe on the other; their internment rates were different by many orders of magnitude.
You *do grasp this Louise, because you are not an idiot. (Which is how I know, contrary to what others have claimed, that you are not Louise Mensch; she’s a clinical moron.)
Maximum Overtroll
Sounds like the name of a noxious light-rock band that produces mostly muzak. ;-}
@ Louise Cypher.
“Except that never happened. The only people put in interment camps in the US were there because their eyes were too slanted and their skin was too yellow.”
Factually incorrect.
Might help if can pull your head out of your arse.
Overtroll=Except of course for the bankers such as Rockefeller and granddaddy Prescott Bush who greatly profited from both sides of the war.
You are wrong , some ethnic Germans (US-citizen) were interned (look it up in Wikipedia)
the numbers were low and there was due process, but some were interned
Does Clark believe his own (seriously out to lunch) rhetoric or is he trying to score political points by pandering to an audience? Both? Neither?
The amount of crazy being passed off as reasonable by ostensibly “respectable” people continues to climb. The absurdity level of already crazy views held by the citizenry (absolutely not limited, btw, to extremist GOP loons…partisan Dems and “progressives” are well represented in crazy land) continues to expand.
The 90s seemed quaintly sane (relatively) compared to the asylum this place has become since late 2001. The outside world isn’t much better.
It seems increasingly unlikely that this nation and the Western world will return to an even keel without first going through some sort of catastrophic breakdown.
“leaves it in smoldering ruins”
Vary gud LousySyphullus hunnee, ur now speekin like teh Ward of Gawd.
Sew LousySyphullus hunnee itz pussible Palestinians wil smiteth Zion unles thay kan flea onn kamels. Thay ar sic uf the smoak and smowldering rubbal don u no.
Sweet-cheeks, I have *no idea* why a spelling-challenged person like yourself thinks that an atheist would care about some dumb quotes from a book of Jewish fairy-tales.
Trouble is, there are two religious groups that do take these fairy tales to heart, let’s call them Ease Rail-lites and Even Jellicles, and they inhabit certain contentious areas near the Jordan and Potomac rivers. They seem to have some influence.
LouseySyphullus hunnee thoas buggs in n yer bra ne kausin delsuhiums agin don u no. Jooisch ferry tails ar tru Ward of Gawd like teh Quorumn isz. Teh both teh same LouseySypullus hunnee.
Iff yew doant ghet tha schot uf peennicilium vary sune hunnee yer brane wil wrot awl aweigh an yew wil bee inn dipers don u no.
Standard childs play to attack spelling when you cant attack the facts presented it standard internet BS today you are busted troll please leave
Clark didn’t say it. His one tweet demolition of this entire blogosphere hysteria – and especially this silly article – leaves it in smoldering ruins, like some Hamastan terrorist infrastructure site after a nice visit from air
Your understanding of these things is really quite simplistic. Of course Clark never uttered the word “Muslims” or “internment”. Discipline is a signature characteristic of the military, and one does not rise to the level he has by being undisciplined. As I noted in a comment below, he did litter his little speech with sufficient dog whistles for careful listeners to hear that which you choose to ignore. To whit:
The first bolded bit is clearly a reference to immigrants, as is the second. They should, instead of feeling aggrieved to the point of being led astray, i.e. being radicalized, count their blessings here.
He goes on to specify,
These are words I have seen you write in this space. The only group of people you and others using this terminology reference, repeatedly and with extreme prejudice, are Muslims. Even if you aren’t smart enough to realize this, Wesley Clark is.
He is also, as his pursed lip tut-tutting on twitter clearly exemplifies, a liar of the first order.
Apologies for any confusion at this freestanding comment. It was actually intended as a response to Louise Cypher’s comment below at July 21 2015, 10:58 a.m. Although it might be a good idea to have it here as an independent refutation of the claim I see surfacing periodically that Wesley Clark didn’t know he was whistling a tune that elicits responses in the ears of some dogs, but not others.
Addendum: the ability to link to individual comments seems to no longer be an option. It would be nice if that could be restored in the next iteration of improvements. Thanks for consideration of this request.
“Apologies for any confusion at this freestanding comment.”
O sancta simplicitas. It’s not you, dear, it’s the person who deleted the comment you were replying to.
I see. So you do admit to saying it. Good. My comment stands as written and your scrubbed idjiocy stands alongside it.
Aside to Maz or whomever is deleting here: I don’t understand why that comment was removed. By taking down simpleton statements like that you deprive us of the opportunity to refute it and show it for the bullshit that it really is. I hope you will lighten up and let this exchange stand.
“your scrubbed idjiocy”
Calm down dear. Your spelling suffers when you start shaking :)
Steady as a rock. I just like to borrow words I think fit well with the circumstances, even if they aren’t necessarily recognized by the dictionaries currently in fashion.
Would you like to now address the substance of my refutation of your original comment and Wesley Clark’s squirming attempts to avoid consequences for his own ill-advised musings? Or would you prefer to continue wriggling like a hooked worm?
“I just like to borrow words I think fit well with the circumstances, even if they aren’t necessarily recognized by the dictionaries currently in fashion.”
Haha, oh dear. How embarrassing.
Almost makes one feel sorry for you.
Almost makes one feel sorry for you.
There’s a song out that relates how that makes me feel. The applicable lyrics go like this:
Stay classy.
“Clark didn’t say it. His one tweet demolition of this entire blogosphere hysteria – and especially this silly article – leaves it in smoldering ruins, like some Hamastan terrorist infrastructure site after a nice visit from air”
I can’t find this paragraph in any of the posts on here. Looks like you would fit *perfectly* in this “invent a quote” ” journalism”.
You are correct, though it’s strange because I’m fairly certain that I copied and pasted it from a comment of yours.
No worries though, we can replace it with this, which you did write:
He did not say it. Too bad “Mr.” “Journalist” here isn’t as fond of updates as Mr. Greenwald is:
The rest applies exactly as written and it is noted that you chose not to respond to it.
“it is noted”
An actual LOL. Thank you for that.
In these dark days of Muslim-perpetrated atrocities worldwide – almost 3000 innocent dead this Ramadan only, as documented here http://www.thereligionofpeace.com – one needs a good laugh now and again.
Given that Muslims outnumber Jews by about 100 to 1, you would expect killings of non-Muslims by Muslims to outnumber killings of non-Jews by Jews by the same ratio. They don’t! In fact, if you (correctly, IMO) assign politically powerful U.S. Zionist Jews at least 50% of the responsibility for the deaths caused by U.S. sanctions and war against Iraq, Muslim killings of non Muslims can barely keep up even in absolute numbers.
Looks like you would fit *perfectly* in this “invent a quote” ” journalism”.
The fact that you are not able to recognize – and acknowledge – words you wrote less than 10 minutes prior to impugning me for quoting them, speaks to one of two things:
1. Selective and/or short-term memory impairment or,
2. Ad hominem in service of avoiding substantive arguments in refutation of your assertion.
Your subsequent admission that the quote was accurate, but from a comment that was deleted, tells me that there is still some tiny crumb of honesty left, even if it is swirling down the drain that encompasses the cesspool of lies you distribute so blithely here.
You should rescue and cultivate it. It might yet grow into something worthy of sharing in spite of the toxic bullshit currently burying it. As any gardener worth her salt knows, stranger weeds have grown…
pretty shocking comments from someone who ought to know better especially since WWII history shows our government ended up apologizing to the Japanese Americans placed in interment camps( and years later paid reparations to them or their heirs )while during the war their children fought bravely for the allies in Europe— his comments are historically flawed, wrong and out of character
The land theft continues apace from the Zionist State of Israel: It wants the small West Bank village of Susiya and is to simply take it by force from the Palestinians who live there. Colonial-settler Jews want the land, so.
For once, the United States is objecting to Israel’s proposal to steal yet more land:
God forbid we talking about gun violence and the horrific consequences. Far easier to just lock up anyone that we deem ‘radical’. Scary thought.
One might reasonably wonder if Clark has had the ingenuity to conceive of segregated camps for the internment of all those many US radicals who more or less routinely rush off to fight on behalf of the IDF whenever a conflict erupts in the Middle East involving white supremacist Israel until then they return back home to pick up the pieces in their everyday lives @ the USA. Surely a large proportion of such zionist fundamentalist extremists insist upon consuming only kosher foods — maybe even on mikvah baths, too. So there is an important economic consideration here at play — the idea of lumping all such food fetishists together — which Clark ought properly and responsibly to recognize.
It seems we are moving into an era some can say something outrageous and then get media attention no matter how ludicrous . If you want to raise your profile, attract the media spot light just make some over the top statement and you can bathe in the warm glow of national attention. There is no real down side because a tiny group of extremists will come to your defense. And the media will give such a person attention because controversy lures people in and makes money for those in the media who give a platform for extremist views.
” some can say something outrageous and then get media attention no matter how ludicrous”
He did not say it. Too bad “Mr.” “Journalist” here isn’t as fond of updates as Mr. Greenwald is:
https://twitter.com/GeneralClark/status/623277716842770432
“Never said “muslim”, “internment” or called for new camps. Blogosteria. See: http://www.msnbc.com/thomas-roberts/watch/more-security-at-military-centers–486498883655 “
A cursory examination of the responses to that tweet are instructional. It really is quite easy to look at the condemnation implicit in his own words. Very few people are being taken in by that lie. That you are one of them is…telling.
Hey, Louise, why’d he say “new camps” and not just “camps”?
Thrift. A very welcome character trait for any leader.
Thrifty from a financial standpoint, sure, but not a wording standpoint. ;)
I can’t help but wonder if someone didn’t recently talked to Alzheimer’s Wes about assisted living facilities…
I remember when Clark “just found out i’m Jewish.”
Around the time of Kosovo..
This pretty much seals the deal.
Jonathan Turley, this morning:
http://jonathanturley.org/2015/07/21/wesley-clark-calls-for-new-american-internment-camps/
“The sad truth is that our greatest wounds as a nation have been self-inflicted. It is the very danger described most famously by Justice Louis Brandeis in Olmstead:
Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding. “
read this article from 2002 by John Pilger:
The great charade | As the West prepares for an assault on Iraq, John Pilger argues that ‘war on terror’ is a smokescreen created by the ultimate terrorist … America itself
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jul/14/usa.terrorism
who is the terrorist? is the US government at war with terrorism, as imperial policymakers and propagandists claim, or is the US government itself the greatest purveyor of terrorism and falsely using the “war on terrorism” language to conceal the US capitalist class’ quest for world domination?
See:
Syria Becomes the 7th Predominantly Muslim Country Bombed by 2009 Nobel Peace Laureate
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/23/nobel-peace-prize-fact-day-syria-7th-country-bombed-obama/
The Third Reich doesn’t even come close to the bloody record of the US government.
United States bombings of other countries (a post-WWII list)
http://williamblum.org/chapters/rogue-state/united-states-bombings-of-other-countries
The Nazis WISHED they had the record of the US government and US capitalist class. Take a look at this list of US-sponsored coups (and it’s an incomplete list, just from post-WWII):
http://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list
Wesley Clark is deliberately promoting lies. He knows that the US policymakers were not ideologically opposed to Naziism. He knows that the US government’s involvement in WW2 had nothing to do with “our” supposed goodness or the US officials’ purported commitment to human rights, democracy, etc. His premise is a lie, and he’s deliberately invoking the Nazis because the Nazis (not the British Empire or the US government) represents in the public imagination the gold standard for Evil.
35 Countries Where the U.S. Has Supported Fascists, Drug Lords and Terrorists
http://www.alternet.org/world/35-countries-where-us-has-supported-fascists-druglords-and-terrorists
Fuck Wesley Clark.
General Wesley Clark calls for putting “disloyal” Americans in internment camps
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/07/21/clar-j21.html
So the answer to extremism is more extremism? Haven’t we’ve seen by now that that shit doesn’t work? Oh, wait. It doesn’t work for the man on the street but it works just fine for those who saw a way of profiting out of war and extremism. The war on drugs. The war on terrorism. Fuck the idea of going to the roots of these problems. No fucking way. Too much money to be made out of security. We must privatize jails and privatize all forms of security. That way more of our fascist buddies can make more and more money. Nothing wrong with our system. You want equality, believe in your god or what the fuck ever, but your sure as shit is not going to get it here, buddy. With us it’s survival of the fittest. Those who have. And you are not it.
a reminder.
Michael Parenti says, “[W]e should stop saying ”we” do this and ”we” do that, since we really mean policymakers within the national security establishment who represent a particular set of class interests. Too many otherwise capable analysts have this habit of referring to ”we.” It is a shorthand way of saying ”U.S. national security state leaders” but it is a misleading use of a pronoun. The point is of more than semantic significance. Those who keep saying ”we” are more likely to treat nations as the basic unit of analysis in international affairs and to ignore class interests. They are more likely to presume that a community of interest exists between leaders and populace when usually it does not. The impression left is that we are all responsible for ”our” policy, a position that takes the heat off the actual policymakers and evokes a lot of misplaced soul-searching by well-meaning persons who conclude that we all should be shamed and saddened by what ”we” are doing in the world.”
There are those who argue the reverse: that “we” must continue to use the word to keep alive the notion that “we” could do something to stop this. But not only do these policies emanate from the “deep state” where “we” can’t even see, let alone control what goes on., but none of the candidates “we” are offered have not already been co-opted. In short, Brennan doesn’t work for Obama—Obama works for Brennan.
Harper’s has a good summary of this dynamic: http://harpers.org/archive/2015/06/what-went-wrong/
It’s amazing how many trolls there are on this site now. I guess the reporting is hitting a raw nerve. It would be nice if there was an alternative forum for discussion, one that is moderated to a degree. The trolling is currently destroying the value of this site. Which i guess is it’s goal.
“an alternative forum for discussion, one that is moderated to a degree”
LOL. So the degree here – where you can’t post links to a website which merely transcribes Muslim own historical writing about the murderous life of their so-called prophet, or to a website merely taking score of the thousands of Muslim-perpetrated Islam-based attacks worldwide – is not enough for your delicate sensibilities?
If it’s not obvious trolling then fine, people can express their opinions. But if it’s vitriolic commentary aimed at destroying the medium (this is illustrated with a descent into ad hominem attacks between commenters and racist slurs) i think some kind of moderation could help to improve it.
My sensibilities are not that delicate and i can recognize a spectrum shift of commentary from genuine debate toward attempted destruction of a medium. I can also understand some sites firstlook.org may not want to link to .. for many possible reasons. But even that does not stop real, genuine debate does it?
A minimal level of moderation *does happen here. In fact, I think Greenwald has booted a previous “Louise Cypher” account, but she just made another. Mr. Hussain expelled a neo-Nazi from this space yesterday.
The level of troll infestation seen in his thread is rather new and we’ll see what policies the site might develop to deal with that. Glenn Greenwald hates the rigid, smothering moderation regime at the Guardian as much as any of us and would never want that. But he’s also not going to permit the discussions here to be polluted beyond recognition by trolls. Mr. Hussain seems inclined that way as well.
“I think Greenwald has booted a previous “Louise Cypher” account, but she just made another.”
You are – as always – wrong.
I don’t think so — he at least deleted you. You were disappeared for some time thereafter.
“I don’t think.”
FTFY
I know for a fact that Glenn “at least deleted” Louise Cypher in a thread where I posted a reply to a comment of “hers,” which had been deleted by the time I posted my reply–or maybe very shortly thereafter.
FYI, Kitt & Mona — Asked on June 14, 2015 via Twitter to simply “confirm/deny speculation @ The Intercept (Comments) … whether or not U R Louise Cypher …”, former UK Tory MP Louise Mensch, by now @ NYC, tweeted back that same day (with quite something of a non sequitur): “I posted a comment but I guess he [GG ?!] didn’t allow it on the blog. So much for transparency”.
So “moderated to a degree” is too much for your delicate sensibilities?
If you weren’t obsessed with your “facts” to the point of madness, I’m pretty sure your posts wouldn’t be deleted. If they actually are being deleted.
Glenn appears to have deleted one of “Louise’s” comments a few weeks ago. “She” then was gone for a bit.
There are no rules against linking to particular web sites. If it’s not illegal, one can post it as far as I know and have experienced.
No, censorship is never a good thing. Make the so-called “trolls” look stupid. That’s all that is needed.
Both the Guardian and Salon have made themselves virtually useless through their censorship. The Intercept should welcome everyone and let the very well spoken and intelligent readers on this site deal with the trolls.
Some so called trolls are not even actual people. Other so called trolls are coming from organized and purposeful infestation outlets. Making either type of those sorts of trolls “look stupid” gains nothing as far as slowing their input down or causing them to alter their approach. The robot trolls are impervious. The hired trolls are also impervious or become so with experience. The most foolish and unintelligent actual human trolls, such as Louse Cypher, who are probably trolling on their own, have no soul and so consequently have no sense of looking stupid or coming off as ignorant and ugly.
LOL. Coming from a single-digit-IQ Israel-obsessed moron who *never once* managed to make a single substantive counter-argument to any of the posts on here, that is truly rich.
Now shut up and play us some banjo.
*Utterly* amazing and *utterly* wonderful to behold what former UK Tory MP Louise Mensch has to say for herself when writing under a nom de plume. Does such an *utter utter* Class A botoxic moron really belong in New York City — and in modern post-Snowden America? — C’mon Louise, I dare you, tell me I’ve got it all wrong (?).
@ Ted
“And Mona provides a valuable service offering cleanup on aisle 4.”
Yes, but even the “maggots” of the Internet have First Amendment rights, so the Intercept has a duty to allow them a venue.
