US Internment Camps (REX 84)?

[zaphod2016]

I found an interesting article today:

www -dot- vorchester -dot- com/vnews/?p=13

Although the government has always been prone to the demonization of certain groups, there hadn’t been much focus on a return to government prison camps until REX 84 (Readiness Exercise 1984) in 1984. That exercise marked a distinct return to the willingness of the US government to imprison its citizens. It shows that they are ready, willing and able to return to citizen internment.

Dislaimer: I've never heard of this website before, and my "woo detector" is blinking. I had never heard of REX 84 either, so I looked at the wiki page:

Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was a plan by the United States federal government to test their ability to detain large numbers of American citizens in case of massive civil unrest or national emergency. Exercises similar to Rex 84 happen periodically.

The source for this statement:

Diana Reynolds, "The Rise of the National Security State: FEMA and the NSC," CovertAction Information Bulletin, issue #33 (Winter 1990).

Who is Diana Reynolds? A crackpot? A trust-worthy author?

And what about these internment camps? Misunderstanding? Total BS? A creepy reality?

A forum search resulted in no matches. If this has already been covered, a link to the discussion would be appreciated.

[Bobert]

I wouldnt discuss this if I were you!

[Gazpacho]

The US government has contingency plans for the breakdown of civilian authority.

The notion that there are already civilian detention camps built for this purpose doesn't make much sense. The government doesn't have any way of knowing where civilian authority will break down, and it would be able to improvise facilities when that happens.

[hamelekim]

The US government has contingency plans for the breakdown of civilian authority.

The notion that there are already civilian detention camps built for this purpose doesn't make much sense. The government doesn't have any way of knowing where civilian authority will break down, and it would be able to improvise facilities when that happens.

It makes complete sense. They know where certain troubled spots are in the Country, where the so called suvivalists live. Although I do agree they would use temporary areas to begin with, they moved people from New Orleans all over the US afterwards. So to think that they wouldn't do the same for possible trouble makers is just silly. They've already done it on a massive scale with the Katrina victims, it's proven they can do it.

They also have train tracks by some of these Camps, which they can use to bring numerous people to the camps from any part of the country.

The Camps are real, there's documentation proving that Halliburton has built several dozen camps for the US Government. It isn't some nutcase fantasy that these camps exist, they really do exist. The US Government has said that they are for immigrants (illegal or otherwise) during a national emergency, but you better believe that anti government people will be brough to them as well in an emergency.

[hamelekim]

Discussion of Continuity of Government plan in Congress. Watch and discuss.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_gD25lwjAk

[theprestige]

It makes complete sense. They know where certain troubled spots are in the Country, where the so called suvivalists live. Although I do agree they would use temporary areas to begin with, they moved people from New Orleans all over the US afterwards.
I'm pretty sure most of those people moved themselves. But hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.

So to think that they wouldn't do the same for possible trouble makers is just silly. They've already done it on a massive scale with the Katrina victims, it's proven they can do it.
That's funny, I could've sworn the government got pilloried in the media for completely failing to do it on a massive scale with Katrina victims. But hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.

They also have train tracks by some of these Camps, which they can use to bring numerous people to the camps from any part of the country.
But hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.

The Camps are real, there's documentation proving that Halliburton has built several dozen camps for the US Government.
Documentation, really? Hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.

It isn't some nutcase fantasy that these camps exist, they really do exist.
They really do? Hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.

The US Government has said that they are for immigrants (illegal or otherwise) during a national emergency,
The US Government has actually said this? Hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.

but you better believe that anti government people will be brough to them as well in an emergency.
I'll tell you what: You present solid, credible evidence to support your claims, and I'll happily believe anything you say. Does that sound fair to you?

[Gazpacho]

Yeah, I bet of all the things the US government has to worry about -- storms, C/B weapons, epidemics -- they're just shaking in their boots at the thought of backwoods survivalists on the march.

The Camps are real, there's documentation proving that Halliburton has built several dozen camps for the US Government. It isn't some nutcase fantasy that these camps exist, they really do exist.Where?

(Please give me something other than Beech Grove Amtrak facility or the Taylor immigrant detention center. I want a challenge here.)

[zaphod2016]

hamelekim: You mentioned documentation that shows Halliburton building these camps. Where can I find it?

[Foolmewunz]

You can find numerous articles on the Haliburton/FEMA death(or internment) camps. On truly reliable (ahem) sites, too.

