The Plan for Iran....

[Che Guava]

I don't know what qualifies as a 'credible source' in your eyes, Faux news?

Yep, that's me, Mr FoxNews. The conservatives on this site should have a good chuckle at that.

But let's look at the sources provided. First comes from the "AMERICAN PATRIOT FRIENDS NETWORK" who's leading story this week is about 'new evidence' that the Bush administration was directly complicit in the 9/11 attacks. Between the story topics and the low-rent website, I just can't really call it credible without some other sites to back up thier information.

Which brings us to rense.com, which looks to me like a website that my 13-y-o cousin just set up. There's a lot of just average news reporting here (never mind the ludicris ads present), but a few nice little gems like this one in the features: Race, Genes, Intelligence - Facts Are Facts which argues that there is undeniable truth that IQ and race are strongly linked....

You mention auschwitz (sorry I don't know how to spell it either) and that if you think about it you have answered your question as to why the camps might appear in the US. No not for reasons of nazi style racism but well it is an old trick of empire. Actually the brits had proper nazi style death camps in africa for the purpose of imperialism and that was 1953!! ATFER WW2. Also the US used these camps in Veitnam for the local vietmanese and that was even more recent. The Italians used camps like auswitz in their attempt to occupy Libya before or during WW1. Internment Camps are as much a tool of trade for imperialists as standing armies, aggresive warring and propaganda.

There is something that all of those cases do have in common that is not shared by the American camps: all of those camps were set up for isolating certain racial groups. I'm not saying that doing that isn't reprehensible, but I would far more likely to beleive (and it would still be an incredible longshot) that the US or Britain would set up camps to intern muslims if a larger-scale 'war' broke out. But not aaverage citizens that would speak up. And even if it were for arabs/muslims/ iranians, I would imagine it would have to be a pretty extreme situation to actually go through. Much more extreme than a bombing campaign of Iran, which seems like the most likely outcome of thes little fracas.

On a related note, IIRC, there were very few vietnamese in the US prior to the end of the war, and so far I can't find any reports of those camps.

Well I hope your right.

Tell ya what, if you're not in an internment camp by 2010, you owe me a coke

 

[zenspiderz]

Yep, that's me, Mr FoxNews. The conservatives on this site should have a good chuckle at that.

But let's look at the sources provided. First comes from the "AMERICAN PATRIOT FRIENDS NETWORK" who's leading story this week is about 'new evidence' that the Bush administration was directly complicit in the 9/11 attacks. Between the story topics and the low-rent website, I just can't really call it credible without some other sites to back up thier information.

Which brings us to rense.com, which looks to me like a website that my 13-y-o cousin just set up. There's a lot of just average news reporting here (never mind the ludicris ads present), but a few nice little gems like this one in the features: Race, Genes, Intelligence - Facts Are Facts which argues that there is undeniable truth that IQ and race are strongly linked....

Well alright I didn't particularly think Fox's particular brand of lies were your style. Probably you like your 'mainstream' lies to be a bit less obvious. So what would qualify in your eyes as a credible source. I have seen the BBC tell some serious whoppers so I personally don't give any credibility to anything in the mainstream media except for the Independant and even then.. Not saying the independant internet media is always on the money... but it is no less trustworthy if you see what I mean.

There is something that all of those cases do have in common that is not shared by the American camps: all of those camps were set up for isolating certain racial groups. I'm not saying that doing that isn't reprehensible, but I would far more likely to beleive (and it would still be an incredible longshot) that the US or Britain would set up camps to intern muslims if a larger-scale 'war' broke out. But not aaverage citizens that would speak up. And even if it were for arabs/muslims/ iranians, I would imagine it would have to be a pretty extreme situation to actually go through. Much more extreme than a bombing campaign of Iran, which seems like the most likely outcome of thes little fracas.

Internment camps do not usually serve a racist agenda they serve a imperialist agenda. Racism often as with other forms of bigotry is a tool of the imperialist. The US is an empire in all but name, and as can be seen from the US elites own documents it is an empire that fears its loss of supremacy to others such as china, india, russia and others. Desperate measures are called for when empires and in danger of decline. Obstacles to the imperial agenda foreign AND domestic must be dealt with. Camps are as good a measure as any other. I repeat the italians didn't put libyans in camps because they are racist they put them there because those libyans were an obstacle to Italian conquest and exploitation of Libya, same goes for the brits in africa and the yanks in veitnam. The justifcation for the camps may invoke racist terminology such as with the Nazi camps and the british ones or they can invoke political terminology as with the soviet camps and the US camps. The justification however is NOT the motivation and the motivation is always dominance, power, empire. You probably know that the US elites are as capable of machievellian scheming, stunning arrogance and callousness as any other group of elites. So why not camps? They use nuclear waste as ammunition in Iraq! They used sarin gas against US marines that deserted in Veitnam. And sooo sooo many other morally void even genocidal actions so really why not camps in the US for domestic opponents if it serves their purposes? They have said in some books and documents that the US empire must 'strike back' to regain its sole supremacy. To do this they envision the need for very extensive and long running military campaigns all across the world most paricularly the oil and gas rich regions. We can already see this plan unfolding with Iraq, afghanistan and now potentially Iran. Economic disruption, recession, depression and war weariness are already expected and counters put in place for the inevitable consequences which is MASSIVE rebellion amongst the US peasentry. So it may be and it wouldn't be the first time in history.