I suggest that the Intercept create an Entertainment section and move their posts there. Think of the fun! After a hard days work, one could go to the Entertainment section and engage in verbal carnage with the trolls in one place! – Free Speech on steroids – great for stress and tension release.
Um, no. The Intercept has no such “duty” to permit anyone, including those deemed trolls, to comment in its space. If it wished to, The Intercept could close down comments altogether.
That said, the people who founded this site are particularly supportive of robust exchange of ideas — with emphasis on ideas. They don’t much care about civility and tolerate illiberal opinions about women, gays or racial minorities. But. Trolls will not be permitted to post what the authors deem to be crap in excessive volume. Glenn Greenwald has never permitted that and Mr. Hussain doesn’t seem inclined to do so either.
While I agree with you that leaving objectionable comments (and commenters) in place is preferred, because nothing indicts them so thoroughly as their own words and those of the folks who offer succinct and timely pushback, this statement offers an incorrect interpretation of the First Amendment,
Yes, but even the “maggots” of the Internet have First Amendment rights, so the Intercept has a duty to allow them a venue.
The Constitution’s Bill of Rights are actually limitations on actions the government may take against it’s citizens:
Additional discussion of the Bill of Rights by it’s proponents make it clear that the objective was protection of citizens from their government:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights
And so on. I will note that I believe that while the moderation policy here at TI – which, while not published, has been clearly elucidated by folks who are familiar with Greenwald’s policies at other forums where he has written in the past – is clearly one of the most lenient to be found, it is not without limitations. And TI as a private, non-governmental entity is clearly within it’s rights to enforce any policy it chooses to create for this space, unlimited by the tenets of the First Amendment, which are expressly limitations on governmental abuse of rights.
How many camels got screwed by prophet mohammed?
Don’t know about camels but he sure did murder a lot of folks:
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Supported_by_Muhammad
“How many camels got screwed by prophet mohammed?”
hunnee u knot ned too bee jellus.
i haev a tok wiht Myrna. mebbe we kan rent a camul foor u too skrew sow u kan wurk thru u envius nachur inna moer helthy mannur don u no.
“How many camels got screwed by prophet mohammed?”
Filtered or unfiltered?
Go watch Max Blumenthal’s new documentary: “Je ne suis pas Charlie.” It’s outstanding and also deeply alarming. France really is poised on the verge of fascism — ironically, the “Je suis Charlie” movement has led to a severe contraction in freedom of speech and of religion. Moreover, the fascist thugs of the Jewish Defense League are tacitly endorsed by the French police and protesting against Israel lands one in court — it is banned.
My only reservation is the film’s brief characterization of the Charlie Hebdo magazine, which is unfair and inaccurate. But the film is not about that publication in any event: it’s about the socio-political movement that is “Je suis Charlie,” which is essentially fascist.
53 minutes: http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=14293#.Va1yxCcaGb0.twitter
“…….Muslims who were among migrants trying to get from Libya to Italy in a boat this week [April 19, 2015] threw 12 fellow passengers overboard — killing them — because the 12 were Christians……..Italian authorities have arrested 15 people on suspicion of murdering the Christians at sea, police in Palermo, Sicily, said……”
That is fascism, hate and bigotry all rolled into one Mona.
Ah! Craig the Whataboutery King spouts forth again. “Nevermind that anti-Muslim animus fueled by violent Jewish thugs is causing a Western democracy to become fascist. Lets talk instead about a dozen Muslim refugees who threw some others off a boat.”
pfffft
An update on Glenn’s Gawker story. Seems there’s been resignations there.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/20/gawker-editors-quit-removed-post
this really bothers me…… He was very clear that this would be for “radicalized” Americans and those who are “disloyal” to the country. I’m positive these camps couldn’t only be for Muslims. Maybe in the beginning, but not always. Maybe those FEMA camps will finally be put to use… This is flat out disgusting.
“Maybe those FEMA camps will finally be put to use… This is flat out disgusting.” – Rachael
On the one hand, this FEMA Camp nonsense is unbelievable and ‘disgusting’ because it’s been readily disproved time and again.
Whatever the case – I’m appalled as an American citizen at being in a country that contains both all too many ill-informed citizens who believe thoroughly refuted garbage such as the FEMA camps existence – and astonishingly – to also now have a not previously completely whacked-out military official espouse the reinstatement of a thoroughly shameful, immoral, illegal, and discredited methodology for dealing with American citizens that have (maybe) done nothing more than appear to think something (or look or act differently enough) to have their rights removed, their independence taken away, and to then be hauled off and segregated from society, all due to the fear-mongering of pseudo-intellectuals and idiotic past-presidents and other government officials.
This is not as viscerally stomach-turning and repugnant as watching victims of the British elite and powerful pedophile network on the latest Australian 60 Minutes show, some who openly espouse ‘consensual’ sex with a 10 year old child – but it’s disgusting and unacceptable for a whole range of other reasons that we must all push-back against as a society, nonetheless.
Pushing this to the top again (hello, second/third shift!):
“We have got to identify the people who are most likely to be radicalized. We’ve got to cut this off at the beginning,” Clark said.”
Just wanted to add, before I get away from ‘current affairs’ for the night — this is easily done by making vast statements such as his, then looking at who responds to statements like this and how. Mass encouragement and incitement is no less incitement just because it is done en-masse.
Stirring up the fish often precedes rather unsavoury outcomes from the fish’s perspective, yes, but sometimes the goal is also ‘stir up the fish’.
Yeah. Better to remain silent on this one or you might draw attention to yourself. Better to take this conversation off list. Maybe an encrypted chat.
Are you getting a bonus for this? You know, sorta like a ‘bounty’? Can I call you Dog (as in the Bounty Hunter, not the canine)? Or do you prefer Dawg? We should totally have a tea party, bro, but only if you split the bounty with me. It’d only be fair.
Well, it has finally happened. The Intercept comment section is becoming a magnet for Scumbag Trolls. Just read some of the comments here.
Before the Internet as we know it, there were bulletin board systems with discussion areas. Since we were all geeks, the discussions revolved around technologies, disruptive technologies – the likes of which raised eyebrows at Microsoft and IBM.
It didn’t take long for Microsoft and IBM to insert “Trolls” into our discussion groups. Their sole purpose was to completely disrupt our discussions. It got very nasty. It was originally called “FUD”. Definition: “Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt”. Google it. IBM was the first to use it decades ago. Then Microsoft perfected it to a science.
Certain US Government entities (with budgets that employ psychiatrist, psychotherapists, and related scumbags) have taken this science to a new dimension and are infecting discussion groups as this.
What this means is that the Intercept is hitting some nerves. And rightly so. Those nerves need to be shattered. However, the more nerves that are hit, the more Scumbag Trolls will show up.
When confronted with their bullshit, Scumbag Trolls will always cry “Freedom Of Speech”. And rightly so. Therefore, while it may be difficult, it behooves us to treat them as “Invisible”.
You beat me to the punch. Like ants to spilled sugar, Mr. Hussain’s piece really drew them in.
Good. It’s pretty easy to navigate around their weak drivel. And Mona provides a valuable service offering cleanup on aisle 4.
“Mr. Hussain’s piece really drew them in”
*chuckle*
The only thing I’m interested in being drawn in by “Mr.” Hussain’s jihad-justifying rants both here and on twitter are security services.
Let’s hope they are monitoring him. He sounds really, really angry, maladjusted and malcontent. He could blow up any moment.
“He could blow up any moment.”
LousySyphullus hunnee yew haf blow jabs onn yer mined butt Mr. Hussain woant dew taht four u. Wee awl no abut yer disseeze inn itz tershiary faze an beesieds hee doant swing taht way don u no.
Ur dellooshums ar vary sevear iff yew aksing journawlusts four sirvices taht isz Mabel’s perview. Go ghet sum assithromycin LousySypullus hunnee an I wil prey four yew. Allways keap inn mined –
Yew ar deafinnitlee shapen inn inniquitee LousySyphullus hunnee. Now goe an sin know moar!
Your spelling is *atrocious*, dear. Obviously attempting to type through your burqa again.
The internment camp for “radicalized Americans” already exists.
It’s called the White House.
“shockingly out of character for Clark”
Character is a tricky thing with politicians. Consider FDR and the Japanese as a case in point. (The only reason there were no internment camps for Germans was there were simply too many to round up.)
Actually, your facts are a little off. There were internment camps for Germans and Italians, many of whom were American citizens. In December 1941, my great-grandfather, a German citizen and immigrant in the mid ’30s, was interned in a camp called Fort Lincoln in North Dakota. Thankfully it was only for a few months, but there were thousands of others interned for years, some involuntarily repatriated to their home countries after the war. It’s an ugly chapter in our history and one that affected more people than only Japanese-Americans.
No, actually it’s WHOA and woe… upon watching the vid… Spoo-KKK- ay… Perfectly(?) reasonable(?) people transformed into Nazis, Crusaders, Inquisitors… Zombies… instantly, as if flung, hurled, hurtled backwards through time by some powerfully unseen darkness… Is this what Truth In Advertising means; that if ya persist long enough in some crazy-assed messaging, relentlessly, that all of a sudden everybody just folds and says “Sure, I’m ALL about the Gestapo, Stasi, Mossad, security state thang, so let’s lock ’em all up, whoever they may be…??? “I Pledge” etcetera? Where do I NOT sign, puleez…Again, and, perhaps, and perhaps not obviously, Mad Cow has made much further inroads than well, acknowledged…
Whoa, whoa, WHOA, Wesley: Wadn’t it you just a few years ago outing all them career hellbent diggers away in the Five Sides Of Gone crypt; them all schemin’ on Libya, Syria, Yemen, Egypt and such? Somethin’ up yer level of anxiety, recently? Didja get an invite back to the game, the table? The stakes and winnings suddenly more interesting? What, really, now?
And the WaPo was just commenting today (front page) that US agencies was having trouble identifying “self-radicalized” Americans. Imagine that—the FIB can’t tell what people are thinking without establishing a pattern of contact with “bad people.”
Don’t worry, bumbling national police force. Clark’s got your back. All they need to do is sweep people up into camps and they will radicalize one another. And the FIB will never run out of :suspects.”
The official response to radicalization, not only in the US but also throughout Europe, is fundamentally flawed. Muslim radicals should be allowed to travel to Syria or Iraq, or wherever, to participate in their holy wars. However, once they have borne arms for any other entity, their citizenship should be revoked. Everybody then gets what they want: they get to fight for their beliefs, and we are rid of them. BTW I think the exact same policy should apply to those who take up arms for Israel.
I couldnt agree with you more, but like most things these days where Israel is involved there is this claim that a double standard is OK, because its ISrael and if you say different you are instantly called Hitler
Get back to a Constitutional Republic fast!
It’s not your fault – your teachers and elders did not bring you up properly. Please start life all over again and maybe you will find it’s not such a bad place after all.
This term “radicalized”, like “terrorist” can always be cast in an unintended direction. Like all slippery slopes, there is no firm threshold. Let’s say we use a robot to kill a bunch of innocent people in overthereestan, and a person who happens to be muslim with brown skin says “that’s not right, that should be stopped”. This person risks ending up in camp.
And what happens when a given white American finds a concience within themselves and says that the industrial slaughter of human life so the “defence” companies can get paid is a bad thing. Do they risk being painted as a sympothiser? Could we call that person “radicalized” also.
The bottom line with all this media brain washing is the people in charge want to remain that way – and all the NSA spying and the turning tide on “locking up troublemakers” sets the stage to allow those in charge to get rid of anyone who would dare to stand up to them in any way, even peacefully through the democratic process.
Realize that dictators like Hitler and Sadam aren’t isolated examples of psychos who are hell bent on violently squashing any opposition to their rule. There are plenty more people just like them alive and well today. Many are actively climbing the ladder of power like those before them. Eventually someone will reach the top who will use all the traps in place to take over. Setting up the machinery of mass spying (even if done for the most benevloent reasons by a loving leader), and setting up a process whereby people can be “removed” for saying the wrong thing is an ABSOLUTE GUARANTEE that at some point in the future, another Hitler, Sadam, or worse will take control of that machinery.
The REAL terrorist is someone who has been “radicalized” into believing that it is okay to kill innocent people. The REAL terrorist is someone who has been “radicalized” into believing that it is okay to lock people up for merely having beliefs that strongly oppose the beliefs of those in power over them.
If someone is of risk enough to be taken away to a camp, then provide reasonable evidence to a public court and get a warrent. Then watch that person. When you catch that person actually consipiring toward an act of violence, arrest them, charge them, and allow a jury to find them guilty. Any idea that opposes this basic idea is in opposition to the constitution. Human beings have a _right_ to a trial by jury before being hauled away.
So well said. Gotta agree!
Get a fucking warrant, Mr. Clark. Each and every time. Your idea is atrocious, and you are simply no better than the rest of us Americans.
As Perry eloquently notes, you are a part of the problem, not a part of the solution.
Actually, goat raping was approved in the United States Declaration of Independence, in the phrase “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of a Happypenis”
I am glad the Intercept allows you the space to show your bigotry. Say what you will but your character is seen as the most banal of people.
You actually serve against your purpose of posting.
You show nothing but pure stupidity.
Post more so more will see you as you are.
A hateful creature of spite.
Well Tom. I have seen a lot of vile hatred from you so don’t believe for a minute you occupy some high road.
I occupy the low ground Craig. The bog Irish. From there I can see those perched on stolen ground.
I see you.
I have always seen you as you are.
Lower than you might imagine.
I dont imagine Craig, I know.
.
On a lofty craig the vulture sits.
From his excrement his mind does shit.
“We have got to identify the people who are most likely to be radicalized. We’ve got to cut this off at the beginning,” Clark said.”
Just wanted to add, before I get away from ‘current affairs’ for the night — this is easily done by making vast statements such as his, then looking at who responds to statements like this and how. Mass encouragement and incitement is no less incitement just because it is done en-masse.
Stirring up the fish often precedes rather unsavoury outcomes from the fish’s perspective, yes, but sometimes the goal is also ‘stir up the fish’.
Yes. Better to remain silent on this one or you might draw attention to yourself. Better to take this conversation off list. Maybe an encrypted chat.
*Yawn*.
You seem to have a lot of time on your hands and a weakness in the area of formal logic and/or informal reasoning that could use reparation. Since I know you’re going to miss me, and are going to have more time on your hands, might I suggest you check out this list of books: http://www.amazon.com/lm/R1NUJDJTBL4OAI/ref=cm_pdp_lm_title_1
So this would include the folks who honor the Confederate flag as well, right? Because the Confederate States of America was an entirely other nation.
Um,noooo –
I admit I find the confederate flag REPULSIVE. I do feel that it should not be flown in gov’t/public buildings or spaces. But no, I don’t see criminalizing the imo, misguided folks who honor it.
Yup, the slope can get very slippery. And supporting free speech is NOT easy, as so often we are called on to support the right of those to speak whose speech repels us. It’s not easy one bit. For example, I abhor hate speech. I WISH and PRAY folks wouldn’t express such awful views. Still…
I think that Perry above gave a great analysis…
And with all the mainstream media warnings of terrorist attacks over the 4th of July weekend, the fact of 8 black churches torched across the American south in the two weeks prior held no irony whatsoever for you?
I support free speech as well, but I do not support violence of any sort.
Please don’t directly embed YouTube vids. That embeds scripting and tracking from Google, YouTube, and YouTube’s image servers.
Tell me more. You know I dont like mondays.
Tell me more, you know I dont like Mondays.
But do you like Acca Dacca and/or the Oilz?
Oils
“U.S. Forces”
U.S. forces give the nod
It’s a setback for your country
Bombs and trenches all in rows
Bombs and threats still ask for more
Divided world the CIA
Who controls the issue
You leave us with no time to talk
You can write your own assessment
Sing me songs of no denying
Seems to me too many trying
Waiting for the next big thing
Will you know it when you see it
High risk children dogs of war
Now market movements call the shots
Business deals in parking lots
Waiting for the meat of tomorrow
Everyone is too stoned to start emission
People too scared to go to prison
We’re unable to make decisions
Political party line don’t cross that floor
L. Ron Hubbard can’t save your life
Superboy takes a plutonium wife
In the shadows of Ban the Bomb we live
Sing me songs of no denying
Seems to me too many trying
Waiting for the next big thing
It’s Tuesday in Australia. But it’s Monday in Hawai’i and Guam!
You are a fine fella, very useful.
Back to the embedded links, danger there I hear you say.
But part of my thing is to link to musical videos, and lyrics.
That good man Kitt also wants to know.
Fine then. Nena, “99 Luftballoons’ for you, in the original German.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsU8fRvTeCI
Someone once told me the luft balloons were condoms, fooled again I was.
Sorry, don’t click links.
If you’re referring to the ‘Slim Shady–Daniel Radcliffe’ video I linked, it isn’t a direct link to a youtube video. It’s a RollingStone article with the video inside of the article.
No, that wasn’t an embedded video. What Murtaza did up in the article was/is.
Thanks for the clarification.
Any time.
Dont click the links. That embeds scripting and tracking from Google, YouTube, and YouTube’s image servers.
I can’t tell if you’re trolling, or if you actually believe you know something about technology.
Most of the time I’m pretty sure the answer is ‘both’.
Mr. Hussain
“……Clark’s proposal (which his MSNBC interlocutor did not challenge him on) also appears to be based on the concept of targeting people for government scrutiny who are not even “radicalized,” but who the government decides may be subject to radicalization in the future…..”