Prison Planet.... An entire article of innuendo....
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/010306gulagsforamericans.htm

The always reliable Liberty For Life crea... http://www.libertyforlife.com/jail-police/us_concentration_camps.htm

This is all a basket of lies. They're playing connect-the-dots, again. Connecting two separate news stories by filtering it through their own paranoia.

Ashcroft made a statement in '02 that citizens could/should be held indefinitely without charges being made, if they were deemed enemy combatants. This was upheld by one of the circuit courts, but I don't know if it got any further. This, they connect to a piddly 385 million contract that a Haliburton subsidiary got to build some sort of facility for FEMA. I say piddly, because it was a 5 year deal and 77 million a year sure won't buy a lot of Haliburton work!

But that's how the conspiradroid mindset works....

"Hmmm, Haliburton is awarded a contract to build something, anything, in a closed bid. Must be something up, here. Nancy, get me my quote file from all the NeoCons, NWO, and PNAC. Start with that bastage Rumsfeld and work your way down the list. Find something.... anything.... I've got a luncheon with Left-Handed Pharmacists for Truth in two hours!"

As I'm sure has been pointed out here before, it is possible that Homeland Security might have thought they needed to move Gitmo onto U.S. soil, so would need some sort of camp... And/or, as is far more likely, the "camps" were designed as centers in case of major natural disasters, and/or maybe they weren't... They certainly hadn't finished any of them by 2005 when Katrina hit.

The point is... no one knows (well, except Alex Jones, because Alex knows everything, man... Alex Rules!), because neither FEMA nor Haliburton has said what the camps are for, if they are indeed camps, or if they're just plans, or in fact, anything. Various sites have published maps with dozens, if not hundreds, of sites around the US identified for the camps. At the looks of those numbers, it looks like they're planning to build them for a few thousand each.

See also We Are Change Finds the Black Helicopters for a similar idea.

[dudalb]

This one goes way,way, back to the Nixon Administration, where rumors spread like wildfire in the Alternative press that Nixon was building concentration camps for his opponents. It has been repeated about every adminsitration, whether Democrat or GOP, ever since. I heard the same crap about how Bill Clinton was going to round up Gun Owners in concentration camps.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

It makes complete sense. They know where certain troubled spots are in the Country, where the so called suvivalists live.


I don't get this. What do survivalists have to do with "trouble spots"? Aren't survivalists the ones that are simply preparing (albeit in sometimes very odd ways) for an eventual breakdown of civilian authority so that they can survive without going out and causing trouble? It seems to me that they'd be one of the least likely "groups" to be targeted for internment.

[Jontg]

Of course, the fact that this stuff is ONLY discussed in various CT nexii just reinforces the delusion; they perceive the lack of coverage as proof that it's being covered up, and in typical fashion, the lack of evidence itself becomes their primary evidence.

[GreNME]

The Camps are real, there's documentation proving that Halliburton has built several dozen camps for the US Government. It isn't some nutcase fantasy that these camps exist, they really do exist.

No, it's definitely a nutcase fantasy. I've been to two supposed locations of these much-fantasized camps, and in both cases the facilities are abandoned buildings that were going to be commissioned for new use but had their funding cut. The gub'mint does this all the time, putting together business plans for using all these commercial locations they own but never following through because of the cost. Instead, they waste money leasing from private owners, pay way too much money keeping things operable, and then leave it when they run out of allocation funding.

Anecdote: a former company I handled IT for moved into one such facility (former Air force publication warehouse) a few months back. The benefit was that the military guys definitely know how to wire a building up for data and telephony, in my opinion. I've never seen a place so beautifully cabled in my professional career.

[Gazpacho]

I don't get this. What do survivalists have to do with "trouble spots"? Aren't survivalists the ones that are simply preparing (albeit in sometimes very odd ways) for an eventual breakdown of civilian authority so that they can survive without going out and causing trouble?
Ah, but they're so called survivalists, which means -- Well, what does it mean? Are they actually successful rebel movements that nobody has bothered to report?

[hamelekim]

hamelekim: You mentioned documentation that shows Halliburton building these camps. Where can I find it?


What, you can't use google? One of the first links that comes up. You could likely find even more articles from business websites if you really wanted to find out.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55925

Houston-based KBR was awarded an initial $385 million contract in January 2006 for one year, with four one-year options extended into 2007. KBR held a previous emergency detention contract with ICE from 2000 to 2005.

