"Internment/Resettlement"..trying to get some facts out
By spalladino
@spalladino (17891)
United States
August 14, 2009 9:58am CST
I originally attempted to post this in Politics, since the Fear Factor version of this position has been posted here a number of times, but it somehow ended up in LaLa Land somewhere. I'm reposting it ONLY to give the folks who normally come to this topic, and who have been concerned about this, the opportunity to read some facts provided by...surprisingly...World Net Daily. They do slip back over to the dark side at the end but, for the most part, they actually practice straight, from reliable sources, reporting which resolves the misconceptions about the controversial position of "Internment/Resettlement" within the Army National Guard. Part of the article is provided below. Does this make sense to you or do your suspicions of our own military members still run wild?
[b]***National Guard reveals 'internment' job sites
Military confirms it follows Constitution, civilian leaders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 13, 2009
10:30 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Soldiers recruited to be "Internment/Resettlement" specialists by a series of National Guard ads concerning "civilian resettlement" locations would have assignments overseas, not within the U.S., says a National Guard spokesman who reports members pledge to follow the U.S. Constitution and take orders from American civilian authorities.
The response came several days after WND submitted questions to the National Guard about the advertisements for "Internment" soldiers who could operate in a "civilian resettlement" center.
As WND reported, the ads were raising alarm because of a series of other government moves, including the recent Department of Homeland Security report describing those who oppose abortion or support third-party political candidates as "extremists" and the Department of Defense's own categorization of protesters as "low-level terrorists."
America was founded by right-wing extremists! Get the bumper sticker that lets everyone know you have no apologies for being right!
The ads, at the GoArmy.com website as well as others including Monster.com, cite the need for:
"Internment/Resettlement (I/R) Specialists in the Army are primarily responsible for day-to-day operations in a military confinement/correctional facility or detention/internment facility. I/R Specialists provide rehabilitative, health, welfare, and security to U.S. military prisoners within a confinement or correctional facility; conduct inspections; prepare written reports; and coordinate activities of prisoners/internees and staff personnel.
Guard spokesman Col. Michael Jones, however, told WND the job description has been around for years and is one area of specialization for members of the military police corps.
They are the ones, he said, who guard captured suspects in Afghanistan or Iraq, move them to safe locations and maintain them in secure locations until they are handled by some sort of judicial process.
"You must resettle the prisoners to an area of safety where they can be interned in a safe environment," he told WND today. "This is a specific role of a military police soldier, to be trained in the proper protection and interrogation and handling of enemy combatants on foreign soil."
Such soldiers "do not ... operate a military police role in the United States," he said.
He said the National Guard has no authority over civilians in the U.S. unless a governor declares some sort of emergency and asks for help, such as when a hurricane hits.
"I don't know of a soldier who would ever contemplate to be used or be allowed to be used against citizens of America," he said.
However, he said given such orders, National Guard troops will handle crowds, provide security and respond to other needs within the United States.
"We follow orders and the Constitution of the United States," he confirmed.
Asked about pending plans in Washington that would put National Guard units under the direct control of Washington, he said he could not respond to "what if" questions, especially potential scenarios that would include an order to act against Americans..
"We're very fortunate in that the leaders we have have never placed us in a position that we even have to ask that question," he said.
He said he could not address the issue of how many such detention centers are operated by the U.S. government in Afghanistan or Iraq or their staffing needs, but did confirm that most operations in Iraq are being turned over step-by-step to Iraqi forces, military or police.
He referred WND to the U.S. Army for that information, and an Army spokesman contacted at the Pentagon said he could not provide that information.
Another National Guard spokesman, Mark Allen, said, "We ran the ad, but the soldiers that we recruit and train are primarily trained so they can be deployed overseas. We envision that eventually people get deployed and they'll be responsible for internment and relocation of people overseas."
He said such "Internment" specialists are recruited just like cooks or other positions.***[/b]
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106742
2 people like this
2 responses
@Rollo1 (16676)
• Boston, Massachusetts
14 Aug 09
"He said the National Guard has no authority over civilians in the U.S. unless a governor declares some sort of emergency and asks for help, such as when a hurricane hits. "
Or an epidemic?