This is a little deceptive. The full quote in context:
“…….“We have got to identify the people who are most likely to be radicalized. We’ve got to cut this off at the beginning. There are always a certain number of young people who are alienated. They don’t get a job, they lost a girlfriend, their family doesn’t feel happy here and we can watch the signs of that. And there are members of the community who can reach out to those people and bring them back in and encourage them to look at their blessings here……”
It’s clear that Clark was not thinking of interning anyone “before” they were radicalized. He goes on to say:
“……“So, if these people are radicalized and they don’t support the United States and they are disloyal to the United States, as a matter of principle fine……”
Again, he is clearly talking about radicalized individuals. However, the US is just going to have to live with the consequences of bombing ISIS. Sting operations, under cover police work and monitoring those that might kill Americans etc. are the best avenues to preventing future attacks. Internment camps are a really bad idea.
Considering that thousands of Muslims have joined ISIS from Europe to murder, execute and intimidate populations throughout the Middle East, one does have to wonder what drives individuals (especially Muslims) to want to murder innocent (primarily) Muslims. There must be a lot of “….very young, impressionable, disaffected, hapless, aimless, inept…” Muslims in Europe. It’s obvious that internment camps is the wrong avenue. Europe needs more social programs so that Muslims feel more at home.
Craig gets it wrong, again:
I think Clark was intimating that — but Hussain didn’t say he was. Hussain’s words, note the word I bold:
Fair enough Mona. But because Clark says “we”, that doesn’t necessarily mean the government. “We” can mean people in the Muslim community which he does suggest in the same paragraph. He definitely does not mean intern non radicalized Muslims, however – as you think.
Thanks.
I agree with you completely. Muslims are getting too much of conflicting advise from all sorts of people, including the Saudi royal family who are actually Jews (google and find – T/I rejects all comment with those links). People like Sufi Muslims who can give advise instead spend more time lecturing the hypochondriacs here. So they are a confused lot and engaged in killing their own people. We need to engage those disaffected folks in creative and meaningful ways and teach them all the good things in our sacred Constitution so that while refreshing our own failing memories we can do a world of good to others.
Yes, this is entirely out of context by Clark but entirely correct. This nation will be destroyed by enemies from within if we don’t take action soon to combat this government’s too soft treatment of “radicalized Muslims”–and this is a fact that will be proven in time. It’s really quite simple–radical Islam stands contrary to individual freedom and if you don’t support our Constitution and respect the freedoms that are guaranteed by that sacred document GET YOUR EFFING ASS BACK TO WHATEVER HOLE YOU CRAWLED OUT OF and if you were born here and espouse the backward, Stone age, cowardly, murderous tenets of radical Islam TAKE YOUR SORRY ASS OUT OF THIS COUNTRY AND GO LIVE IN THE HELLHOLE OF YOUR CHOICE. We neither want, nor need your backward ass, anti freedom crap here. And, before some knucklehead misreads my comment, I’m not talking about peaceful Muslims. This country was founded for those who wanted to freely practice their religion. But, if YOU want to impose Shari’a Law upon ME, YOU need to go–because that’s one battle you WILL lose.
So how long have you been having these violent persecution fantasies?
Attention: Benito Mussolini
Il Duce, if this nice person began posting in this vein quite liberally, do you feel the author should — in the spirit of free speech — allow it to continue to do so as it pleases? Let’s say its friends learn there is little moderation here, and come to join it in this advanced ratiocination — such that this prose takes up a quarter to a third of the commentary — is that something that should be permitted if one is in favor of free speech?
Time, place and manner, and all that. It’s beginning to look like Mr. Greenwald’s Neighborhood is getting cameos from the Monty Python section in the next set. I’m waiting to see if the Dirty Vicar, the Spanish Inquisition and Mrs. Premise and Mrs. Conclusion show up.
“……Il Duce, if this nice person began posting in this vein quite liberally, do you feel the author should — in the spirit of free speech — allow it to continue to do so as it pleases?…..”
You mean exactly like you Mona?
No Craig,l I’d never allow that to continue. And earlier today I complained here that an actual Nazi was flooding the place with antisemitic garbage, and Maz deleted him as I said I hoped he would.
“…….No Craig,l I’d never allow that to continue. And earlier today I complained here that an actual Nazi was flooding the place with antisemitic garbage…..”
Someone stealing your thunder? I would be interested in what he/she said. None the less, the irony is remarkable in your case. Nice to have friends in high places, ain’t it?
Because unlike yourself I’m not a rancid Zionist who defends the murderous, ethno-supremacist apartheid State of Israel — and who considers all criticism of that racist regime to be antisemtitic — when I detect antisemitism my “friends in high places” know it’s the real deal.
“……when I detect antisemitism my “friends in high places” know it’s the real deal…..”
You are absolutely no one to judge who is antisemitic, Mona. That is like a Fox protecting the Hen. YOU are the real deal, Mona. And I thought free speech was alive and well at the Intercept? Why delete the Nazi?
Except that, those who matter believe that I am.
One vile Nazi post might have stood. But it started posting significant volume, and that constitutes crapflooding.
@ Mona
Well, the poster does make everyone else look a bit classier. Personally, I’d leave it up as an exemplar of a certain mindset. Whether that mindset takes over the comment section has yet to be established. It’s probably just a Wesley Clark fan, so it might have been specifically attracted only to this particular article.
Surprising coming from Clark. One the other hand when will the blueprints be drawn up?
Time for a history lesson, for the newcomers among us.
– – –
The PBS NewsHour is brought to you by the Transcontinental Railroad; by the Mary Todd Lincoln Foundation, by the Jefferson and Varina Davis Charitable Trust; and by viewers like you! Thank you!
JEFFREY BROWN: … this week’s ruling in the Supreme Court. For analysis we have David Brooks, columnist for the New York Times, and Mark Shields, syndicated columnist. Welcome, gentlemen.
DAVID BROOKS: Thank you.
JEFFREY: So, the justices handed President Obama a major defeat this week.
MARK SHIELDS: Big defeat, Jeff. The Court said that the military commissions could not try U.S. citizens when Federal courts are available. Lambdin P. Milligan was to have been hanged this week but now he’s free.
JEFFREY: David?
DAVID: Mr. Milligan was a radical, an enemy combatant of sorts. He and his radicalized friends allegedly were part of a terrorist group called the Knights of the Golden Circle, allegedly in a plot to deliver Indiana into the hands of the Confederacy. Arrested over two years ago.
JEFFREY: This was in May 1864.
DAVID: Yeah. Milligan was arrested under the President’s national defense authorization. The man was thrown in a dirty prison, and rushed through a tribunal in Indianapolis even though the Federal courts there were in session. Vague charges of conspiracy against the the United States, affording aid and comfort to the rebels, inciting insurrection, disloyal practices, and violation of the laws of war. Nebulous, but enough to draw a death sentence. Milligan submitted a habeas petition to the Supreme Court, who this week found in his favor.
JEFFREY: It was in the middle of the Southern rebellion. Nothing, ever, will be more of a threat to this country’s existence than an attempt to break up the Union.
DAVID: Even so, the Court said it didn’t justify throwing this radical in the stockade. (reads) “The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. “
MARK: The Chief Justice did try to stick up for Mr. Obama’s position. Chief Justice Chase said that the civil courts “might be open and undisturbed in their functions . . . yet wholly incompetent to avert threatened danger, or to punish, with adequate promptitude and certainty, the guilty conspirators.”
JEFFREY: But it was a dissent.
DAVID: Yes. The majority wrote that “The proposition is this: that, in a time of war, the commander of an armed force … cannot be restrained except by his superior officer or the President of the United States [and can] substitute military force for and to the exclusion of the laws, and punish all persons as he thinks right and proper, without fixed or certain rules. … if true, republican government is a failure, and there is an end of liberty regulated by law. … Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure together; the antagonism is irreconcilable, and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish.”
Wow.
MARK: Mr. Obama’s authority seems to have been stymied.
DAVID: Well, the President just can’t detain or kill a U.S. citizen on his say-so, or that of some general. Maybe it was a terrorist plot, or maybe just a group of middle-aged men with fantasies of revolution. The tribunal never really proved it one way or another.
MARK: Although it didn’t come up directly, the ruling may keep some army general from putting people in detention camps. Remember General Order No. 11, out in Missouri? They rounded up whole counties of suspected rebel sympathizers. Some were a threat, with terrorist bushwhackers like Bloody Bill Anderson operating in those parts.
DAVID: Most weren’t a threat. A lot of those people, radicalized or not, died in those camps, so they weren’t in a position to apply to the courts.
JEFFREY: Anyway, the Southern rebellion is over. Maybe this will keep a future President from overstepping his authority like that, even in some future war. Speaking of the future, the Central Pacific reported progress in building the transcontinental railroad over the Sierras. For that story here’s Spencer Michaels in Auburn, California …
American baby-boomers should be put in camps. Then maybe with could get back to a Constitutional Republic. Instead of the feminized nanny-state mess we live under currently.
You realise all that ‘nanny-state mess’ is just as much from the baby-boomers’ kids and their kids and kids’ kids, yes? You’re massively simplifying a problem that’s ingrained in culture and how kids and families (term used quite lightly) are being raised, encultured and encouraged.
This has been one long-azz comment thread, and loaded with a lot of trollish horze shat that came in from who knows where abowz.
So … for the sake of fun and sanity I’m sticking in a twist on the good ol’ Musical Interlude with this:
Daniel Radcliffe karaoke raps” The Real Slim Shady”> with accompaniment from his girl friend, actress Erin Darke
Jaysus on a fucking crutch. What wingnut sites are linking to The Intercept lately? The infestation, it burns.
“The infestation, it burns.”
it almos az bad az taht tiem Myrna gawt krabz.
seh wuz jumpin rownd liek hur wuz hostin teh biggus boosh fier in hizstory.
Who knows? Freep? The Weekly Substandard? Clown Hall? The Richard III ward for actors?
Wesley had better be careful or his radical cronies on the extreme left will assume he has begun a moral crusade against CNN’s protected class of unhinged Islamist terrorists.
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis. Et cum spirit cuckoo-oh.
Great. So they’re now planning to throw tea party citizens into a cage with the islamic militants? Let me guess, the islamic prisoners will be allowed weapons but not the American prisoners.
This country has become a disgrace.
Stop trying to talk me into the internment camp idea.
They really should have listened on the no-javascript thing.
GrubstoneTheCumJuice hunnee yew cant abject two religulous milluhtints becos teh lourd yer gawd liek tehm two don u no. Expeshally whin yew aboad inn shittin:
Taek head uf teh wird uf teh lourd GrubstoneTheCumJuice an stahp abiden inn shittin!
Well, we knew this was coming. After all Obomber signed the military act NDAA, that allows it. Indefinite detention of civilians by the military. And it won’t be only Muslims, it will be those who disagree with the corrupt USG and the elites, based on evidence now being collected by NSA, et al. I always thought pretty highly of Clark and even contributed a small amount to his POTUS campaign, because I thought he had a good balance of strength and compassion. But, wrong again. Kerry, Obama, Clark=WRONG. Nader, Stein, Sanders, Warren=RIGHT.
It seems that I should never vote Democratic Party again, as they turn out to be the disappointments, and I mean Warren also, because of her unquestioning support of Israel in Gaza.
There’s only oneproblem.
Who decides who is radical?
The same people who decide what ‘collect’ means.
I actually agree with the dem scum on this issue.
Another radical.
We’ve come a long way, from Blackstone to Blackwater.
-> Xe -> Academi -> Constellis. Too many Canopies, so many Canopies!
What about all the disloyal conservative republicans and conservative democrats who commit daily treason against America, shouldn’t they be interred in a camp which prevents them from harming this nation? The most radicalized folks in America are right wingers but that is not who this nut is talking about…He along with the rest of the radicalized conservative Christian crusaders want to inter Muslims, non Christians, blacks, Hispanics, liberals, folks who believe in majority rule, activists, environmentalist’s, and folks who tell truth to power.
Exactly, and it will invariably include non-Muslims, to include “Christians”, dissenters against the tyranny and fascism taking over the U.S. and the West (fascism which Clark’s comments, and what he’s calling for, clearly are), protestors, and critics of the fascism and tyranny that are usurping all True Liberty and Freedom in the land(s) that is and/or are no longer free, but increasingly totalitarian countries that used to be free.
Now you must be a good “‘Nazi’ (neo-corporate-fascist) Party” member or be targeted. And “liberals” and “progressives” have long thought that Clark is one of their “progressive” heroes? I’ve said all along that he is no such thing, and that he is a typical example of the authoritarians in and outside of the U.S. government who in-truth have little or respect for the U.S. Bill of Rights and Constitution; and call for, as he is here, things that are fascist and are anathema to what to what the founding principles of the U.S. stand for. They often say one thing; and, in-reality, believe another. He obviously clearly believes, as he admitted in this fascist diatribe, that the Japanese and German internment during World War Two, which was a war crime in and of itself, was supposedly “justified”. Thank God he never became a U.S. president!
“Odrona” probably thinks much the same way on this topic, and/or on these topics. ALL of these corporate-fascists are a grave and dire threat to True Freedom and Liberty in the U.S., the West and the world.
Is there a doubt in ANYONE’S mind that the only people put in these camps would be white Christians?
hunnee tehm bibble thumpurz at teh Ayr Farce Akadummy in Koloradum Sprinks wud poot teh kiboosh on taht so fast u haid wudnt just spin it wud pop kleer off u nick don u no.
There is that, Mabel, and there’s the idea that we have this pesky Constitution in force, things like rights to due process, trial by jury, freedom of religion and speech, stuff like that, that keeps white Christians, or green Pastafarians, or magenta Druids out of camps.
Operating these camps sort of makes the rest of the Constitution not too functional. It’s like olive oil: it’s the difference between extra-virgin and ex-virgin, you see.
hunne tehm ben tri taek teh “pesk” owt uv taht Cunstumtooshumnal thin foor lon tiem now. iz amayzin taht teh onny thin stand beetween tehm an sucksess mite bee sumwun liek Scaliass.
las tiem i saw a Pastoralfarian anna majenta Dood wuz at Burnink Menz.
i wuz knot furry funkshumnal butt i don thin it wuz teh olif oyl orr mi eggstra sooper furginity don u no.
Retired general and former Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark would be the first and only “disloyal American” I would put in the CONCENTRATION camp that he built.
Try interning this.
corman nobbeez hunne taht Anterninni Scaliass sumtiemz cumz up wiht a reel wopper don he?
tehm peepholez doun inna soowur beelow gon haev tehm haids essplode ef tehy kan reed an unnerstan Scaliass logicum don u no.
Justice Scalia believes in original intent, and there’s nothing more original than habeas corpus and due process, the Great Writ (its 800th birthday was June 15). I do get the notion sometimes that he’s arguing, not with us, but with James Madison and Alex Hamilton.
“I do get the notion sometimes that he’s arguing, not with us, but with James Madison and Alex Hamilton.”
wel he iz sorta owld sow we haev too maek allowunses tho we porbably ott to drah teh lien at him tokkin too himsef whiel in kort don u no.
Is anyone really foolish enough to follow this psycho’s advice on this, and if you are, are you downright stupid enough to think it will stop with Muslims? Someday you’ll be saying, “When they came for the Muslims, I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Muslim…”
The thing is, this kind of thinking can in fact cause otherwise reasonable sane people to support nuts like him.
A few million hard core supporters of the Bush / Cheney / Rumsfeld cabal, with their media mouthpieces blitzing the airwaves, is all it would take.
I think truly difficult days are close on us …
Absolutely.
And for anyone curious…
http://observergal.blogspot.com/2013/07/my-update-on-classic.html
So what if we support America, our Constitution, the rights of our citizens but think our government and our politicians are the enemy of America and are operating a criminal organization that violates the rights of the citizens and abuses the powers of government in the Constitution? Should those patriotic citizens be considered radicals and interned?
I was not put on earth to support anything, I don’t give a rabbits foot regarding what broke dirt poor country your going after. I would not support you if Jesus endorsed you as holy entity. How you like them apples.
OK, where are all these wingnuts coming from…redstate? freerepublic?
Not sure. Apparently the ‘Alex Jones Show’ aka infowars has story on it (bleh); my guess is this is on all of the sites resembling infowars; I can’t imagine how it wouldn’t be. (Fun timing viz Jade Helm, init?)
I do know when I first loaded this page it had like in the low double-digits comments. When I finally got to reading it it had hundreds more.
Yes, kind of like we imprisoned Prescott Bush and the other globalists along with Ford motor company that were supplying material aid to the enemy, and only after a great deal of grief was that funding shut down, but Bush nor anyone involved in that was ever prosecuted.
So here come the ‘INTERNEMENT’ camps—-Clarke must be a Roosevelt Democrat—-long extensive history of Leftist/liberal/socialist/communist put masses of people in internment camps.
Who defines “radicalized”? Homeschoolers, veterans, Christians, etc….are those people “radicalized”?
War? What war?
Congress declares wars in the US and by all accounts the US has not declared a war since 1941. (The 2001 AUMF arguably wasn’t a declaration of war, although just what it was is doubtless something we can all have a discussion about.)
That’s one issue. Another issue is the various prohibitions in the US constitution against punishment without judicial trial. Quite apart from the Fifth Amendment, there is this clause in Art. 1 Sec. 9:
“No Bill of Attainder…shall be passed.”
A bill of attainder is a statute which seeks to punish individuals without judicial trial.
There is a similar clause which applies to the states in art. 1, sec. 10.
Meaning Clark’s proposed internment would arguably be invalid.
A third issue is defining disloyalty to the US. For example, is a US citizen who takes an oath of allegiance to another country guilty of disloyalty to the US? If so, a lot of dual nationals are likely to end up in Clark’s internment camps.