ICE spokeswoman Jamie Zuieback told Corsi the primary intent of the contract was to build temporary detention facilities that could be used in the event of a mass migration crisis, but she confirmed the facilities could be employed in national emergencies, including natural disasters.

"The idea of the KBR contract is to support the Army Corp of Engineers in case we experienced a sudden mass immigration and we had to respond quickly," she said. "We would need immediate detention facilities in the form of temporary housing that would enable us to determine if the large numbers of illegal immigrants were political or economically motivated, or if they were criminals or terrorists."

[hamelekim]

I'm pretty sure most of those people moved themselves. But hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.

Not all of them, and some are still living in FEMA trailers/camps.


That's funny, I could've sworn the government got pilloried in the media for completely failing to do it on a massive scale with Katrina victims. But hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.

I'm sorry but they were not lamblasted by the media, it was a whitewash and didn't have any affect on the government and the way they do things. I persoanlly believe that it was allowed to happen as training for future disasters/national emergencies. Plus cleaning out a crime ridden and poor city.

But hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.


Documentation, really? Hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.


They really do? Hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.


The US Government has actually said this? Hey, if you have evidence to support your claim, feel free to present it any time.


I'll tell you what: You present solid, credible evidence to support your claims, and I'll happily believe anything you say. Does that sound fair to you?

I posted a link in a post before this one linking to the building of camps. The US government also did the same thing in WW2 with Japanese and German people in the US.

[technoextreme]

I'm sorry but they were not lamblasted by the media, it was a whitewash and didn't have any affect on the government and the way they do things.
Yeah it did.:)

[Gazpacho]

What, you can't use google? One of the first links that comes up. You could likely find even more articles from business websites if you really wanted to find out.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55925

The US government has contingency plans for the breakdown of civilian authority. As the headline of the same article says, the contract is a contingency contract, meaning you still have no evidence of camps actually being constructed.

Emergencies being what they are, it's better to do the bids before thousands of people are in danger rather than after.

[Viper Daimao]

What, you can't use google? One of the first links that comes up. You could likely find even more articles from business websites if you really wanted to find out.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55925

KBR is not Halliburton. It sounds foolish when you say an oil and gas service company is building your imaginary prison camps.

[aggle-rithm]

In 1984, the probability of nuclear war was very high. With the nation's infrastructure essentially destroyed, you bet there would be thousands of people with no food, water, etc., threatening to gouge each other's eyes out to get what they needed to survive. Internment camps to keep people under control would make perfect sense in this hellish scenario.

They would only have to do it for a few weeks, anyway, before radiation poisoning made them too weak to be a problem anymore.

[theprestige]

Not all of them, and some are still living in FEMA trailers/camps.
I never said "all". I said most. You originally claimed that the U.S. government moved large numbers of people during the disaster. Now you're claiming that the U.S. government housed small numbers of people after the disaster.

Why did you change your claim? Where is your evidence to support your original claim?

I'm sorry but they were not lamblasted by the media, it was a whitewash and didn't have any affect on the government and the way they do things.
How is this relevant? You claimed that the U.S. government moved large numbers of people during the disaster. The evidence presented by the national media is that the government failed to transport large numbers of people during the disaster. Where is your evidence to the contrary?

I persoanlly believe that it was allowed to happen as training for future disasters/national emergencies. Plus cleaning out a crime ridden and poor city.
You must have reasons for these beliefs, evidence you can share with the rest of us to make clear the reasons for your concern, to convince us that we should adopt your belief and share your concern. Where is that evidence?

I posted a link in a post before this one linking to the building of camps. The US government also did the same thing in WW2 with Japanese and German people in the US.
You posted a link to evidence of a contingency contract to build camps, not a link to evidence that such camps have been built. Certainly not a link to evidence that such camps would be built for the purposes you imagine.

And that's just one claim of several you have made. Where's your evidence for the rest of your claims?

[zaphod2016]

hamelekim: Thanks for the reply. However, there is a problem with this story:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55925

Halliburton's former engineering and construction subsidiary has a contingency contract with the Department of Homeland Security to construct detention facilities in the event of a national emergency, according to WND columnist Jerome Corsi.

Around these parts, I'd assume Jerome Corsi is considered in league with the Alex Jones/9-11 Truth crowd. Of course, an ad hominem attack against Corsi does not disprove the article.