"National Guard drill at high school to prepare for possible H1N1 riot":
http://www.sunjournal.com/node/105339/
"Swine Flu's Worst Case Scenario: Paranoia or Preparedness?":
During the bird flu scare of 2005, the Bush administration added novel forms of influenza — including the swine flu — to the official list of "quarantinable communicable diseases," clearing the way for the forced detention of people who exhibit symptoms of the disease.
Now a proposal awaiting Defense Secretary Robert Gates' approval would allow the military to set up regional teams to assist civilian authorities in dealing with the impact of the swine flu pandemic. And some observers see this level of government preparedness as little more than a pretext for tyranny.
"It would be extremely troubling and raise serious constitutional questions," Chris Calabre, ACLU counsel for technology and liberty, told FOXNews.com when asked how the civil liberties group would react to mandatory quarantines. "We opposed this in 2005 and will do so again because it gives the government blanket authority to hold anyone and has no due process."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,538774,00.html
No due process. That's what happens if you are accused of terrorism, and you are removed not to a local jail but to a special detention center that could be in another state. More than one US citizen has already been detained this way, without due process, including one man who threatened a telemarketer.
Hey, it could be much ado about nothing. But if the ACLU is concerned about it, it's probably not nothing and it's definitely not a right-wing conspiracy.
It never hurts to be prepared.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
14 Aug 09
"Now a proposal awaiting Defense Secretary Robert Gates' approval would allow the military to set up regional teams to assist civilian authorities in dealing with the impact of the swine flu pandemic. And some observers see this level of government preparedness as little more than a pretext for tyranny."
Would this be the same kind of tyranny that allows the Florida National Guard to set up regional teams following a hurricane to assits civilian authorities in dealing with the impact of a big storm? The National Guard is usually in place just outside of the areas that are going to be hit before the storm arrives so that they can get in and set up quickly in order to distribute food, water & tarps to cover roofs. FEMA gets in quickly as well. When Hurricane Wilma left us without power for 5 days I welcomed this government assistance since we had been prepared for 3 days and our supplies had run out.
It's already been reported (somewhere) that the guard would assist regional & local health officials with testing and the administration of medication if the swine flu comes back as a true pandemic during the normal flu season. I live in a rural county among a series of other rural counties and I can tell you that our Health Depts. are small. Even with the assistance of the few hospitals we have in the area, large numbers of sick people needing treatment for this flu would quickly overwhelm the ability of the people responsible for providing care. This is why the Guard would be needed...to provide additional staff for testing and treatment.
The idea of mandatory quarantines is flawed in several areas. Primarily, once you present with the illness, the possibility that you've already infected other members of your family exists. Will entire families be taken to quarantine camps? Secondly, as soon as word gets out that something like this is even being seriously considered, people will stop seeking treatment which will result in more deaths from this flu. Also, transporting sick people to "camps" instead of treating them and sending them home puts those responsible for transportation at risk, those responsible for maintaining the "camps" and caring for the sick at risk. It also increases the liklihood of REAL riots when there is an easier and more logical solution...get treatment and go home.
I have no faith and little respect for the ACLU because of their track record and take what they have to say about most issues with a ton of salt.
@Rollo1 (16676)
• Boston, Massachusetts
14 Aug 09
I am not always a fan of the ACLU, for instance, when they bully small school districts into banning Christmas concerts, etc., but they aren't the sort of people to oppose a liberal administration lightly. The words Civil Liberties is right there in the organization's title. Due process is one of our civil liberties.
I wondered though, because I see on the news now and then that there are people who have disregarded the evacuation notices and stay on at home during hurricanes. Do they forcibly remove people from their property and transport them to an evacuation center during a hurricane?
I don't think that preparing for vaccine riots and mandatory quarantines is quite the same as providing evacuation and rescue services in a hurricane.
There's something about the word "mandatory" that sticks in my constitutional craw, if you know what I mean.
2 people like this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
14 Aug 09
No, Rollo, the term "mandatory evacuation" is actually a misnomer because no one has the authority to force you to leave your home for any reason...hurricane, fire, flood included. You also can't be forced to evacuate a home that you're renting, which is something we discovered many years ago when we were vacationing on the outer banks of North Carolina. Going to evacuation centers is strictly voluntary and usually consists of a school gymnasium or auditorium somewhere in the community. Here in Florida, even on the islands and far down in the Keys, no one can force you to leave your home and there are those who don't regardless of how bad the storm is projected to be. My family and I have personal standards depending on the strength of an incoming storm and it's track. Our house is wind rated to 150mph so we didn't evacuate when Wilma was coming because she wasn't strong enough. What happened though was that she intensified practically on top of us and there was massive loss of electricity to a very large area because so many trees brought down power lines and so many poles came down as well.