What about making a speech denouncing US public policies. Mass surveillance, for example, or the drone war. Or the US policies towards Yemen or Gaza. Would that be seen as being disloyal to the US?
What about leaking or publishing classified material? Would that count as being disloyal to the US?
Then there’s the issue of foreigners resident in the US, some legally, some illegally. Such people implicitly owe no loyalty to the US at all. Should they all be made to register and take periodic “radicalisation” tests?
Of course the illegals among them are not likely to come forward voluntarily, which means there would have to be periodic campaigns to find them and round them up. Presumably, once caught they would not be registered but would instead be thrust out the nearest border exit.
Then there’s the issue of finding radicals among US citizens, and what penalties would be exacted for knowing of the existence of a radical but failing to disclose that knowledge to the proper authorities.
All of this suggests that what Clark is really proposing is a return to the Red Scare era, when radicals called “communists” were feared to be lurking under every bed and many a promising career was ruined by simply refusing to answer questions about them or one’s knowledge of them.
Wow Wesley Clark finally gets it….
Sorry, chum, but some of us Americans actually read from time to time, such as the after-action congressional reports on the CIA and FBI, proof postive they both should have been immediately shut down after 9/11/01.
Also, we read that the DIA also had data about the upcoming attacks form analyst, Julie Sirrs, but they of course forced her out of their agency.
Also, look closely at the backgrounds at all these foreign-born, or first-gen terrorist-types: they are sponsored by corporations or hedge funds to be in this country. Remember that Times Square bomber? Sponsored over here by a hedge fund based in Connecticut!
Nope, the corporations and gov’t — the kind that Wesley belong to for ever so long — must stop sponsoring these terrorists.
And speaking of the American Terrorist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU
The ones from the vid above are the most dangerous, and damaging and traitorous kind.
“Wow Wesley Clark finally gets it….”
Myrna haev sum eggstra peneshillium she kan lone him untill him kan get appuntmunt wiht him doktur.
I’m not a Muslim, but I would defend any peaceful Muslim who would be imprisoned this way. And IMO, if you wouldn’t join me in protecting everyone’s right to their faith, no matter what you personally think about, you’re not an American in the truest sense, and you certainly have no place in my kind of revolution.
You are all taking this at face value (which is, yes, awful — but also unlikely). Ask instead what it is he’s trying to do by saying things like this. What’s the real goal is the correct question; arguing this is a false uproar. Little moves, big moves.
Little moves… Float the idea see what sticks… It’s all a chess game after all, Right…
If you want to use chess as the language, I’d probably go with ‘discovered check’… Maybe with a bit of pawn (idea) advancing to knight instead of queen.
They already have the camps built. I dont believe their main goal though is to round up moose limbs but more than likely true patriotic Americans who would stand up to a tyrannical govt. This talking head is only trying to drum up support from what he thinks is the “far right fringe tea party terrorist groups”.
Not going to work.
But at face value, I wouldnt want internment camps, too costly. Cheaper to ship them all back and stop importing millions a year like barry is doing now.
The best thing to do would be to put Wesley Clark in the lockup indefinitely.
Clark, like most politicians, is an opportunist… He’ll say anything that promotes him at the moment.. Caveat emptor.
Islam is an ideology that is subversive to, hostile towards and incompatible with liberty. I am in favor of stopping ALL immigration of Muslims into the U.S. NOW. That being said, Wesley Clark show his authoritarian, Democrat Party, progressive, Islamophile totalitarianism. ALL CITIZENS, INCLUDING AND ESPECIALY MUSLIMS MUST BE PROTECTED BY OUR CONSTITUTION AND OUR BILL OF RIGHTS. THIS PROBLEM WILL BEGAIN TO DISIPATE IF MUSLIMS ARE NOT PERMITTED EVER AGAIN TO IMMIGRATE HERE AND ALL CITIZENS, INCLUDING THOSE WHO BOTH LOVE AND DESPISE ISLAM, ARE ABLE TO SPEQK FREELY
If Islam is incompatible with liberty as you say, then why must Muslims be protected by our Constitution and our Bill of Rights? Wouldn’t it be better in your opinion to just get it over with and eliminate them?
According to breitbart.com there are 6.2 million Muslims in the United States today; it would take an internment camp the size of Delaware to contain them all. Isn’t it a little too late to talk about the problem dissipating, if there are 6.2 million subversive people hostile to liberty already in the country?
All they need to do is put up a barbed wire fence around Washington, D.C. and half the work will be done already.
amen
Oh he calls for them because he thinks the people of this country are so stupid that they do not know they have already BUILT their FEMA/detention/concentration camps all across this country for “disloyal” americans. AKA, Multi Generational Constitutional Patriots, aka the American People, aka White Christians who think this country and world is being ran into the ground and do not wish to become total subservient slaves to a small group of psychopaths led by some murdering self worshiping leader. Clarke is a One World New World Order Lacky, and he is being totally in character. The guy is a killer for gosh sake and a psyop specialist.
Where are these camps?
Clark want’s internment camp for radicalized Americans! How many AMERICANS have been radicalized. Killer spent considerable time in Mid-East since 2010. It amazes me how anyone raised in this country with all the benefits of citizenry can turn on a county that took his family in and enabled the father & mother to educate and provide for the children in a way that would never have been possible in the home country of the father, Palestine. How will Clark decide which American needs to be interned?
Its easy. If you agree with everything they say then you are okay, but if you have doubts you may need to be re-“educated” , orwell you know.
There’s one million Americans on the terrorist watch list. Most are ordinary Americans. This is Clark getting the nation ready for what’s coming.
Clark’s son, a chip-off-the-old-blockhead, stated that 9/11 couldn’t possibly be an inside job as there were actually Republicons who died in those Twin Towers?
Amazing, spawn bred true . . .
Wow, 5000 camps? Where can I visit one? With so many, it’s impossible that they are all hidden.
Gee General, you’re gonna wind up in a said camp by calling out the POTUS, SCOUS, and the irrelevant US Duma.
Unless its strictly for radical muslim jihadists, then I’m not sure the slippery slope principal would apply here. Once government sets something up, it never goes away. Is Wesley Clark this f*cking stupid to even suggest such a thing? Why yes, yes he is. Know why? Because he’s a democrat and democrats believe in central planning bureau control and totalitarianism. This is who they are. This is what they do. History shows us these examples and how they’ve played out.
Wowzer! Locking up congress and the White House … Throw in the liberals and RINOs too.
After reading the entire article and watching the video, I didn’t hear “Muslim” or “Islamic” once. How do I know he was talking about my Tea-Parisanship. Homeland Security, IRS, and military (Democrat) administrators have all described the Tea Party as a threat to national security. Several congressmen have advocated incarcerating Global Warming “Denialists”.
Not to mention Neil DeGrasse Tyson…
Three signs that you might have the potential for future radicalization:
1. You don’t have a job
2. You lost a girlfriend
3. Your family is not happy
But don’t worry if you score a yes, the government keeps tabs on you, listens to your chats, follows your every move, monitors your life and can send you to an internment camp.
Will it get you a job, find you a new girlfriend or make your parents happy?
Hum! not sure about that one, maybe at the internment camp!
And you are liberal
Can’t tell yet whether “abc” is a (neo)liberal or not. But I agree those are usually nasty — the only thing worse is a wingnut.
And you puppy died.
Michele & Mona – you obviously don’t understand satire?
Not understanding satire is the least of Moona the Loona’s problems.
Nah, I “got it.” But I took the occasion to smack silly Michele around. :)
The all caps is obnoxious. Stop it.
All-caps is a primitive relic of early Net days, and it was rude even then. It signals that the writer is incapable of making a point using vocabulary, or at least formatting. It’s like yelling theater in a crowded fire.
It was wrong when they did it to the Japanese Americans, it will be wrong when they do it to the patriots, conservatives and Christians. This call for internment camps is just a heads up for what’s coming next, those fema camps are for anyone against this new communist order that’s coming down the turnpike.
Here is the leaked Army manual for re-education camps (2006):
http://www.infowars.com/leaked-u-s-army-document-outlines-plan-for-re-education-camps-in-america/
They already exist and were made live by an executive order in 2011-2012, kiss those calories goodbye folks, it’s the United States of North Korea
You do realize that in 2006 George W. Bush was president? So these alleged camps would be Bush Administration creations?
ding ding ding! Wow you almost have it. Now you’re one step closer to realizing that both sides are playing for the same team and that you are just a useful idiot cheer leading for one half of a monopoly on power. A libtard is no different than a consirvaturd. Levels of opinions may vary but each thinks one is better than the other. wake up and smell the agenda 21 buddy. They are playing chess and youre playing marbles.
Actually, I am playing Farmville.
*Gifts you a cabbage patch*
I’m playing Civilization V. There’s no place like Rome … there’s no place like Rome …
I lied about the cabbages. I’m actually playing Conway’s Game of Life (or rather, it’s playing itself).
I agree, though, Dorothy. I missed you, scarecrow, most of all.
According to truth’s link, DoD gave this manual limited release in 2010, which puts it in the Obama administration — confirmed by the Army PDF Inforwar links to, which dates it February 2010. (It looks and sounds genuine enough, typefaces, formatting, jargon and so forth). FWIW, it covers “internment/resettlement” operations in any battlefield environment worldwide. Under GWOT of course, that means anywhere.
So where’d he get (2006) from then.
It may have been “released” in 2010, but when was it written…and who wrote it. Or rather, who ordered it written and when.
Not gonna get out of the boat to look at infowars…
No, but the Field Manual (link to PDF copy thru infowars) makes for interesting reading. It looks genuine and the latest edition is definitely 2010, well into Obama’s presidency.
You have your head where the sun doesn’t shine on the …..5000 camps… comment. No such thing!
I never liked Wesley Clark, but I have to agree with him on this one, he is right on the money with this idea. However, Obummer would never go for anything like that unless it was to intern non-muslims!
Wes is having a memory lapse thinking he was FDR!!!! How many soldiers died during your watch as SACEUR? It is not zero as your biography states….
How many times do the progs have to throw folks in internment camps before we stop thinking of it as “out of character” for them?
Yeah, conservatives are the ones who throw people in internment camps these days! Quit stealing their schtick, libs!
Two points:
1. If you seek to imprison people on the basis of speech, the standard is Brandenburg v. Ohio, which said,
Key test: imminent and likely. A new law would have to meet that test, and maybe also show a compelling government interest, a narrowly-tailored means of meeting that, and is the least restrictive way to meet it. I doubt if any Congress, let alone this one, could construct a law that would stand up to review, if the courts are still in session.
2. What Gen. Clark may be insinuating — and which Mr. Hussain mentions — is the Nisei precedent. If one assumes Muslims, or maybe Arabs and South Asians, are by nature “radicalized” and subject to roundup on the basis of identity, of race or ethnicity, we do have a precedent. The Court applied the strict-scrutiny test to the Nisei roundup in Korematsu and upheld it, and that case hasn’t been overturned, not really.
Point 2 is the nastier one but it is ready for use.
The problem in this case is that the military emergency is a war on a concept rather than one against a country or opposing military force. We are told that we are in a “war on terror”. What does that mean? And why would it not be said to mean anything it needs to mean for as long as those who would favor a military order might have it?
That’s the trouble with these concepts. A war without a formal declaration of such, and vague concepts of terror and radicalization. They’re hyperbole, but it’s also becoming the basis for military and police action. And it justifies very real acts of detention, torture, unrestrained surveillance and warfare. Its very vagueness gives it its reach.
*Rubs crystal ball*
‘Muslim’ is neither necessary nor desirable to include in the language. In fact, ‘Muslim’ would be counter-effective. So we have the big ask — the crazy ask, right? What we should be asking is what the real ask is, or what the goal of a fake big ask is.
Think like you’re Clark.
Think like Gen. Clark?
“Well, of course we won’t round up people on the basis of religion, nothing like that. Christians in our society, people of faith, might feel threatened. But we know that radicalized persons and terrorists move within certain ethnic communities in the U.S., and the fact that some may be loyal doesn’t mean the threat doesn’t exist. We can’t be too careful. As they said about the Nisei, the fact that they haven’t carried out major sabotage just proves how devious their planning is.”
I don’t think he really expects people being rounded up, per se (at least not like he stated). I suspect your last sentence is pretty close to something he’d say. I’d call that there’s a big disconnect between the things he says and the things he actually wants — which is to say he says things to get things he’s not asking for but to get something entirely different instead. Something more ‘friendly’ and seemingly more reasonable than this, so he can be said to be ‘reasonable’ — while still being more than is actually reasonable or should be given. What does he really want? Consider also the timing of it. Friday. News cycle-wise.
Bungled the last sentence. Tweet Friday. News-cycle-wise. Then interview. News-cycle-wise. Then silence, Monday. News-cycle-wise.
The last sentence was attributed to Gen. DeWitt, then-commander of the West Coast sector, and to then-California Attorney General Earl Warren. It was a common enough sentiment.
Do you remember the conversation (I believe you were active in it) in the article this past week? I can’t remember which article it was and it’s virtually impossible to search comments, but either way, it was on euphemisms, and I’d mentioned Japanese internment camps. The Chattanooga article a few days ago brought up some of the same stuff; definitions are too slippy.
We’re in McCarthy-and-beyond territory — especially given the new push (putsch?) against ‘Russia’*. (*Russia being a convenient substitute for the fuller name of that type of enemy, and taking “Anybody that doesn’t agree with us is against us” to a further extreme: “Anybody that doesn’t think like we do is against us”).
To me the logical conclusion of this isn’t camps, though it may be jails; given the structure as it’s set up, and being set up further now, the logical conclusion is that there’s no point in providing food and shelter for most such enemies; the better solution is to starve them out, blackball them, make it impossible for them to work or bank on anything but the lowest-possible level, and frustrate their attempts to maintain relationships (which are already fragile due to the ‘nuclear’ nature of families now). Shunning works; even threatening shunning works, for some values of ‘correction’. Occasionally, though, the maw of the beast must be fed with actual sacrifice.
Well, at least if it’s Russia, we’re back to the Red Menace and McCarthyism, known terrain. Sen. Carnival Cruz even bears an uncanny resemblance to old Joe McCarthy.
Unfortunately I don’t see many Edward R. Murrow types out there in tee-vee land.
It’s not Russia. The goal is to just make it look like it’s Russia (insert also China, North Korea). One is requested to consider the illusion of the bunny and the hat; the bunny’s origin is largely irrelevant.
What is relevant is only that the People see an enemy; it needn’t be the enemy the government (or corporations) see.
BTW, you seem well-versed in history, so I was hoping you could explain something to me: What’s the purpose of NATO, if NATO existed specifically to counter Russia during the ‘Cold War’? Who is NATO’s ‘enemy’? Who does NATO protect now?
(When I said Russia in the NATO thing, I meant CIS states, USSR then former USSR; now many of those countries are part of NATO; that was just sloppy of me; I’m tired).
For a while it looked like NATO was nothing more than an organization for ensuring US hegemony over Europe, but successive administrations have worked very hard to restore Russia as our mortal enemy, thereby hiding the real purpose of NATO once more. Were it otherwise, NATO would have been dissolved in response to the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact.
I really do believe all of the stuff in Ukraine right now is being done as a direct provocation, the goal being to provoke Russia to do something, anything, slip up even the slightest bit — so that the US has an excuse to do something worse than it’s already doing. The fact that Russia (and I guess I mean Putin) has been playing this game so much better than the US by NOT feeding it is actually striking — it would be pointing out the US as bullies, only it seems as though the truth doesn’t matter as the US basically owns the media and controls the narrative. While that’s been brewing a long time, I’d say the big strike to the US ego occurred with Russia during the Syria issue; I don’t think the US wants another country, especially successfully, handling diplomacy. To take it further, I don’t think it wants ANY body, especially successfully, handling diplomacy (witness the original deal the legitimate Ukraine government agreed on with the EU which the US did everything in its power to stop the signing of — and incite a coup instead. In return, the US gets to have weapons right up against Russia’s borders, despite long-standing agreements not to. The US would go to war if other countries installed arms in Canada pointing in their direction. And in fact it came close to war during the Cuban missile crisis for a similar reason.
It seems to be using everything in its diplomatic powers to exert pressure to try to make Russia break — in any direction — that can be taken advantage of. There really are few ‘enemies’ of NATO left to fight. Mostly I just see elusive dangling carrots in the form of offering countries pathways to the EU (shellgame where their economies and resources get gutted and their businesses get overrun by American business/commercial interests) which are actually just unspoken dangling sticks (you don’t want to be on the losing side).
NATO should’ve been dissolved in the 90s — instead it was given new life by breaking up and bombing Yugoslavia, etc. It should be broken up now, but instead it’s for some reason being encouraged to grow. That’s why I made that comment about the Earth needing an alien invasion weeks back — there’s no enemy big enough, and the goal must only be having and maintaining enemies.
To bring that back around to this article’s subject, the economy as it is now is basically probably untenable without those ongoing wars and constant influx of enemies. The US, whether it admits it or not, created the IS* threat — and I’m not talking about origins. It was pretty much unheard of til the US trumpeted it and when it did start trumpeting it as an enemy it trumpeted it HARD as one.
Enter dissatisfaction and disillusionment: There are a lot of people dissatisfied in the US and elsewhere that have no proper outlets to deal with growing unease and anger and I suspect that a lot of people who are caught ‘stealing off to join ISIS’ or what have you are really not so much going to fight for ‘Allah’ or ‘ISIS” but going to get away from something.
Some of it might just be a desire to ‘shoot shit up real good’ but there’s more to it than that; it is an outright decision to ‘shoot shit up real good’ that isn’t who or what America (its politicians) want them to shoot up.