However, when I begin Googling, all I find is an echo chamber repeating the same story, crediting either WND or Corsi. Despite promises of "documentation", I have yet to see anything that can be confirmed as genuine.

Also, as gaspacho said:

The US government has contingency plans for the breakdown of civilian authority. As the headline of the same article says, the contract is a contingency contract, meaning you still have no evidence of camps actually being constructed.

Over on YouTube we have thousands of videos, claiming to show these camps. Case in point:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0P-hvPJPTi4

The problem with this sort of "evidence" is that it is pure speculation. This might be converted into a legitimate prison. This might be converted into a military base. This might be used to illegally detain American citizens.

To be clear: after doing additional research, I have no doubt that these camps exist. I also understand that they are justified as part of a contingency plan in the event of some extreme emergency or mass arrest.

Here is my question: what are these camps for?

Are they for drug users? Illegal immigrants? Gun owners? 9/11 Truthers? I have seen "evidence" of all of these theories on different websites, and some of these theories go back all the way to the internment camps during WWII.

But let us pretend for a moment that we were going to trial. We are going to convict [FILL IN THE BLANK] for treason, and prevent another NAZI-esque Holocaust. How do we present this case? We need HARD evidence, not of a spooky building that indisputably exists, but rather, HARD evidence of the motive to use these camps for something illegal.

I have seen all sorts of references to executive orders and FEMA directives, but I cannot find a PRIMARY source for any of it. In a court of law, what I've seen so far is hearsay, and in the court of public opinion, most people view us as insane to even worry about the issue.

Help me get the facts. I *do* want to find out the truth on this, I just demand a very high standard of facts.

To other readers: as the grandson of Holocaust survivors, the idea of "Concentration Camps" in America is one of my "hot button" issues. However, I see nothing wrong with legal prisons and holding cells. If this is just "conspiracy spin", there is nothing to fear. But if there is a genuine threat here, it deserves our full scrutiny.

[Gazpacho]

Over on YouTube we have thousands of videos, claiming to show these camps. Case in point:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0P-hvPJPTi4
That's not a camp, it's the Beech Grove Amtrak facility.

To be clear: after doing additional research, I have no doubt that these camps exist.
Where?

[Viper Daimao]

To be clear: after doing additional research, I have no doubt that these camps exist.
Where?
His head?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Where?


On the Internet, of course. :p

[Foolmewunz]

Zaphod...


Accch! Never mind... Gazpacho beat me to it.
Beech Grove, yet again!

(edited out two paragraphs)

Why do you think this nebulous connect-the-dots I seen it on YouTube stuff is "evidence"? You say yourself that there's no initial source evidence being offered.

And thanks to whomever pointed out "CONTINGENCY". That makes even more sense. For 385 million, that's about what you'd get - commitment from Haliburton that they'd be ready, if needed, to implement a plan and get construction going/completed withing X days of initiation. I don't think Haliburton could build a Frosty Freeze for less than .5 billion!

[GreNME]

To other readers: as the grandson of Holocaust survivors, the idea of "Concentration Camps" in America is one of my "hot button" issues. However, I see nothing wrong with legal prisons and holding cells. If this is just "conspiracy spin", there is nothing to fear. But if there is a genuine threat here, it deserves our full scrutiny.

As someone who has seen a couple of these so-called sites, I can assure you they're hoaxes. I do believe there are even videos of other people who have visited various sites with cameras to show how much nothing is actually there. Just empty buildings that haven't seen any activity in years in some cases.

[zaphod2016]

To clarify my prior statement:

I have no doubt these camps exist

I have no doubt that the location featured in the above video exists. Gazpacho claims this is the Beech Grove Amtrak facility. Be it a train station, prison, camp, condemned building, whatever, I see that it *does* exist, and *could* be used for nefarious purposes.

But as we all agree, that is pure speculation.

What I'm trying to figure out is:

1. under what circumstances do these camps (facilities) get used?

2. what will they be used for?

It may very well turn out that the answer to both questions is: "no one really knows, and all theories are mere speculation". That seems to be the consensus in this thread.

However, if someone can answer the above 2 questions directly, with something resembling legitimate evidence, I am all ears.

If I came across as a woo-monger, excuse me. That was not my intent.

