It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ret. US General Wesley Clark Promotes Internment of 'Radicalized' US Citizens on MSNBC

page: 1
47
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+22 more 
posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Careful what you say on TV, Wes. Some people might get the wrong idea...


"In 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 them in a camp," Clark continued, "They were prisoners of war."

"If these people are radicalized, and they don't support the United States, and they're disloyal to the United States, as a matter of principle, fine, that's their right, but it's our (the government's) right and our obligation to segregate them from the normal community for the duration of the conflict. And I think we're going to have to get increasingly get tough on this."

...although I don't know how else that could really be interpreted.


I thought some of you might find this interesting. I especially found the "lost a job/girlfriend" part interesting. Basically, if you're going through any kind of common difficulty in your life, you are at-risk for radicalization and need to be... looked at.

It's coming, folks. They grow more and more brazen by the minute, relying on our own ignorance as their cover.


edit on 7/18/15 by NthOther because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther

Wow! That's a pretty eye opening interview. The implications of his statement are staggering, to say the least. I really got shook up by his mention that we need to "identify those most likely to be radicalized". Thought crime ...?

Just because Gen. Clark is retired in no way means he is not still intertwined with the U.S. military and government. I believe that he held this interview and said what he did with the full backing and possibly instructions from someone of power.


edit on 18-7-2015 by quercusrex because: adding text



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: quercusrex

Just because Gen. Clark is retired in no way means he is not still intertwined with the U.S. military and government. I believe that he held this interview and said what he did with the full backing and possibly instructions from someone of power.

Well of course. Very little gets past the multiple levels and protocols of network content management. He was there, saying what he said, for an endorsed reason.

That being said, ol' Wes has always been a little zany. So maybe that just makes him the perfect wacko to openly suggest the idea.

Plausible deniability. "That crazy old codger doesn't know what he's talking about," etc. But the idea is planted nonetheless. All part of the conditioning process, in my opinion.
edit on 7/18/15 by NthOther because: (no reason given)


+5 more 
posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:27 PM
link   
It seems Wesley Clark got paid off at some point in recent years.

He used to be critical on the so-called "war on terror".

In addition to the internment camp notion, Clark's statement also implies a "Minoritly Report" pre-crime style of justice. Get people before they do anything.

BTW, the term "self-radicalized lone wolf" is the biggest load of who-ha TPTB have fed the American public in quite awhile.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:30 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther

There's really only one way to deal with a 'radical' of any kind and that's to become one yourself.

The government is always anti-human because, by nature, it has to be for self preservation. It needs secrets and spies, courts and money. They do not need people, in fact people are antithetical to government control and hegemony. Why have all these people out there with their different ideals and standards when everything can be standardised and measured, controlled and regimented?

1984 ~(the book), in my opinion, is the single best example of a warning ahead of its' time PERIOD. There hasn't, and wont be, another like it - maybe brave new world as the alternative or Atlas Shrugged.

These people, especially ones like this general see enemies everywhere. They see radicals and extremists where we see passion. They see war and violence were we would debate. Who is going to stop HIS kind of radical? Because his kind of radical seems to be running the world!

I point to "self-radicalized lone wolf" ----- what a beautiful example of double-speak. This means a person with strong views.
edit on 11/10/2012 by Joneselius because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:32 PM
link   
The retired General has an unpopular opinion...go figure.


He likes how things used to be done and wishes we would return to that era....er... Have you ever noticed that is a common theme with many groups?


+9 more 
posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:33 PM
link   
The current government need an enemy.

And I don't mean just the Obama Regime. I mean the previous administrations and probably the future administrations.

This type/style of authoritative government can only exist if it has an enemy.

If things were peaceful, if we all could get along, this government would cease to exist.

Therefor it needs, it requires enemies. Foreign and domestic.

It requires strife. It places stresses upon the citizenry in order to justify it's existence.

It creates enemies where none existed before.

It is, oh, how do you say it? Quite progressive in its behavior.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther

If someone like Prescott Bush supported nazi Germany we'll
put all you all up in here!


They're all completely out of their G-D minds!
edit on Rpm71815v39201500000002 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Exactly right, I don't get how this simple observation escapes people.

Every government has to be anti people, it simply has to be, to exist. They need to be fighting something, or fighting against something or for something. If not they need to protect us from something instead. If both of those fail we see through historyw what happens, they simply start killing us instead.