And so we’re back to what Clark is calling ‘Radicalized’ Americans. What’s dubbed ‘self-radicalization’ is actually a really fascinating modular process, and there’s one passage I read a while back in an academic book (the contents itself, I believe, taken from a different academic paper) that I should probably type out, though I figure it’ll get buried given the commenting here; it’d feel like a waste if it was never seen (let me know if you want me to type it in; it’s several paragraphs). Basically, radicalization, and especially self-radicalization (religion has nothing to do with it) is like a staircase, and at each ascending level it’s harder and harder to come back down to the main floor.
I’m not sure if the next sentence will lose its context without the quote but basically what Clark is seeking to do is to break the staircase, making it impossible for anybody to go back down the staircase when a lot of people would otherwise stop on a certain floor and/or retreat — and in effect it’d push people further UP the staircase instead (thus proving that there’s more terrorists, thus more effort, time, and resources are required to ‘fight terrorism’ or ‘fight terrorists’).
In some cases, the staircase might just be done away with altogether and instead only a one-way escalator will exist — and that’s what I think we’re seeing a lot more of, now: People might want to go back down the escalator but often they are doing all they can to try to push against what society says they already are and not go further up. Eventually someone’s just going to grab them on the escalator, accuse them of being on the escalator (at whatever stage that escalator is in its road toward the top), and claim that the escalator (which is to say, the analytical process, which often leads us down dark paths before we find better ones — far more often than it leads us down dark paths ‘for good’) is the ‘bad thing’.
This basically means only the non-questioning are safe — and when I say the non-questioning that doesn’t disinclude any religion or belief system. It’s actually *very* easy to tease with the idea of radicalizing oneself, especially when one gets cut out of society (or never gets integrated into society — Clark’s dangerous immigrants (spooky!)) — but values of ‘radicalize’ are what varies. Most people adapt. Most people are flexible. Most people are also vulnerable.
And in strange places where people cannot find a friend, a false friend who believes in you and says nice things and offers you money (an oasis in a desert, ie, an informant) and is your only lifeline can also ‘radicalise you’ — by your need to be or feel human (I’d like to see a study on feelings of betrayal among people who were brought into those sorts of stings).
Clark basically wants to do away with vulnerability. But vulnerability is innately human. Christians become ‘radicalized’ every day when they’re “reborn”. Capitalists are often ‘radicalized’ (as are any -ists). There is a danger in equating ‘radicalized’ and ‘extremist’ with dangerous. Yes, one might not want to ‘hang out’ with some or most people who have been ‘converted’ to a cause — but their conversion also shouldn’t be stomped down on (despite personal distaste). Actions are actionable; thought processes are human.
The best way to do away with “Anti-American Radicalization” is to start fixing America.
(Replying to you and Baldie in this comment).
What’s happening elsewhere? is what I’m asking.
And why is this a very good time to say things like this?
The parallels are stunning, as the rails of illogic twist through the same crazyland.
I’d like to give Clark a slight benefit of the doubt and assume that he is not primarily a a racist but rather just another army general who can’t imagine not having an enemy that isn’t trying to out-Napoleon them at every turn. If it isn’t the Japs, it’s the VC; if it isn’t the Commies it’s the Mooslims.
Proof we need to keep the generals out of politics.
Hi Baldie, I rolled my response to you into my response to 24b4Jeff, a few posts above (it’s the long one). Thanks for your response. :)
Are u ppl out of your minds, this is the type of hate speech used as Germany was being amped up by Hitler, listen to yourself, “venture”, into concentration camps, America is long gone if that’s where we are at. sry to ruin your concentration camp party.
It’s this whole ADHD problem. More and more people needing Adderall, Ritalin and Vyvanse to ‘function’ in ‘American society’ — they’re saying they have no concentration, but then those powerful people are like, oh, well we can just fix that and send them to camp. Who doesn’t like camp?!
These sort of concentration camps are not a bad idea. It’s been tried before, with mixed results. There are still a few people living who can be consultants in this venture, but we need to hurry as they are all closing in on their centuries. Otherwise the art would be lost for ever and we will have to reinvent the procedure.
And now that the sprawling facility in Utah is unlikely to be of much use due to the proliferation of the the Tor browser and encrypted chats courtesy of Mr Lee , we can better utilize the space to give all the new guests a “shower” before assigning them their underground quarters.
Pshaw. Just put a ‘Biggest Loser Camp’ sign out front and send mass mailing to people from certain pilfered databases offering them a special free one-month weight-loss vacation. One month is the approximate length of time for inculcating any new behaviour/learning, so I’ll just use it as an example.
Solemnly swearing to preserve protect and defend the US constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic…I may not agree with what your saying but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it…
Quote me the part of the constitution that allows for such illegal imprisonment.
The US constitution has no such provision Lou. General Wesley Clark Needs to start protecting our constitutional democracy against a newfound domestic enemy….himself.
I filled up today and noticed that gas went down 8 cents a gallon, so I immediately went home a wrote a letter to President Obama, thanking him for standing up to Bush’s evil oil buddies and giving us all a break.
sweathart u shud immediantly go get a loob jab to.
ur gonna ned it wen teh nxet democrap presumdunt taeks offis don u no.
Mabel hunnee wehn Hillowree iss prisondent thar woant bee enuff loob inn teh whirled four teh orrifusses. Shea bin takeen lessums frum republicunts an haf passed width flyeen cullers don u no.
iz tru Myrtle.
taht woeman ben taek it inna sharts so mush she kant wate to giev sum bak.
if they were alive today, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin et al would ALL be considered “radicalized”
Let America be America again
by Langston Hughes (1935)
Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.
(America never was America to me.)
Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed—
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.
(It never was America to me.)
O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.
(There’s never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this “homeland of the free.”)
Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?
I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery’s scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek—
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.
I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one’s own greed!
I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean—
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today—O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.
Yet I’m the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That’s made America the land it has become.
O, I’m the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home—
For I’m the one who left dark Ireland’s shore,
And Poland’s plain, and England’s grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa’s strand I came
To build a “homeland of the free.”
The free?
Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we’ve dreamed
And all the songs we’ve sung
And all the hopes we’ve held
And all the flags we’ve hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay—
Except the dream that’s almost dead today.
O, let America be America again—
The land that never has been yet—
And yet must be—the land where every man is free.
The land that’s mine—the poor man’s, Indian’s, Negro’s, ME—
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.
Sure, call me any ugly name you choose—
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people’s lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!
O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath—
America will be!
Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain—
All, all the stretch of these great green states—
And make America again!
Thank you and Langston Hughes.
…what Pedinska said.
This guy was a totally incompetent general officer – Slick Willy’s and the UN’s military hand puppet, fighting FOR muslims in Yugoslavia, Bosnia and Eastern Europe in the 90’s. He was a horrible leader and his troops had no respect for him.
They followed his orders, though…
I guess you’re saying we should have supported the Bosnian Serbs in their genocide of the Muslims?
Are certain posts being deleted? I was in the middle of a civil dialog, not offensive and on topic; now it’s gone. Mods?
The only posts I’ve seen deleted were those of a Stormfront-level Nazi and replies to it. And I approve of that.
There is very little modding here — which as most of us like it. But out-and-out Nazis swamping comments are intolerable pollution.
Hrmm. Was talking with Mike T and now the entire conversation is gone. Not sure if it’s my browser or the site. Anyways, the lack of live-updating really kind of kills this forum.
Hmmm. I don’t recall any “Mike T” posts in this thread.
The commenting software here was partially upgraded last week — it’s still a work in progress. We want all sorts of more stuff, and live-updating would be great. It may be coming.
I missed that Mike T was commenting here. I see that below at timestamp 11:42 he accurately labeled “Louise Cyper” an “anti-intellectual psychopath.”
There’s nothing ‘anti-intellectual’ about Wheezy, Mona. Wheezy just wants people to be intellectual in his/her dictated way, like most people who have more power than they let on and probably a paycheck at least in part for expressing it (and I don’t believe Wheezy is a sockpuppet or necessarily a psychopath — Wheezy is something else, and part of it is ‘narcissist’).
People read his/her comments; they comment on his/her comments. That’s more power than most of us would like him/her to have.
OMG, there most certainly is! That purblind creature thinks Max Boot is a great thinker. I mean, I can’t even.
You’re assuming s/he believes the bullshit s/he types here instead of assuming there’s a purpose behind what s/he says. There’s all kinds of ways to be logical but not rational, or intellectual but not smart.
“And I approve of that. ”
Excuse me, but who the fuck are you, besides the self-appointed junkyard dog?
I’m a person who knows you are a racist pig who thinks blacks don’t deserve police protection from murderers. #karma
Why should the police go out of their way to protect a population that has tarred the image of ALL of them? Urban blacks have zero respect for the police, and the job they have of putting their lives on the every day for their benefit. They expect the police to protect them against the violent thugs that they have raised in their own neighborhoods, but when one of those violent thugs gets treated roughly or dies from the encounter, all hell comes down on them. Yes, until the mindset and behavior of urban blacks changes, the police should just stay out of the line of fire – from both sides.
That is their Karma.
That’s great, Lou. I’ve copied it to a file and you’ll see it again.
You are an out-of-control narcissist.
You may be unaware of this, but the person you were conversing with was attempting to radicalize you. The person has been deported to a camp and the thread deleted to prevent others from being exposed to second hand radicalization.
Exactly. Mona the Stalinist decrying the words of a supposed ‘Nazi’.
Thank God Almighty she’s here to protect us naïve and innocent little Cretans…
Fortunately not, because then I’d have to defend the scum, as I did professionally for actual Nazis at one time.
No, the author has simply cleared his space of a wayward Stormfront fellow. Government was not involved.
” the author has simply cleared his space”
*chuckle*
No wonder you can’t post anything about that degenerate murderous so-called prophet of his without getting it deleted. Pathetic.
Too bad that the well-crafted replies by Sufi Muslim and that burqa-chewing The Muttering Dummkopf Sister Act also got zapped, those were fun.
“and that burqa-chewing The Muttering Dummkopf Sister Act also got zapped,”
Lousysippullus hunnee iz taht tershiary infeckshum sew farr addvansid taht yew thimk mee an Mabel ar unwelcum hear? Wee boath ascyst pour fallin wimmins liek u lousysyphullus hunnee. Mabel duz itt width condomints and anntibyuhticks an I dew itt width preyer. Wee are publick survints don u no.
Mabel haz uh bigg neadle width tetracycline four u lousysyphullus hunnee an than ur halloosimashums shud seese. An teh lourd tel mee two cher this massage width yew – Hee feal yew knead two here itt four sum reesum:
Here an ohbay Lousysyphullus!
Myrtle hunnee i thin Loowheeze iz two fawr goen foor tattercycling too wurk don u no.
The principle of free speech is based on the premise that incorrect or unpleasant views, rather than being suppressed, should be challenged and debated. The government, much to its dismay, is often obliged to respect this principle, due to its own Constitution.
In a private space, the publication which owns it is free to simply delete any comments whose views they oppose. But if their own existence is premised on the freedom to challenge the government and they are therefore continually invoking the importance of the principle of free speech, their dedication to said principle appears mostly self serving.
So the question is: does free speech have inherent value, or is it merely a legal obligation imposed on the US government?
Not at all. SCOTUS has long upheld “time, place and manner” rules on speech; you can’t shout your message in the suburbs with a bullhorn at 3 a.m.
No one is allowed to crapflood the comment space at The Intercept — no one. It is a “manner” of speech that destroys the conversation.
Glenn and the other authors decide what constitutes crap and flooding. One or two Stormfront comments would possibly just sit there; a slew of them, likely not.
I have no problem with that.
“Second-Hand Radicalization: The Silent Killer”
We have a winner!
Welcome to Liberal Inconsistency. Freedom of speech for them, but not for you.
Are you saying conservatives are tolerant of antisemitic speech in their private places?
Smart. Let’s put them ALL Together. Nothing bad can come from THAT smh. Idiot.
No way ,As soon as internment camps are built the definition of disloyal will include conservetives
The only people we are at war with are the scum bag tyrants like Clark.
-Ken
LaserGuidedLoogie.com
Gen. Clark’s suggestion sounds radical and terroristic to me.
He’s like the arsonist who is first to yell, “Fire.”
He should be placed under house arrest for as long as American media present chowderheads like him as if they have something useful to say.
And this is why I have no respect for Establishment figures such as Clark, and the corporate “news” media. One has to wonder if Hillary also has something like this in mind. As a Green, I’m one of the people the Establishment would likely end up throwing in these camps if people like Clark had their way.
A big thank you to The Intercept for helping to keep REAL journalism alive in this country. Hopefully more people will start waking up and stop supporting the Democratic and Republican parties.
Just more proof as to why our Founding Fathers were against standing armies and being in a perpetual state of war due to the tendency for liberty to be eroded. I guess Wesley would like to be the arbiter of who gets sent to the camps, eh General? What, Donald Trump isn’t crazy enough, you feel you need to win the crazy contest?
And those Americans would also include many REAL progressives and left-libertarians who oppose the ACA because of its heavy usage of insurance corporations (we would prefer to see a single-payer system set up, but then again, the Democrats can’t be trusted with it). Wesley is no progressive if this article is anything to go by; he’s a neoliberal like Obama.
Or at least a public option.
Clark had a Jewish grandparent. If that is a problem for anyone they need help.
It’s only a problem for Clark – poor thing.
Yes, there’s Lou. When he isn’t expressing approval of black women getting murdered because of no police protection (Lou says this is “karma”), he’s sniping at or about Jews.
A man of the Enlightenment, that Lou.
I think you like me…
I like letting people know what you are.
I actually like you, Lou. Know why? You’re easy to analyse and extraordinarily transparent. Others have nuance, whereas you have the nuance of a frozen chicken pot pie.
alzheimers.
I have no doubt this Democrat Clintonista would broadly expand the definition of disloyalty if this came to pass. I see the General as a hatchet man for the Corporatist Oligarchy strangling the middle class. We already know he will fire on American citizens. I am unaware of any other US General who was directly involved in killing children on US soil since the days of the Old West and the various shameful Indian Wars.
Fuck off Adolf.
The only thing that pisses you off is any negative comments on Jews.
You asked someone below,
Louise, you know exactly were the Rabbi touched the new-born male. The Rabbi then sucked on that same spot.
How many millennia have Jews been sexually mutilating and abusing their young boys?
They already have the FEMA camps setup and it isn’t for the Muslims.
US Army -FM 3-39.40 – INTERNMENT AND RESETTLEMENT OPERATIONS
http://info.publicintelligence.net/USArmy-InternmentResettlement.pdf
Don’t worry—that’s just a blueprint for the invasion of Texas.
Hey, Thomas Roberts! Idiot! Did you even listen to what the General just said? No reaction at all??? You aren’t a journalist! The guy wants to tear up the Constitution, but you just thank him for being on the show?? You are REALLY bad at your job!
Has Wesley picked out his cell yet? He’s been ready for some time.
It would be nice if ONCE you morons could provide some proof other than the usual, tired worn out anti semetic canard.
You are confused. You are the one who came and dropped an assertion into the comments without offering so much as a single link or source for proof.
this didn’t work well during world war 2. Not a good plan now.
This is slippery slope conversation that has happened elsewhere throughout history.
SPOILER ALERT: If you ever saw movies about those “conversations” during other times in history, they don’t end well.
“If these people are radicalized and they don’t support the United States and they are disloyal to the United States as a matter of principle, fine. It’s their right and it’s our right and obligation to segregate them from the normal community for the duration of the conflict.”
Duration of the conflict? He can’t even call it a war, and duration implies it will actually end. What he proposes is indefinite detention of Americans for thoughtcrime.
Ahhh… the respect…. Just call the creep a creep.
Just because the 2 of you had a conversation doesn’t make him a lesser creep.
This Stormfront shit is where I draw the line in opposing comment moderation for substance. Even Greenwald has been known to delete this kind of vile stuff.
Hey, what a great idea. We could call them FEMA camps. :P
Another Liberal KNUCKLEHEAD.
If Wesley Clark is really wanting to imprison people who are
“disloyal” and “radicalized”
then perhaps he needs to call for a fence to be built around
the US capitol building and the white house.
This is straight out of NAZI Germany. America has its own shame of arresting Americans of Japanese Decent in WW2 and putting even their children in camps. People like Alex Jones have been right all along. General Clark, I have grown to hate this nation to the point that I am leaving for ISRAEL never to return. As a 9/11 first responder i risked my life and health saving people like you. As an American JEW i am ashamed of my country.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Label me what you wish, yes I am radicalized in my heart. At the same time, I feel sorry for you. General, I used to respect you. Now to me your a piece of CHARA.
So much for having a GAY talking head around on msnbc [thomas roberts] to ask the really tough follow-up questions …
Yeah, he’s as bad as Glenn Greenwald who’s never asked a tough question or played hardball with a political opponent in his gay-sheltered life.
(Maz, how’d you draw all these cretins?)
He was too busy wondering if he looked good for the cameras to actually do his job.
“So much for having a GAY talking head around on msnbc [thomas roberts] to ask the really tough follow-up questions …”
knot effurwun kan bee a paracon uv greenwaldism.
it taek tiem foor teh infekshum to settel in an starrt wurkin don u no.
Nise two sea u Mabel hunnee! Butt i musht tel yew itt iss gud two haf greenwaldism infuhkshum akscept itt take sew musch tiem two devilup taht moast peepholes dye furst. Knot mannee Greenwaldisms arownd don u no.
The good general probably got bit carried away with enthusiasm. In a surveillance society, no one will be able to act without the government having prior knowledge. So everyone can be safe without interning anybody.