On a related note, IIRC, there were very few vietnamese in the US prior to the end of the war, and so far I can't find any reports of those camps.

The camps the US put veitnamese in were in US occuppied areas of Veitnam not the US.

Tell ya what, if you're not in an internment camp by 2010, you owe me a coke

If I am not in an internment camp by 2010 then I gladdly give you 2!! hey but what do I get if i get gulaged in 2011 onwards?

What will really happen? I guess we will just have to wait and see.

 

[Che Guava]

Well alright I didn't particularly think Fox's particular brand of lies were your style. Probably you like your 'mainstream' lies to be a bit less obvious. So what would qualify in your eyes as a credible source. I have seen the BBC tell some serious whoppers so I personally don't give any credibility to anything in the mainstream media except for the Independant and even then.. Not saying the independant internet media is always on the money... but it is no less trustworthy if you see what I mean.

Your condescending attitude isn't winning you any points here, but what the hell, I just retired from another thread....

Credible sources to me are ones that contain well researched-facts, that are backed up with references. Which is why I tend to hold peer-reviewed scientific literature as top tier. But of course, that isn't where I get the news.

I tend to put a bit more stock in mainstream media for one simple reason: being mainstream, they enjoy enough viewership/readership to be held accountable. If the BBC tells a whopper, there's a better chance we'll hear about it than Joe Blow's I KNOW THE SECRET OF 9_11 homepage. When I hear about a story that interest me, I'll take a look at a couple mainstream sources, do a bit of research on my own, and try to come up with something of a complete picture. I don't expect the BBC, the CBC, CNN, or anyone to give me a completely unbiased view, and in many cases I do think that the indie media gets a lot closer to the truth than major news networks. Problem is, when they're off, they tend to be REALLY off.

Which brings me back to this story. Searching on the web for internment camps in America I find more than a few websites. Are any from major news sources? No. Are any from major organizations, governmental or NGO? No. Any scolarly papers or reviews? No. Any from any of the larger indie media? Not that I could see. Any from 'Joe Blow' sites? Plenty.

So, what are we to deduce from our research? Two possibilities come up:

(1) These camps are being built in America under a such web of secrecy so that no major news outlet or NGO has heard word of it, or has been intimidated by the US government to keep quiet.

(2) It's an internet runour that has been passed from page to page with scant evidence to back it up.

Accum's Razor tells me to pick #2.

Of course, If I've missed naything in my searches, I'd be glad to see what else is out there.

Internment camps do not usually serve a racist agenda they serve a imperialist agenda. Racism often as with other forms of bigotry is a tool of the imperialist. The US is an empire in all but name, and as can be seen from the US elites own documents it is an empire that fears its loss of supremacy to others such as china, india, russia and others. Desperate measures are called for when empires and in danger of decline. Obstacles to the imperial agenda foreign AND domestic must be dealt with. Camps are as good a measure as any other. I repeat the italians didn't put libyans in camps because they are racist they put them there because those libyans were an obstacle to Italian conquest and exploitation of Libya, same goes for the brits in africa and the yanks in veitnam. The justifcation for the camps may invoke racist terminology such as with the Nazi camps and the british ones or they can invoke political terminology as with the soviet camps and the US camps. The justification however is NOT the motivation and the motivation is always dominance, power, empire. You probably know that the US elites are as capable of machievellian scheming, stunning arrogance and callousness as any other group of elites. So why not camps? They use nuclear waste as ammunition in Iraq! They used sarin gas against US marines that deserted in Veitnam. And sooo sooo many other morally void even genocidal actions so really why not camps in the US for domestic opponents if it serves their purposes? They have said in some books and documents that the US empire must 'strike back' to regain its sole supremacy. To do this they envision the need for very extensive and long running military campaigns all across the world most paricularly the oil and gas rich regions. We can already see this plan unfolding with Iraq, afghanistan and now potentially Iran. Economic disruption, recession, depression and war weariness are already expected and counters put in place for the inevitable consequences which is MASSIVE rebellion amongst the US peasentry. So it may be and it wouldn't be the first time in history.

I don't mean to say that the intentions of the 'camp builders' were racially motivated, I'm saying that the only way a government can do something like this and still seem legitimate in the eyes of its citizens is if it manages to draw a clear and definite line between those who will be interned and those that will not. Race tends to be a clear definer, because you are either Lebanese/Japanese/Vietnamese or not. Getting into the grey area of political dissidents that come from teh majority is simply too dicey, and people wouldn't stand for it (not that they should stand for racial segregation, but it does make it easier)

The camps the US put veitnamese in were in US occuppied areas of Veitnam not the US.

I beleive the camps you are referring to were a misguided attempt to clear the vietnamese out of the countryside into 'safe zones' where they wouldn't get killed by bombing raids or poisonned by defoliants. Not exactly the same thing, though stil not kosher.

If I am not in an internment camp by 2010 then I gladdly give you 2!! hey but what do I get if i get gulaged in 2011 onwards?

Then I take my two cokes and make a run for Panama

What will really happen? I guess we will just have to wait and see.

Expect an e-mail with a forwarding address on New Years day....