There has never been a government in history that didn't subjugate it's own people at some time. Japanese Americas anyone?

Government is the single worst entity man ever dreamt up, and I wish we'd all collectively wash our hands of it and go back to simple communities instead.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Joneselius

Hmmm, the alternative being...doing nothing?? Or perhaps empathizing with the 'doers'? "After all we must have done something bad for them to hate us so much....much like the abused wife figures it's her fault for her bullying husband.

The British solution seems most workable. Once the lead starts flying, SAS or their ilk enters the fray....there are no prisoners, 'resisting arrest'...


edit on 18-7-2015 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Joneselius

I will never be "anti-human".



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: NthOther
"If these people are radicalized, and they don't support the United States, and they're disloyal to the United States, as a matter of principle, fine, that's their right, but it's our (the government's) right and our obligation to segregate them from the normal community for the duration of the conflict. And I think we're going to have to get increasingly get tough on this."


Interesting. So it's fine. It's their right. But we're going to lock them up for it anyway. Anyone wanna tell me again how "rights" cannot be infringed upon.

Also, since when did Governments get "rights"??? I always thought people had "rights" and Governments protected them, even against Government itself. Guess the Gov. doesn't get it's power from the people anymore. The People may want to examine this and find out where their power does come from before it's unleashed.

I wonder if he gets a kick back from the weapons manufactures at all because I'm sure his little speech just sold a crap load of guns to people all over this country.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:41 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther
Seems to me that the implication is towards Muslim radicalization. Our collective " Big Threat To The Health And Well Being Of The American Way Of Life." McCarthyism much?

Hey, my grumpy old ass is pretty freakin' radical, or so I've been told. But I'm a middle aged, white non-Muslim male so I guess I don't get free rent at a camp.




posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Joneselius

I didn't see your initial post, was writing mine, but I see that it echoed yours quite well.

Well said, sir.

Well said.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: quercusrex

Hey, my grumpy old ass is pretty freakin' radical, or so I've been told. But I'm a middle aged, white non-Muslim male so I guess I don't get free rent at a camp.



Wait long enough, your time may come.

Sadly.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: quercusrex
Seems to me that the implication is towards Muslim radicalization. Our collective " Big Threat To The Health And Well Being Of The American Way Of Life." McCarthyism much?

Hey, my grumpy old ass is pretty freakin' radical, or so I've been told. But I'm a middle aged, white non-Muslim male so I guess I don't get free rent at a camp.



Don't be so sure. Remember the question asked was "what to do about these lone wolf attacks". I'm almost positive every middle aged, white non-Muslim who's ever gone against the Gov. or rebelled in anyway against the establishment has been labeled as a "lone wolf attack".

Just something to think about.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: quercusrex

Seems to me that the implication is towards Muslim radicalization. Our collective " Big Threat To The Health And Well Being Of The American Way Of Life." McCarthyism much?

The people themselves are now the perpetual enemy, which really means that the enemy is whoever in power says is the enemy. He gives it an anti-Muslim flavor to make it more palatable to the American public, which of course couldn't be based on a more bigoted assumption.

However, we all know he is talking about anyone who might get the bright idea of resisting their evil machinations.
edit on 7/18/15 by NthOther because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Ya those interment camps aren't a very dark page of our history at all...

Can't believe someone would act like that was/is a good idea.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Well the alternative is to absolutely castrate the people in 'power'. Cut them off from their weapons and their status. Make being a politicians a job no one wants. Remove the celebrity and the fanfare and make it ALL business, all the time, every day.

We'll soon see the narcissistic money makers out, then after them can go the 'look I'm on TV crowd' then the slackers and shmoozers.

The remnant that are left should take both an empathy and mental stability course every month, for the duration of their tenure, and be forced to live amongst the people they govern. With the median income being their own. MAYBE then something will change. Don't let the people in power be part of 'any' private club where status speaks. None. Don't let them hide emails and goings on, never have a closed door meeting. Stop foreign war interventions and for the love of God arrest their banker friends and end legal bribery.

Separate completely corporations from politics and give them NO say in how anything is governed. Separate banking from speculation. There's a lot of things we 'could do' but no one will, it's too painful.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Lol. If I live long enough. My fear is for my grandchildren. Their world as adults will be so completely different I'm sure I wouldn't recognize it.



new topics

top topics



 
47
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join