The following is a completely non-discriminatory way of achieving the same result:
– any trip outside the home requires prior approval by DHS;
– all guns fitted with an anti-firing device, unlockable only with a DHS supplied code;
– all citizens to undergo one hour of de-radicalization therapy a week.
Other measures could be added, without unduly infringing on people’s freedom. So there’s no need for extreme actions that unfairly target a specific group. It’s just a question of striking the right balance between freedom and security.
Seriously? No extreme actions & not infringing on Americans rights? If this were a Republican spouting this you leftists would be up arms outraged! The hypocrisy of the Left Wingers is just mind numbing!
We are up in arms about this! It’s posted all over social media by liberals and conservatives, with no support from anyone. This moron has lost his last marble. From Trump I might expect it, but I don’t know one liberal who agrees with this and doesn’t know that it’s against everything the Constitution stands for.
Rightwing internment camps are notoriously unpleasant. General Clark’s camps will employ modern psychological techniques so that internees learn to love the government of their own free will.
It’ll be touching, how much they love the government…
If this were a Republican spouting this you leftists would be up arms outraged! –Wrenchman
How entirely imbecilic or disengaged does one need to be in order to have posted that? So called “leftists” can be found all over social media, and also in this very thread you’ve posted on, expressing outrage.
Here, I’ll fix this for you:
“The idiocy of the [whatever the hell it is that your are] is just mind numbing!”
Benito your non-discriminatory suggestions are good, but lets take it a step further; hear me out: Every day at approximately noon every good citizen will be required to curse and yell profanities at images of America’s enemies (for about two minutes.) DHS employees will monitor the citizenry during those two minutes; keeping a eye out for those who don’t seem to have their heart into it. Those people will be questioned and possibly sent to de-radicalization therapy.
This is an excellent suggestion, but ‘keeping an eye out’ sounds a bit haphazard. If everyone were fitted with a blood pressure monitor, the virulence of their feelings could be measured directly. It’s better to quantify things where possible.
Already available.
Yes, the security state should be evidence-based whenever possible.
Surely a modernisation and streamlining of the “two minute hate” is possible; noon is just such an inappropriate time for the digestion, and it wastes several hours of the citizens’ day that could be spent more resentful.
Children already have to say the Pledge of Allegiance. I nominate that the process be moved to the earliest possible time slot in every person’s day. To be fair, it also be applied at night as well, soas to encourage only patriotic dreams.
These times would, of course, be variable — with times to be allocated by their personal communications/tracking devices/phones in order to ensure that those on shift work can express themselves at the appropriate times and in the appropriate manners for their schedules; ditto, ‘night-owls’.
Also, as long as everyone is treated the same, the 14A need not be triggered. Simply replace an hour of church/mosque/synagogue with an hour of DHS-monitored hate services (performed by Booz Allen Hamilton). It’s the America third way.
Finally something that comes out of a liberals mouth that actually makes sense. Get the f outta this country if you don’t want to abide by OUR rules. Same goes for all you progressive anti American commie leftists.
Know anything about the Stasi-like apparatus that’s operational from coast to coast?
I’m guessing that Clark and this administration have TEA Party members on their short list of internment camp invitees also. Is that OK with you?
You first, get the f outta MY country if you don’t want to abide by MY rules, you regressive authoritarian fascist rightists.
No matter how much one might desire to do so, might it not be best not to allow statements made by people like Clark be used to turn people with preexisting grudges against one another or stir up angst in anything but a constructive way? Infighting and misattributing ‘enemy’ status on those who one staunchly disagrees with but has no power over one often benefits someone else — the ones with the power.
is this one of the crazies McCain talks about…look, he got crazie eye…
Does running Tor in Linux to visit Wikileaks to view supplemental source docs cited by Jacob Appelbaum in Der Spiegel and the Intercept “radicalize” this user?
I think they had you at ‘Tor’.
If Gen Clark had not been among the globalists in favor of transforming the nation via massive 3rd world immigration, there would be no need of interning foreign anti American radicals. We need to intern a few billionaire globalists who are American in name only and who have bought the media and both parties and have been pushing for massive immigration for decades. Invading the world and having open borders has consequences.
Clark was the General who violated posse comitatus and gave the FBI several M-88 tank recovery vehicles to inject a flammable mixture of paint remover and CS gas into the Branch Davidian’s church, killing the elderly and children inside.
Well, another democrat tossed the Japanese Americans into internment camps. Why is this so shocking?
I find the Generals ideas rather un-American and radical. Who is going to round him up and put him in an internment camp? Lastly, his idea about rounding up American Nazi Sympathizers before during and after WWII, he should read Americas Nazi Secret by John Loftus. He will learn from reading that book and others that some Americans deeply sympathized with the Nazi fascists who were moguls of industry, well known artists and politicians, none of them were rounded up.
Thank you. I was waiting for someone to point this out. Japanese American were the only ones placed in any internment camps. He was totally wrong on this point. He is trying to gain support by associating ‘the need for camps’, using our favourite boogie men… the nazis.
“Japanese American were the only ones placed in any internment camps. ”
No. Italians and Germans were as well.
But you are correct that fascists were not.
“The comments were shockingly out of character for Clark, who… made a name for himself in progressive political circles.”
Historically, this is textbook progressivism. Ironic that the author does not realize this given the WWII analogy – is he purposely ignoring that the man behind Japanese Internment is a progressive hero?
“Historically, this is textbook progressivism.”
hunnee u wud knot no tuxtbook porgressumnism ef it bit u in u noz wile u wuz tryin too sownd owt teh letturz.
Read this every day out loud.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Laughable.
It’s a part of history and is only “laughable” to an anti-intellectual psychopath like youself.
” an anti-intellectual psychopath”
Yeah, I’m *extremely* upset that an anti-Semitic piece of human excrement calls me names on THE//JIHADI//FELLOW//TRAVELER boards. Please excuse me while I curl up in a ball and go cry in the nearest corner.
Clever nic, Lou.
Only the Great Dissembler could declare human tragedy laughable.
What is laughable here, dear, is not the human tragedy in the context of which these words were uttered by your namesake; what is laughable is your silly attempt to imply with your dumb post that they are somehow relevant to the situation of *world-wide* Muslim-perpetrated Islam-based Quran-mandated murderous jihad in *2015*.
But you already know this. You dummy.
I don’t know why you never respond to me or try to troll me? It makes me feel unloved and so alone.
“Hearken with your ears to these best counsels,
Reflect upon them with illumined judgment.
Let each one choose his creed with that freedom of choice each must have at great events.” (- Ahunuvaiti Gatha; Yasna 30, 2).
So, who decides who is most susceptible to radicalization? Scary stuff.
First they came for the Jews…..”
and Clark omitted the first to go to his camp……………OBAMA
Niemoeller — never more relevant than today.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
As horrendous as the internment of the Japanese was, at least that had limits: the Japanese. It was based on the longstanding notion of interning enemy aliens during a war (i.e. official citizens of the country at war with the interning country). True, in American hands this was extended to people with Japanese ethnic ancestry, rather than citizenship – but they didn’t have a license to intern every Charles Lindbergh who praised the wrong people.
Clark’s proposal, formally punishing mere sympathy for the enemy with indefinite imprisonment, therefore goes much further than the Japanese internment program. It is, simply, a proposal for a martial law type of military coup, with summary judgment outside the constitution. (By being outside the constitution, it would in fact BE a coup, even if some high-ranking official like a president were in support of it)
I bet that somewhere behind this bow wave there must be some proposal busily slouching towards Bedlam that is based on the old prohibition of “advocating the overthrow of the United States government”. Whatever it is, we should find the fire under this smoke.
Actually you are incorrect. Germans, Italians and South Americans were also interned.
Sorry, I was trying to keep it simple. Those other nationalities were similarly targeted as “enemy alien” status … plus a lot of spillover to American citizens with the ‘wrong’ ancestry.
I should add that searching for my own hypothesis, I didn’t find any recent legislation under a Google News search for advocating violent overthrow, but I did find some idiot advocating for such legislation at the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/06/24/charleston-and-the-threat-of-homegrown-hate-groups/restrict-white-supremacist-hate-speech-online
I should make clear that I don’t minimize the threat posed by ISIS or by Nazis, nor do I forget the magnitude of the response that can be required! Some of America’s proudest moments were when giant bomb after giant bomb crashed through the civilian neighborhoods of German cities. Imagine the mothers watching their children explode into nothing, the fallen rubble with the bloated bodies of the babies crying ever more feebly as infection spreads from the ends of their shattered bones. Some of these violent radical ideas are incredibly stupid, and the response nearly as terrible; it can be ennobled only by the sense that there is no other way to restore peace and decency at all. But as surely as a smart person doesn’t lay hands on a cobra to throw it out of his house, a well-run country does not ban the expression of ideas which are self-evidently false. The act of censorship ennobles the ignoble – it makes it impossible to refute the wrong ideas because those holding them can say that the truth has been censored out of sight, and may even believe it.
<blockquote<at least that had limits: the Japanese.
the limit you speak of was Japanese ancestry to include born American citizens.
Fantastic, U.S.A Terrorist #1 is finally showing its true colors as a secret dictatorship which has a Cosntitution not worth the paper that is writen on.
The problem, is how would a democrat administration define disloyal citizens?
The answer is that anybody who has shown any disrespect for the obam administration would be shipped off to these camps.
Also, look at the kinds of governments that use these sort of camps, Communist regimes and 3rd world dictators.
No way in hattiesburg would the current admin round up radical islamists or illegal border crossers or drug dealers.
Techdirt has taken notice as well:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150718/19520631685/general-wesley-clark-some-wwii-style-internment-camps-are-just-thing-we-need-to-fight-domestic-radicalization.shtml
If being dangerously radicalized is the standard, I guess most of the GOP president candidates would be interned in short order, if Clark has his way.
This is satire lifted from the Onion, right?
An American politician who aspires to the highest office in the land wants to incarcerate an unknown number of citizens for an indefinite period of time because of their “disloyalty”.
General (out of respect for the office, not the man) Clark, I can recommend to you a list of countries where this is standard procedure and you may be able to get a job in civilian government. The United States of America is not one of them.
Well stated, Publicus.
ReformedII, you forget to include selected State governors.
Internment Camps is a terrible Phrase!
That would be confused with my idea of a “safety zone.”
I believe one of the large “empty” west Texas counties like Brewster should be used to provide a safe haven! A 10′ high cinder block fence topped by concertina wire surrounding the county, would certainly make us safe! I mean THEM of course.
We should “for their safety of course” simply place the top 10000 [by income] attorneys, 10000 top bankers [especially the wonderful FED members], top 10000 CEO’s/CFO’s?COO’s AND the top [by earnings] 10000 atheletes/entertainers PLUS “about” 552 WDC “persons” INSIDE the safety zone !
For compassion of course we’d have to provide 1000 baseball bats [to hunt for food , of course] and 1000 shovels [to dig for water] and this would NOT be for “HOAX & CHAINS!”
We love our elite!!!!
Hmmmph. As if Louise Cypher, apologist for the NSA, Israeli lebensraum, and other such manifestations of fascism, was the least bit concerned about “liberty.”
It’s not the least bit surprising that Louise would support a policy like this.
“Israeli lebensraum, and other such manifestations of fascism”
Mikey show me on the doll where you were touched by the big bad Jew.
Louise, you know exactly were the Rabbi touched the new-born male. The Rabbi then sucked on that same spot to complete the Jewish Ceremony of the Bris.
And folks have been giving Catholics shit for raping boys for just centuries …
How many millennia have Jews been sexually mutilating and abusing boys?
Clark is 100% correct. During WWII any foreign nationals (Japan, Russia, Germany, Italy, etc, etc) were put into these camps and interrogated. If it was determined that they were here legitimately and posed no threat to the war effort they were released. In 1945 we didn’t have the immigration disaster that we have today. We should be doing this with anyone who vocally opposes the US government and who supports the overthrow of it.
I have a better idea. Why don’t we instead imprison or deport enemies of the US Constitution? Of course that includes people such as yourself and most of those who are currently in leadership positions within the US government (especially those relating to law enforcement).
If you’re loyal to the US government as it currently exists, you’re an enemy of the US Constitution. If you’re loyal to the US Constitution, then you cannot support the US government in its current incarnation.
Well said Mike T.
Amen. Internment camp #1 could be built around Hollyweird.
If you start locking up anyone who opposes the U.S. Govt. , you will be locking up all the armed militias and anti govt. groups in the Deep South . Is that what you want…or are you in favor of interning only those with a Muslim name?
While I believe in the rule of law, and revere the Constitution, this government (all 3 branches) have subverted and usurped that document. Do I belong in your concentration camp?
“We should be doing this with anyone who vocally opposes the US government and who supports the overthrow of it.”
maybee u haev foorgut taht mennee peepholez doin tihs karakterize tehmselfs az Doodz frum Dicksee.
And so-called “conservatives” will want the camps filled with anyone who doesn’t “support the troops” for “defending our freedom” from a Taliban invasion, or with anyone who doesn’t worship the cloth idol that symbolizes the US. The mainstream “Right” has its own sacred cows, and it is just as hypocritical in defending them as the mainstream “Left.”
The only broad political group that truly cares about freedom are libertarians.
You care about the 55 million?
Whodathunkit?
Its a Democrat proposing internment camps, dim bulb, not conservatives.
Except “conservative” Republicans (neocons, actually) HAVE openly supported the idea of internment camps. There were neocons who called for the arrest of Iraq war opponents for “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.” So I guess that makes you the “dim bulb,” and you can kiss my ass.
Does “radicalized” include T Party Wesley?
Wesley Clark is not now, nor has he ever been a t party supporter, he has been a democrat sycophant all along.
were liberals exempt from history classes? I mean how come, every generation when the next “workers socialist paradise” figurehead comes along and makes the same old promises using the same old phrases: “for the people”, “wealth distribution”, “equal outcome” and the like, liberals seem to be totally unaware of all the previous “success” stories: Russia, China, North Korea and on and on and on.
Leftists don’t consider ussr, cuba, north korea, etc. to be failures, merely good ideas that were poorly implemented.
Now, report to the re-education center for being disloyal
Grimmikinz hunnee hoo wuz it taht lukked deep intoo Pooteez eyez an sed
“”I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue,” ?
pleez remin me uv hiz partee affiliashumz ef u wil bucuz i don thin him wud appreshumnate u cawllin him a “luftist”.
We already have one, General. It’s call Guantanamo Bay. Marines are waiting for their arrival.
There’s nothing shocking about a progressive calling for internment camps. The end game is to inter patriotic Americans as being disloyal when they resist the fascist police state the progressives intend to erect.
Correct, and that’s why the civilian gun ownership in America is so important. If the US military had to struggle with the Iraqi “insurgents” and a few tens of thousand Taliban, they’d have no chance indefinitely holding off a couple million armed Americans on their own soil.
Of course, that calculus doesn’t account for the pathetically brainwashed condition of the typical American, who typically worships the very military who will come to kill him or take him to a camp.
Let me know how your battle against the 2nd Armored Division’s M-1 tanks with your AR-15s goes.
Or about a rightwing favorite defending them. “In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror,” by Michelle Malkin. Available at Amazon.
Clark was so bad he had to be removed as Nato Commander. All the countries agreed.
“Clark said that during World War II, ‘if someone supported Nazi Germany at the expense of the United States, we didn’t say that was freedom of speech, we put him in a camp, they were prisoners of war.'”
And, in so doing, violated the Constitution.
“He called for a revival of internment camps to help combat Muslim extremism, saying, ‘If these people are radicalized and they don’t support the United States and they are disloyal to the United States as a matter of principle, fine. It’s their right and it’s our right and obligation to segregate them from the normal community for the duration of the conflict.'”
And, being their right, any action against them would be in violation of due process.
“The comments were shockingly out of character for Clark”
I doubt that. Probably more a window to his true character.
“[H]e has been a critic of policies that violate the Geneva Convention.”
Ah, so there is a document he will respect.
Just not the Constitution.
Sorry buddy, but the vast majority of people in the internment camps were not US citizens. If they were citizens, then they had family here who were not and they were quickly released after interrogation. The US Constitution was never intended to grant non-citizens any rights. That interpretation has come much later from progressive courts.
The,US Constitution doesn’t grant ANYONE rights, and it wasn’t meant to do so. One of the founding principles of of America, which has long since been abandoned by traitors like you, is that certain rights are INALIENABLE. They are natural rights inherent to all and are not granted by some people (governments) to others.
how do you not know that on the West coast thousands of US born citizens of Japanese descent lost their personal possessions, businesses, land, and were incarcerated for the duration?
\
Exactly — like all those imported Africans who weren’t citizens. Abraham Lincoln had to get elected and then progressive courts – oh, wait.
A religious or a non-religious path becomes a path of peace when the adherents of that path train their inner self so that it moves away from its lower qualities, such as hatred, selfishness, arrogance, ignorance, injustice, vengeance, doing to others what one doesn’t want done unto oneself, lust for power and control, greed, etc., and reflects the higher qualities that are opposites of the lower ones I’ve listed.
Otherwise, a religious or a non-religious path simply becomes a tool for control and power, and leads to injustices and violence.
STASI government is already here.
No-Touch torture COINTELPRO.
Chemical tools. Conditioning Camps would be cost effective. We’ll call them concentration camps.
Just a small archipelago of reeducation camps, eh?
Democrats should love this. Just like FDR’s Japanese-American internment camps instead of being based on race, it is on political beliefs.
Go Big Brother!
And this from a Democrat.
You’re surprised it’s from a democrat?
Democrats are dead. America has two parties: Cartoons and neoliberal fascists.