"I don't think that preparing for vaccine riots and mandatory quarantines is quite the same as providing evacuation and rescue services in a hurricane."
I agree, it's worse! Imagine how outraged you would feel if someone wanted to remove a sick family member of yours to some quarantine facility. Imagine how outraged YOU would be if they told you that you had to go, too, because you've been exposed. I do not for one second believe that the American people would stand for something like that and...trust me...if anyone tried something even remotely like that down here, they'd be shot. I don't believe that Floridians are the only folks in the country who would react violently to something like that which is one of the reasons why a "mandatory evacuation" is not and cannot be truly mandatory. The other reason is the Constitution...and a pandemic cannot be used to overstep that document.
1 person likes this

@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
14 Aug 09
This is a pretty broad and encumpassing topic. I have been hearing abut the "FEMA camps" thing since the 90s. Talk of that sort of thing accelerated drasticly under the Bush administration, especialy after the directive issued on contitnuity of govnernment, conspiricy theorists were convinced for years that Bush was perpetualy on the edge of declaring martial law, declaring himself president for life and locking up and executing us all in mass internment/concentration camps. YOutube was, and still is loaded with videos that show these suposed "camps", along with "Fema trains" complete with "shackles" and "guillotines".
The funny thing is, these same conspiricy theorists who were then deemed to be "leftwing nuts", are now deemed "rightwing nuts".......
While I don't buy in to the whole FEMA camp thing or that we are on the verge of martial law and mass round ups. There are a few things that concern me. We do in fact have military on U.S. soil training for civil unrest, something that is BLATENTLY ILEGAL. By law, and alluded to even in the constitution, the United States military cannot enforce civil. Not only are there several large groups training and on stand by for this, it has actually happened already. Alabam, after that shooting spree, soldiers from a near by base, not a national guard base, regular army, were seen conducting road blocks and such. I still have not heard any more on it, who was responsable, who ordered it, and if that person was procecuted for it, the whole thing just seemed to quietly go away.
While I don't buy in to the whole FEMA camp thing or that we are on the verge of martial law and mass round ups. There are a few things that concern me. We do in fact have military on U.S. soil training for civil unrest, something that is BLATENTLY ILEGAL. By law, and alluded to even in the constitution, the United States military cannot enforce civil. Not only are there several large groups training and on stand by for this, it has actually happened already. Alabam, after that shooting spree, soldiers from a near by base, not a national guard base, regular army, were seen conducting road blocks and such. I still have not heard any more on it, who was responsable, who ordered it, and if that person was procecuted for it, the whole thing just seemed to quietly go away.

@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
14 Aug 09
Although it was a noble offer on the part of the base commander, it was stil technicly illegal. The deeper problem is the doors it opens. Is this really the direction we want to be looking down? Could not the county and state law enforcemnt been called in? Or for that matter, national guard? civilian militia? I realize every situation is unique and I may not know all the circumstances. It just seemed another small chip in the stone by a chisle that has been slowly at work for quite some time now. If we accept this instance, it makes the next one easier.
2 people like this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
15 Aug 09
I do agree with you, x, but there does come a point the line being crossed is unacceptable. Interning sick people in camps instead of allowing them to recover at home would be one in my opinion. I believe the situation in that small town in Alabama was beyond the norm and time was of the essence since this madman was still running around. I don't remember all of the details regarding the lack of reinforcements for the local law enforcement but I don't think a civilian militia would have been a good idea since the shooter was a civilian so he could have blended in pretty easily.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
14 Aug 09
I remember that incident and am working from memory here so bear with me. There was a gunman on a rampage who had already killed 11 people as I recall and the commander of the nearby Army base made a call and offered the limited assistance of some military police in to assist the small police force there in a supportive role. Because this situation had so overwhelmed the local authorities, the offer was accepted. The military police did not just "go in". They also didn't take on any role other than manning roadblocks in an attempt to spot the suspect, which wouldn't have been possible with a police force already in place. It didn't just quietly go away. There was an investigation and no one was prosecuted for it because of the ongoing relationship between the community and the military base.