However, these camps, or facilities, or prisons, or whatever they are, do indeed exist. There is a record of videos, photos, maps, etc that have been documented all over the country. As we agree: none of this addresses what these facilities are actually for, but they are out there. And, most of these facilities have cameras, lights, and other signs of current activity.

To use the above video as an example; why would someone run cameras through an abandoned Amtrack Station? To keep an eye on squatters/vandals? Aren't the cameras worth more than anything else in that place?

I'm not saying this proves anything. However, I do think it is weird that *someone* is paying to record and light an otherwise abandoned building.

I will assume that anyone incurring this expense is doing so for a reason. This brings us back to the real issue:

1. under what circumstances do these camps (facilities) get used?

2. what will they be used for?

[Gazpacho]

I have no doubt that the location featured in the above video exists. Gazpacho claims this is the Beech Grove Amtrak facility. Be it a train station, prison, camp, condemned building, whatever, I see that it *does* exist, and *could* be used for nefarious purposes.
The security measures at the Amtrak facility (I call it an Amtrak facility because it is one) are consistent with the warehouse where my uncle used to work, in a different part of the country. This is to be expected, since being around rolling stock, steel forges, and various other kinds of machines is dangerous. Amtrak doesn't want anyone coming onto that property who isn't properly trained or supervised.

What basis is there for identifying this facility, out of all the industrial facilities in the United States, as "nefarious"?

You can see a photo tour of the facility, including all the equipment that would have to be removed and the buildings that would have to be renovated for prison use, here (http://www.trainweb.org/chris/beech.html)

[dudalb]

Someone shows that an alleged concentration camp is really an empty Amtrack facility and a CT STILL maintains there is some "nefarious purpose" involved........

Ouch, the stupid hurts......

[Gazpacho]

Someone shows that an alleged concentration camp is really an empty Amtrack facility
It's not empty, someone apparently just filmed it off work hours. You'll notice in the video that there's a flag on the flagpole and a car parked inside the facility.

[zaphod2016]

Ouch, the stupid hurts......

Indeed it does. Try reading the full post before insulting me.

What I'm trying to figure out is:

1. under what circumstances do these camps (facilities) get used?

2. what will they be used for?

It may very well turn out that the answer to both questions is: "no one really knows, and all theories are mere speculation". That seems to be the consensus in this thread.

Gezpacho explains that this is a train station, being filmed off hours. I take him at his word, because I'm not sure how you go about proving or disproving that. The video quality is poor, and looks old- I'd guess early-mid 1990's. For all I know, that place was torn down years ago.

If anyone has any sort of proof that this video shows an Amtrack station, please share. However, I wasn't attempting to debate this particular example, but rather, illustrate an example of supposed "concentration camps" in America. Like I said, I take gezpacho at his word.

So to be 100%, clear-as-a-bell: I <b>do not</b> maintain that the evil NWO is going to cart me off to a train station in the middle of the night.

However, I am still interested in any solid information regarding any laws or directives that allow for mass detainment.

The actual facility is a red-herring. For example, in the event of mass detainment, I'm sure a new facility could be built (eg. Halliburton, see link above), or a temporary facility used, like an existing school or prison.

Is guess better question(s) are:

Is REX 84 real?

Are there any existing laws/directives that allow for the same sort of mass detainment?

If so, I imagine it would be easy to find the actual written law. However, I have not been able to do so yet, so I'm asking for help.

Also: I assume the reason many of you act like jerks around here is because you assume I am a CT lunatic pretending to have questions so I can troll you into watching my propaganda. As I understand, that has been common practice on the JREF.

So, let me state emphatically that:

1. I do NOT believe 9/11 was an inside job

2. I do believe 9/11 exposed some gross negligence

3. I will favor "new investigations" of anything until the end of time, because hey, you never know. My logic is this: the govt already pisses away trillions of dollars I'd rather not spend, so if they want to spend another few million re-investigating 9/11 or hunting bigfoot, I'm fine with that.

4. I don't have any evidence that bigfoot exists, but hey, it might. Honestly, I've never really cared either way.

5. The moon landing was real. One of my neighbors was "on the inside" and has shared plenty of evidence on that one.

I could go on and on, but my point is, I am a skeptic, and I try to remain agnostic about conspiracy theory for as long as possible. I also maintain it is impossible to prove a negative, and so, most CTs will live forever.