If there’s one thing Americans need to realize soon, it’s that both major parties are ultimately playing for the same team. All you have to do is ignore their phony public debates and look at what they agree about: continuing US military imperialism, the “War on Drugs” and the “War on Terror,” sponsoring Israel’s murderous lebensraum policy, supporting the crimes of the financial industry, Big Brother spying, and all the rest. There’s big money for politicians who toe the line with respect to these and other issues.
Also worth mentioning is that the mainstream media is in cahoots with the political establishment and serves to marginalize ideas and political candidates who aren’t approved by the oligarchy.
It all adds up to a system in which the American people, because they can vote, *think* they have a say in how the country is run. What they don’t realize is that the candidates they’re allowed to choose from are carefully controlled. This is why Obama has been no different from Bush, and it’s why the next president will be no different from either of them. Same with nearly all members of Congress.
A related problem is that Americans began allowing politicians and the courts to undermine the Bill of Rights through legislation and “creative” interpretation. Those rights were meant to be sacrosanct and not even subject to vote. But that’s another discussion.
*company=country
What about material encouraging violence in parts of the Bible? Plenty violence in the name of Christianity in the last 2,000 years. But I guess that does not matter to you.
It is funny how most Muslims neither believe or act as you imply they must.
Nobody can deny that Christians have engaged in violence in the past (lots of it), but tell me where in the Bible are followers encouraged to be violent?
Seriously? The Old Testament is filled with calls to violence — or at least with passages that could be interpreted that way. Remember that story where God commands “his people” to slaughter the men, women, and children of an entire population? And let’s not forget “thou shall not suffer a witch to live.” Such verses were used by Christians of the past to justify all kinds of horrible violence that makes even the worst of today’s Muslim extremists seem downright merciful.
Yeah, it’s *absolute nonsense* because everyone knows that the persecutions of “heretics” and the witch-burnings never happened. Retard.
Yes, I’m aware that there are Muslim savages out there. They are no worse than the Israeli child-butchers, the American imperial forces, or anyone else who commits acts of brutal aggression. The main difference is that generally it’s the US and its puppets attacking Muslims, not the other way around. In fact, Muslim countries pose ZERO military threat to Americans as long as we stay within our borders and out of their lands.
Compare the number of innocent people killed by “peaceful” America and its allies to the number of innocent people killed radical Muslims over the past couple of decades. That tells you who the real “terrorists” are.
The occasional Muslim here at home who foolishly decides to take revenge on random US citizens for US foreign policy is a tiny threat. Thousands of times more people die at the hands of common criminals.
The main foreign threat faced by America is the iron grip Israel holds over our government by way of its lobby, big money, and Israeli loyalists planted in various key government positions.
Mike – You must understand that according to Christian theology, the laws and commandments of the OT are null and void, replaced with the gospel. You say Christians and you give a time-frame of 2000 years, so you must be referring to the new testament. Can you give me an example from the NT? Again, i’m not going to defend the actions of christians in the past, but if you’re going to claim the Bible tells christians to be violent you should at least provide a relevant example. Otherwise you’re referring to the jews. Belief in the NT is what separates the christian from the jew, after all.
lousysypohullus hunnee I keap telin yew two stahp disseen teh lourd’s violins. He dusnnt liek itt
Yew ar hellbownd lousesypullus don u no.
Ghet thee behinde mee lousysuphullus hunnee!!
I have *no idea* why you think that an atheist like myself cares about what is written in a collection of Jewish fairy-tales, sweet-cheeks.
There is no god, and there are no prophets. It’s just that some of these invented creatures are less savory than others, just like their inventors were, and Allah is the sickest puppy of them all.
By the way apparently there is again a big chunk of some smelly Eid food still stuck in-between your two front teeth Bucky, which again makes your mutterings hard to decipher. Or is that typing through your burqa?
Loowheeze hunnee teh volyoom uv yew hysterectical yammerinz maeks me almos embarrussd too bee uv teh saem jendur don u no.
Do a reverse Caitlyn then, you birdbrained biddy.
We have exactly what Wes wants already. It’s called GITMO. Oh wait….
Great idea Wes!
You can be the first occupant, and Obama can join you.
I completely agree with him. Classify these terrorists and those who aide and abed them as enemy combatants carrying out an act of war against the US and put them in POW camps.
“Classify these terrorists and those who aide and abed them as enemy combatants”
hunnee leev teh wurkin gurlz owt uv it.
tehm onny try too poot food on tehm chilrenz an teh markut foor a gud blo jab shudnt bee limuted too politishumz an armee officurz lukky enuf too haev biogrumpherz don u no.
this guy is a big Hillary supporter
Anyone who calls for something like this is literally insane, or has some hidden agenda to push. There simply is no significant danger from radical Islam, home or foreign, with reasonable police efforts in effect. He does not seem interested in locking up right wing terrorists or racist terrorists, people who taken together are not quite as insignificant in the threat they pose. His problem could be with Islam itself.
Look at the numbers snuffy. Almost nobody dies from terrorism in the US, but more die from right wing terrorism than Islamic. If you are looking for insanity, look in the mirror. You must go by the numbers, not what some politician seeking for your vote says.
Shades of how we treated Japanese immigrants during World War II.
Democrats sure seem to have quite the fascination with internment camps, don’t they?
The Hegelian Dialectic in action. Want to know why our borders are open to criminal gangs, sex offenders, and Islamic radicals? Now you know.
You first Mr. Clark
All these Generals are mentally sick people. They should be put in internment camps as radicalized Americans.
I call for this anti-American, anti-Constitution A-Hole and his INCOMPETENT military buddies to occupy the internment camps THEY built for Americans who don’t tow their anti-American rhetoric!
And next it will be Roman Catholics, Jews, Mormans, Evangelicals, members of the NRA and anyone who resists or questions the actions of the State. Ever read the power point that identified potential radicals that was prepared by Homeland Security? Of course, such interment and re-education will only be for the duration of the war. Anyone figured out we are always at war.
Anyone religious is technically insane. So, yep lock up everyone you listed!
Strange. I have been watching the past few days as experts and media people talk as if they cannot figure out why the Tennessee shooter carried out this terrorist attack.
And then Clark wants to “figure out” who is a terrorist and who isn’t.
Yeah, uummm, no.
What a coward. He’s afraid of free speech that doesn’t conform to his beliefs.
Clark was always a random crank. Sometimes right, usually wrong.
But if he wants to start imprisoning radicalized Americans who support terrorism, lots of them make that easy by flying Confederate flags, and the KKK (who’ve killed more Americans than any other non-government terrorist group, including bin Laden’s) don’t wear hoods as much any more, but are still easy to find.
Who is it that will determine who these “radicalized Muslims” are? You? And to where, pray tell, would you have them deported?
General Clark, who determines what a terrorist is?
Yeah, mmmmkay!
Is that smoke I see rising from the Reichstag?
I bet this will actually get some traction from other progressives.
Internment camps, starting with islamo facist southern gun toting, god lovin racists and ending up with just southern gun totin, god lovin racists. After all the islamo facist part is just an allegation. But the southern gun totin, god lovin racist part is fact. right? lol
jezus paste, what is “prince wesley” going to think of next?
We need internment camps for ex military officers and active who do not defend the Constitution and the people, as they swore to do. If the military, from the Joint Chiefs on down, was doing their duty, Obama would be at the very least, in a prison cell.
Marcus Antonius
Virginia
Sick Semper Tyrannis
Wesley even has a name for it he calls it the ” Final Solution” . A man clearly ahead of his time.
Obama brought in 2.5 million Muslims into the U.S.? This will come as news to the rest of the country. Can we have any links to prove this please.
Last I heard Obama increased extra judicial killings ( mostly Muslims) and increased drone attacks on Muslim “terrorist” suspects by more tha. 200 % over what the previous administration of Bush.
If we could put Mr. Transparency himself , John ‘Ketchup’ Kerry, Joe ‘Shotgun’ Biden, Hilary ‘Shredder’ Clinton, there until 2017, I think this is a great idea.
Scratch a democrat and you’ll find a little bit of FDR Fascism.
AGREED.
The United States also created internment camps in barren parts of Arizona to detain thousands of people of Japanese descent after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, solely on the basis that they were Japanese.
And FDR did that against the recommendation of naval intelligence that reported the Japanese-American population on the west coast posed no threat to US security.
Absolutely! Domestic enemies. Every military person and new citizens took the oath to defend the country against domestic enemies.
Every military person and new citizens took the oath to defend the country against domestic enemies.
Actually, the oath is to defend the Constitution, not country:
http://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/naturalization-test/naturalization-oath-allegiance-united-states-america
I cheated a little bit by paying attention when my (then future) husband – who swore off the potentates of Czechoslovakia (then under communist rule) – took this oath and became a naturalized citizen of the United States.
The camps are already built, but they are not for Muslims, they are for Christians.
Ludicrous.
Considering this and what the UK’s Prime Minister is proposing, we seem to be getting closer to a time when loyalty oaths will be required — first, depending on your ethnicity, and eventually, I suppose, from everyone.
“World War II-style internment camps to be revived for “disloyal Americans…”
Humm, and whom exactly will define who is “disloyal” or is not?
I think this has already been tried in other countries, in some it’s still a government policy. The USSR had gulags in Siberia, the mideast is rife with countries that do this for people critical of the controlling regime and both N. Korea and China are well known for their ‘political re-education’ camps. Mild, below is right. Under the right administration he, himself, would be interned until he ‘got his mind right’. I know what his intentions are, but his solution is far more dangerous than constructive.
There are better answers to islamic influenced attacks.
When Clark says “radicalized Americans” he’s really hoping that it will be right-wing Americans.
The MSNBC host states, “self-radicalized lone wolves domestically“, so your statement could conceivably be applied to him, but Clark himself starts out generally,
but evolves as he goes along,
The bolded bits don’t really seem to apply to right-wing Americans, imho. They apply, again imho, more to foreigners, specifically Muslim foreigners. He continues to get more specific as his comment continues:
Now, I suppose someone could suggest that he is referencing RWers, he is quite careful in this interview to NOT specify any given group. But Clark is a military man and the military has not been at war with RW America. It has, demonstrably, been at war with various Muslim nations and groups. In particular, the phrase “duration of conflict” has repeatedly been applied to the war on terror – which, to date, certainly has no applicable standard wrt RW non-Muslim Americans. I think context is important to apply here in sorting initial targets of this draconian suggestion. I agree with you that it is likely to drift in its application should it become reality though I think we might digress over likely follow-on targeting.
Yup …… the same Wesley Clark, as a General in charge of Ft. Hood Texas, who illegally “loaned” a US Army TANK to the Dept of Justice, Janet Reno, which was used to illegally attack the Branch Davidian Compound outside of Waco Texas, killing all the kids, women, and men inside.
Same crooked slob that had the audacity to run for the Democratic Nomination for PRESIDENT.
Good Day …………………………..
“The comments were shockingly out of character for Clark, who after serving as supreme allied commander of NATO made a name for himself in progressive political circles.”
Really? Out of character? Have we forgotten that our 2 greatest Progressive President’s also created internment camps for “disloyal” Americans.
Leave it to the Dems to bring this hideous idea back to life.
Three presidents. You forgot Lincoln, who did it by whole counties at times, General Order No. 11 and such.
So I suppose lets start with congress who supported rebels which turned out to be Isis. Or maybe George Soros who supported neonazis in Ukraine?
You mean ‘radicalized Americans like the black panthers that chased down the black confederate flag supporter and killed him in a rollover crash?
The radicalized Americans? The ones this administration is unleashing in their quest to start a race war?
SLAY RAGHEADS.
This makes sense to me and I do not see a direct parallel to WWII. In WWII, we rounded up Japanese-Americans indiscriminately. What Clark suggested was locking up radicalized Muslim extremists who don’t support the US and who will presumably commit various acts of domestic terror. I am sure the day will come when this will be necessary in America.
No, he said, “Radicalized Americans”.
You can bet the ones they are really drooling over ‘interning’ of are not of the Muslim persuasion.
Do you realize who the government considers “radicalized?” Vets, Disables Vets, gun owners, and many Christian groups are in this category. Think of this one very carefully.
Muslims today, Bill of RIGHTS and limited government supporters tomorrow.
Tom you need to seek help because you are certifiably insane.
You utter fool. It won’t stop with Muslims, you know.
Will there be any due process, or will the Intel people just dispatch the military to round people up and lock them in camps?
Jesus, and people like you will think this still resembles anything like a free country with enforceable rights.
Has General Clark lost his mind? It was only loyal Japanese Americans who were interned during WWII not Germans. In fact the German American Bund was quite active in the 30’s promoting American Germany (meaning of course Hitler) operation.
Wrong war. Imprisonment or worse for anti-war or anti-draft speech did happen in WWI and during the Civil War. The case of Lamdin Milligan is a good example of how far such prosecution could go.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan
German-Americans (e.g. the Pennsylvania Dutch) changed names, learned English, and hid their heritage from their children after WWI in an effort to prevent it from happening again to themselves and their children, especially as sentiment rose with news from Europe. It didn’t, but the reason was probably that the Japanese-Americans were so much more readily identifiable.
It’s interesting that in WWII the U.S. had general- and flag-rank officers with names like Spaatz, Eichelberger, Krueger, Oldendorf, Nimitz, Eisenhower. (The family name was originally “von Nimitz”).
In a country where citizens are being stalked and harassed — with frequent sneak and peek (and pilfer) searches — anything is possible. Please Google Fight Gang Stalking dot com.
(The comment counter doesn’t seem to be working correctly, but you’re probably already aware…)
Yes, let’s put everyone who doesn’t support Middle East wars in a government camp. Let’s just put the military in charge of everything. We might as well complete our journey to being a 3rd world country.
But radicalization is precisely what we do overseas. We fan those flames for tactical advantage in various conflicts. We’re doing it right now against the Shiites. Clark knows that better than most. We could shut off “radicalization” like a faucet if we stopped doing that stuff, and he knows it
Why has he suddenly changed his position?
Danny boy, tell me…..why were the marines created? Why didn’t they love us before the Marines were created. Conundrum’s, I know.
For this idea, Clark himself would be detained in the internment camp he envisions were this country leaning the other way. Internment camps are pretty damn radical.
Several points:
1) There is no “The Geneva Convention”. There are 4 of them, which one are you talking about?
2) General Clark is talking about a prisoner of war camp, not an internment camp, and he specified the “radicalized” people be put there, not those who were potentially “radicalizable”.
3) (of General Clark) People must be combatants of some kind to be held for the “duration of conflict” under the third Geneva Convention (which applies to international armed conflict) and the conflict has to be one that has a duration (Hamdi decision Justice Sandra Day O’Connor).
Murtaza: People were interned during World War II because of Japanese ancestry or citizenship, not German. People supporting Nazi Germany, Charles Lindberg, for example, were not interned.
If you want examples of people who supported Germany being persecuted, try World War I. Something that far too seldom gets mentioned here and elsewhere about the Espionage Act (which people regularly talk about when talking about reporters and bloggers nowadays) is that it, and it’s 1918 companion the Sedition Act, were passed expressly to give a reason to detain German-Americans during that war.
POW status does not apply to your own citizens. It applies to soldiers of another nationality who are held until the end of a conflict, to be returned to their country of origin at the end. Bush’s argument regarding prisoners Gitmo was that they did not fight on behalf of a recognized nation, so they could not be considered prisoners of war. A similar principle would apply to domestic Muslim detainees. What Clark is suggesting is an expansion of the Gitmo detainee program.
POW status applies to all prisoners taken in war between signatories to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 to which Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention applies, whether or not they are your own citizens.
All prisoners taken in a war who are not POWs are civilians and may not be held except on grounds of a national security risk, which must be evaluated periodically — customary law says every 6 months. So there is no concept of “duration of conflict” for people who are not POWs. Clark did in fact use the term POW, but exactly how is an Article 5 hearing going to find these people eligible for that status? Therefore, they may not be unconditionally held for the duration of conflict.
Furthermore, as I said, the Hamdi decision clearly stated that if “duration of conflict” was going to extend so far as to be “generations” that such detention would need to be revisited as to its legality.
Wesley Clark may be suggesting something like Gitmo, but don’t forget that Gitmo was originally set up for intelligence gathering purposes, not security.
The Sedition Act and its progeny did imprison people on the basis of speech, e.g., presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs, as well as others. See, e.g., Schenck v. U.S., States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919) and Debs v. U.S., 249 U.S. 211 (1919). The Sedition Act and its progeny did survive the war, e.g., Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927).
I believe it’s technically still in effect, isn’t it?
If so, then this last bit,
could be applied, quite literally, to almost any group the government chooses for persecution.
Maybe on the books. Cases like Schenck had clear and present danger of speech as an issue, and Ohio v. Brandenburg may have raised the standard of prosecutable (inflammatory) speech enough to make such laws unusable — certainly the ruling reversed the kind of syndicalism law seen in Whitney. Absent a complete reversal of case law, or a suspension of the Constitution, the General is talking through his hat.
(As for the talk elsewhere about the Nisei, they were detained because of their race/nationality. And the US Supreme Court hasn’t really overruled Korematsu v. U.S., the 9th Circuit discreditation notwithstanding.)
HI Coram and Ondelette –
Hmmm.. but isn’t the Sedition Act per se, no longer in effect:
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts#Component_Acts
The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 mostly lapsed or were repudiated in Jefferson’s administration and later, although bits of it remained regarding enemy aliens. The Espionage and Sedition Acts of 1917-18 were a lot more enduring; Obama certainly has made use of the former.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917
Great. That is making things clearer!
Your point about the Geneva Conventions being plural is important. The reference Murtaza makes should recognize that, but he did link to an article wherein Clark was discussing the Conventions in general,
so a request that Murtaza specify a given Convention within the confines and direction of this article is, perhaps, not the prerequisite it might be if Clark had, himself, been more specific in the interview(s) being referenced.
Murtaza: People were interned during World War II because of Japanese ancestry or citizenship, not German. People supporting Nazi Germany, Charles Lindberg, for example, were not interned.
That is true, but again, Murtaza is referencing Clark’s own words. The assertion is not Murtaza’s, it is Clark’s. From the video:
2) General Clark is talking about a prisoner of war camp, not an internment camp, and he specified the “radicalized” people be put there, not those who were potentially “radicalizable”.
He did…
A couple things I am not clear on, but think you can help me understand:
1. What is the legal difference between internment camps and prisoner of war camps? I find these concepts become quagmires quickly in my mind, so if it possible to simplify them a bit for me, without losing any of the legalities, I would be grateful for an explanation.
2. Is there an international definition of radical(ized) that would be applicable here? If not, then I would be extremely wary of any definition put forth by Clark and/or anyone else putting forward these concepts as it would seem very easy indeed for them to be overgeneralized to make it simpler for them to be broadly (mis)applied to anyone the government might consider “troublesome”.
3) (of General Clark) People must be combatants of some kind to be held for the “duration of conflict” under the third Geneva Convention […]
Did you mean to General Clark? As in, you are addressing General Clark’s assertion (want to be sure I am reading you correctly)? If so, this redirects to my concern above about how the definition of radical is established. If General Clark thinks that “duration of conflict” should apply to radicals in the US – however broadly that term may or may not be applied – who are non-combatants then, imh and poorly educated understanding, he is just as guilty of misunderstanding and/or distorting the Geneva Conventions as he accused Bush of being. :-s
Thanks for helping my thought process on this.
He didn’t. Your quote doesn’t contradict ondelette. Hussain wrote this:
That’s false. About those “subject to radicalization in the future”, Clark said only this:
This is another in a series of similar misrepresentations by Hussain that invariably serve to strengthen his argument. It’s impossible to believe that he’s not making these “mistakes” intentionally. (If they were honest mistakes, he would correct them.)
(Just to be sure, ondelette was also correct about whether Clark meant POW camps or internment camps. Clark said: “We put them in a camp. They were prisoners of war.”)
Hussain wrote this:
That’s fair interpretation, but the author does not assert it as fact.
All of the foregoing is WHY your claim is wrong. What follows is what you are:
Well, here’s barncat the nit-picking fuckwit again.
It doesn’t “appear” at all. Clark’s words are clear. He isn’t proposing that those “subject to radicalization in the future” should be confined, and that’s clear. And only a “fuckwit” would think that a mistake that enhances a writer’s argument is a “nit”. Especially when the writer is making a career out of such “mistakes”.
(@Pedinska – Sorry, I see now that you were agreeing with ondelette on point #2. I wanted to write that bit about Hussain, anyway.)
Yes, it does. And by using the word “appear” it cannot be reasonably said that Maz is making a “mistake.” He’s offering an opinion and interpretation which is quite reasonable.
You fuckwit.
You’re not adding anything to what you already wrote. Again, Hussain’s interpretation is not reasonable because it’s perfectly clear from Clark’s words that he isn’t proposing that those “subject to radicalization in the future” should be confined:
He then goes on to propose internment for those who have actually become “radicalized”.
(This is where you fall back on the mistake being just a nit.)
Clark’s words are clear. He isn’t proposing that those “subject to radicalization in the future” should be confined, and that’s clear.
Murtaza didn’t write that. As you quoted above, he wrote:
Murtaza wrote scrutiny not confine. You’re changing what he wrote to suit your argument.
Ha! You’re right. No, that was a mistake. Thanks for the correction.
Thanks for taking it in the spirit it was offered.
You’re a fuckwitted picker of nits, real and manufactured. You “make a career” of it here. This is the only time I recall your conceding error, but you are usually wrong.
You’re so funny. Apparently, you don’t even know what a nit is. As I said, accusing me of picking nits is just something you do when your argument fails. And you keep repeating the same ridiculous accusation over and over just to convince yourself that it’s true.
A decent person in your position today would feel as abashed as I do. You went on and on with your silly argument, accepting my erroneous premise. You were as stupid and desperate as you always are. Pedinska proved me wrong, not you. But if you had pointed out the mistake I would have admitted it just as readily. And that is something you would NEVER do.
Your quote doesn’t contradict ondelette.
It doesn’t and I wasn’t trying to contradict him on that point. In fact I was agreeing with him there. I then followed up with some things I hoped he could shed more clarity on.
If Clark says,
then how does that happen without,
?
(Just to be sure, ondelette was also correct about whether Clark meant POW camps or internment camps. Clark said: “We put them in a camp. They were prisoners of war.”)
Yes. That’s why I italicized that quote from ondelette’s comment, then wrote,
“He did…”
You are misreading me, but perhaps my writing wasn’t clear on these points.
No, you were clear enough. My bad.
Thanks again. I think it can be really tough at times to clearly lay out the details of issues in long comments where we try to address multiple issues. Simple things like how we each choose to use italics or blockquotes can lead to misunderstanding too when there’s no convention.
I try to take the least inflammatory interpretation when reading, but it can be hard to not interject the onus of “tone” at times and I think that sometimes leads us to disagree with people with whom we would largely agree – or at least disagree with less vociferously – if we were, say, having a drink and a discussion in a bar somewhere. ;-}
That, to me, is a COMPLETELY different activity. That’s fun. That’s easy. For me, this is often nerve-wracking. I’m really nervous about making mistakes, especially the kind I made today. In a conversation, recovering from a mistake is easy. Here a mistake can be a disaster. For me, it’s difficult enough to hold an online conversation together even if I’m writing as well as I can.
But, above you wrote, “Thanks for taking it in the spirit it was offered.” All I felt was gratitude! As far as I’m concerned we show respect for each other when we correct each other’s mistakes. One reason I write is to be corrected. If I’m trying really hard not to make a mistake, then of course I want to know when I fail.
Anyway… apart from whatever tiny contribution we can make to the writers, this really is all for the lulz, right? Taking it seriously just makes it more enjoyable. It helps me to remember that every now and then.
Thanks, Pedinska.
That took tremendous guts and grace.
Thanks. That’s very kind of you.
Here a mistake can be a disaster.
Ah, but it shouldn’t be, for “who among us is without sin”?
We all make them, so we should all be a little gracious when others do too.
I made the distinction because the entire article is very clearly implying that Clark wants to set up camps in the image of the Japanese Internment — Camps of civilians, based on a common characteristic (in that case, Japanese ancestry), in fairly clear implication here, Muslims-Americans. Clark was referring to prisoner of war camps, which did indeed inter Germans in the U.S. during World War II, who had been detained in the conflict. In that conflict, the Japanese internment camps were authorized by an act of Congress, the prisoner of war camps were legal and required under the Geneva Convention of 1929 relative to prisoners of war. The current conventions make a huge distinction between interning prisoners of war and interning civilians, BTW. The rules for the former are in GCIII, in fact, they are GCIII, and for the latter are part of GCIV which is relative to civilians.
Nope. The term is only a few years old, and is a theory that started in the U.S. Board of Prisons as far as I can tell, coram nobis maybe knows more about it. Also as far as I can tell, it doesn’t have a precise definition before the act, only in the aftermath.
I meant that it was a criticism of General Clark as opposed to being a criticism of the article. I’m actually not thinking Clark is misunderstanding and/or distorting the Geneva Conventions here. I’m kind of scared by all parties.
On the one hand, Murtaza seems to be raising the specter of Muslim internment camps on the model of the Japanese internment. I don’t see that at all in what Clark said, and I do see parallels to some of the treatment of Muslims, or the proposed treatment of Muslims to the treatment of German-Americans during World War I, they weren’t mass interned, they instead legalized harassing them and interning them as criminals and on at least one occasion lynching them. But I don’t see that in what Clark said, either. So I am quite worried that someone would — not sure how to put this politely — stir up a rumor of an internment in the works. So I’m very worried about Murtaza’s tone, given what Clark actually said.
On the other hand, General Clark seems to be buying into the same strange interpretation of ISIS’ call for random attacks as the commenter hellfire — who refers to it as “4th generation warfare” for some reason — which comports with the notion of a well-defined process of “radicalization”. And he’s talking about trying to, not sure how to put it without sloganeering, “pre-crime” the perpetrators before the fact and treat them like they were part of a well-organized underground army of some kind. It reads like a plot out of one of those scary internet movies where people who see a particular website are brainwashed and turn into zombies that cut out people’s hearts or something. Like I said, that kind of talk seems to have started in the B.O.P., and I think it’s a little weird.
But I also think pretending that the creators of the Islamic State aren’t Muslims, or pretending that they aren’t following the general historical pattern of armed groups in history forming caliphates, and how popular that was for recruiting even without the internet is also incredibly weird and resembles the ostrich and sand thing. They are Muslims, they are following a very well defined historical pattern for the formation of caliphates at least since the Fatimid Caliphate, or the Seljuks, or even the Ottomans, down through the Mahdi rebellion in the 1880s or the Khilafat Movement in India. Caliphates are formed by jacobin dissidents or armed groups, not scholars on Islamic law, at least historically. And they draw very large numbers of Muslims and of “foreign fighters”. And voluntary fighters throughout history have been predominantly young. So pretending there’s a spooky brain hacking program owned by ISIS capable of magically transforming youth into followers of a not-really-Muslim-not-real-caliphate is trash. It is Muslim, it is about a very real attempt to form a caliphate, it’s popular because of that, and no, that implies zip zilch nada about the Muslim family that lives down the street.
Personally, I think Abdulazeez was plain old suicidal. The whole “Muslim attacks U.S. military” was just his personal clear sky single driver bridge abutment. I wish it was “legal” to talk about the guns part instead.
I’m not aware that “radicalization” can be the subject of criminal law, since it would be a breach of the 1st Amendment on free speech, and maybe a criminalization of one’s very identity as well, not to mention void for vagueness (we criminalize crimes, not persons, i.e., no “outlawry”).
the entire article is very clearly implying that Clark wants to set up camps in the image of the Japanese Internment — Camps of civilians, based on a common characteristic (in that case, Japanese ancestry), in fairly clear implication here, Muslims-Americans. Clark was referring to prisoner of war camps, which did indeed inter Germans in the U.S. during World War II, who had been detained in the conflict.
While Clark was very careful to avoid calling out Muslims in particular, I noted elsewhere in comments those bits of Clark’s response which I felt were a bit dog whistleish that made me also feel like his intent was aimed, at least primarily, at Muslim-Americans. Thanks for setting out the distinctions between the two forms of captivity. While they are important, I would venture that it is, perhaps, a difference largely without distinction to the US citizens who’ve been deprived of freedom based on criteria which are likely to be held secret (national security demands being what they are) without due process.
I’m kind of scared by all parties.
Agreed, but the resource distribution seems to come down hardest on Clark’s side of the equation. :-s
I do see parallels to some of the treatment of Muslims, or the proposed treatment of Muslims to the treatment of German-Americans during World War I, they weren’t mass interned, they instead legalized harassing them and interning them as criminals and on at least one occasion lynching them. But I don’t see that in what Clark said, either.
Perhaps Clark confused WWI with WWII, something that would be very strange for him to do, I would think.
So I am quite worried that someone would — not sure how to put this politely — stir up a rumor of an internment in the works. So I’m very worried about Murtaza’s tone, given what Clark actually said.
I am less worried about Murtaza’s tone – which may be understandable given recent history between American armed forces and domestic security incidents and Muslim-Americans – than I am about the confusion that seems to be inherent to Clark’s statements. The comparison between inferences in an article here versus policies being advocated by a powerful military person on national tv do not favor the former over the latter. And, given the parallels you noted above, and the history you have clarified here in comments, Clark’s statements raise concerns for me that go above and beyond one category of potential targets.
But I also think pretending that the creators of the Islamic State aren’t Muslims, or pretending that they aren’t following the general historical pattern of armed groups in history forming caliphates, and how popular that was for recruiting even without the internet is also incredibly weird and resembles the ostrich and sand thing.
Maybe I’ve missed something, but I don’t recall seeing Murtaza do that. I don’t read all his articles but know he has criticized the fundamental religious influences of Saudi Arabia as well as the religious extremists found in Pakistan’s madrassas.
Personally, I think Abdulazeez was plain old suicidal. The whole “Muslim attacks U.S. military” was just his personal clear sky single driver bridge abutment.
Agree there’s evidence for that case.
I wish it was “legal” to talk about the guns part instead.
Well, it is, but then you have to deal with a whole ‘nother group of frothers than the one’s this article’s scared up. :-)
I also don’t recall my attributing that behavior directly to Murtaza. I think it’s a narrative that is heard in diverse corners of western society right now, and in diverse corners of many Muslim countries as well, from the think tanks in Washington to the halls of Al Azhar.
To me, the fear is all focussed on the mysterious websites that turn people into radicals in the west, attention is focussed on you can’t blame that shit on Islam in the east, and not enough attention is paid to history or to what it means to live in a world drowning in guns that can’t stoop to feed those without sustenance. A pox is already upon all our houses on all sides of all arguments. Like the song said, “Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong.”
I also don’t recall my attributing that behavior directly to Murtaza.
Sorry. Misunderstanding on my part.
The mention of Geneva was tangential and may be there to show that Clark had some humanitarian feelings at some point. What he’s talking about here, however, is detention, presumably with little or no trial, for Americans, and in U.S. territory, at least on intake. At this point Geneva — four conventions and two protocols — are not the main issue, the U.S. Constitution is, and the Milligan Court made plain that it doesn’t go on hiatus in wartime.
I think you mean that the mention of Geneva ought to be tangential. Because it is Clark’s assumption that these things constitute some kind of military action by ISIS, with whom we are arguably at war (we’re bombing them and arming their enemies, etc.) If he’s going to be interpreting everything as some kind of a war, then Geneva certainly can be held up to him as limiting his means and methods. Especially if he’s claiming the right to detain people for the “duration of conflict”.
In actual fact, like I said before, the ISIS thing seems to be a suicidal young person’s latest way of going out in a blaze of glory — a big splash way of hitting a bridge abutment. Today’s article in the NYTimes about the Abdulazeez investigation pretty much continues to lead ever closer to that conclusion. This isn’t an ISIS attack at all: If your name is Billy Joe McAllister you jump off the Tallahatchie bridge, if your name is Mohammed Abdulazeez you shoot at the US military and get the biggest obit the US media gives, including the alternative media.
The real discussion is still with the guns. An AK-47? From where? A gunshow in Atlanta run by the remnants of the Klan? Who are we kidding that you need military help from a caliphate in Syria to buy a lot of weapons when you’re a clinically depressed self-medicating bankrupt unemployable engineer mixed martial artist with an upcoming felony DUI trial?
A lot of people go into MMA with dreams of fighting the big one.
If we wanted to intern the really dangerous radicals, we will only need enough capacity for the legislative, executive and judicial branches of fedgov ….. plus Homeland Security (all of it) and the pentagon.
In all of history, I doubt there was any bad guys worse than this mafia that has our country by the butt. Major suckage.
That might be reasonable, if the camps were for those who want to replace our form of government with a theocracy.
Some people are just too Rad. What causes the to be radicalized?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SZXrWTaNlY
According the general,s philosophy, the country will need NUMEROUS internment camps….. so MANY are “RADICALS” in the country…. anti-war activists, non interventionists, Quakers, “Right to choose”, Demanders of Equality etc etc……. where will he put them all???
FEMA camps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moCCixXV_Bc
Wow, the very man who told us about neocon plans in the mideast. Who’d a thunk it.
It says something about how rapidly nervous people are willing to throw democracy under the bus. They don’t really have much faith, do they. But then, in my reckoning, this is the era we live in and see this on every level, microcosmic to macrocosmic.
“if someone supported Nazi Germany at the expense of the United States, we didn’t say that was freedom of speech, we put him in a camp, they were prisoners of war.”
Uh… not if his name was Preston Bush. The govt only, in the end, put a clamp on his bank. And certainly not if his name was Henry Ford, who supported the nazis, who gave Hitler a birthday present of $12,000 every year, and who ran Ford Germany on a non profit basis while they churned out tanks for the Wehrmacht. Indeed, after the war, Ford sued the US Govt for bombing damage to their German factories who had been churning out those very tanks – and WON the suit!
Pardon me, but what a lot of hypocritical horseshit.
There was an Irish minister, Conor Cruise O’Brien (RIP) who did the same thing in Ireland – that is, push for internment laws in the North. (Ironic, really, since he helped form a government with Charles Haughey, who was caught shipping arms to the IRA. How very Irish, lol.) Even later, when O’Brien was writing for The Observer (since purchased by The Guardian), he had very astute observations to make on international matters, but turned dumb whenever his focus shifted back toward Ireland.
It’s amazing that some parts of the world could hold on to even a pretence of democracy for so long.
That would have been Prescott Bush, not Preston. But yes, he was one of many so-called “exceptions” who evaded prosecution and lawful imprisonment for aiding the Nazis.
I guess that would mean the KKK?
So, when was a war against Islam declared by the U.S. government?
It’s not a war against Islam, it’s a war against uppity peasants – which in this era, just happens to be Muslims. Usually, at least.
But maybe you’re right. Muslims, it seems, have this awful tendency to fight back. We all should have appreciated Latin Americans and black Africans when we could. Now there are people out there willing to slaughter innocents just like us. Can’t have that, now can we?
Good