I am not an Alex-Jones fanboi, or a troofer, or affiliated with any conspiracy fringe groups. However, I get exposed to a lot of their stuff, which is why I came to JREF in the first place. Now that I have seen plenty of evidence disproving the 9/11 CTs, I have begun vetting a few others that I'm honestly not sure about.

So there you go. No need to be rude. If my posts bore or offend you, please ignore me.

[zaphod2016]

YouTube video (~2 min)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug0IL7k3elQ

It appears to be part of a conspiracy video. Here we see a congressman interrogating Oliver North about a "contingency plan". No answer is given- making this ripe for conspiracy.

Of course, this was way back in the late 80's. Assuming there *was* some sort of "contingency plan", and that REX 84 is totally legit, it may no longer exist today. In other words, it might be true that "REX 84 does not exist", even if it did at one time.

However, I would expect there are all sorts of contingency plans. Case in point, if my town is invaded by aliens, I sure as hell hope that SOMEONE has a plan to deal with the resulting chaos. And in certain circumstances, the temporary detention of American citizens may be necessary and legitimate. I have no problem with an "emergency plan" that temporarily suspends certain privileges in the interest of saving my life.

But why the secrecy? All that does is make research impossible and allow CTs to flourish. If these contingency plans are lawful, why not share them with the citizenry?

Possible answer: because they don't exist.

Surely there must be some official policy somewhere. Perhaps this is all part of FEMA. Honestly, I don't know much about FEMA, and as you can imagine, FEMA info provided by REX 84 advocates is a tad biased.

So someone out there, please save me a lot of time and headache and simply link me to the law that addresses detainment during national emergency.

And, if no such law exists, would someone please explain to me why the hell not?

[zaphod2016]

A good example of my frustration:

http://uweb.txstate.edu/~lf14/conspire/rex84.html

In April 1984, President Reagan signed Presidential Directorate Number 54 that allowed FEMA to engage in a secret national "readiness exercise" under the code name of REX 84.

A-ha! Now we are getting somewhere...

Google "Presidential Directorate Number 54"...

All we get is the same article...

Try "Presidential Directive Number 54" and we get 173...

But none look very credible. So I'm inclined to believe this is all nonsense.

But- why didn't Ollie just answer "nope" in the above video. Why all the secrecy?

[Horatius]

YouTube video (~2 min)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug0IL7k3elQ

It appears to be part of a conspiracy video. Here we see a congressman interrogating Oliver North about a "contingency plan". No answer is given- making this ripe for conspiracy.

Of course, this was way back in the late 80's. Assuming there *was* some sort of "contingency plan", and that REX 84 is totally legit, it may no longer exist today. In other words, it might be true that "REX 84 does not exist", even if it did at one time.




And of course, that video makes no mention of "Rex 84", or detention of US citizens, does it? It refers to "Continuity of Government", and mentions some people (not in the government) who claim that that plan involved suspending the US constitution.

And they made it clear why they didn't want to answer - the answer would have touched on matters of National Security, which, in the 80's meant they simply would not have addressed them in a public venue. People these days seem to forget that back then, we were still in the middle of the cold war, and no one with any level of security clearance would have been willing to discuss such matters in public.

So, yes, ripe for CTs to flourish, but not much we can do about it now. If people want to ignore the historical context to make up fantasies, we simply cannot stop them.

[Foolmewunz]

A good example of my frustration:

http://uweb.txstate.edu/~lf14/conspire/rex84.html



A-ha! Now we are getting somewhere...

Google "Presidential Directorate Number 54"...

All we get is the same article...

Try "Presidential Directive Number 54" and we get 173...

But none look very credible. So I'm inclined to believe this is all nonsense.

But- why didn't Ollie just answer "nope" in the above video. Why all the secrecy?

Zaph,
Maybe Ollie just didn't know... I can't get YouTube or such at work, so I haven't seen the video in question, but it's conceivable that the panel asked him some stuff he just wasn't in on. He wasn't exactly the head of the NSA or CIA.

I should add the traditional disclaimer: I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the Ollie North Fan Club. I just think that it's quite possible that occasionally the simplest solution could conceivably be the right solution.

[Gazpacho]

Zaphod, I've been checking your links, and I'd appreciate it if you'd check the link I gave you in response.

REX-84 was what journalists have said it was: An exercise for the mass detention of Central Americans who didn't have permission to be in the United States, during a US military action in Central America. That is entirely within the constitution, and it's only a matter of resources that such people walk free at all.

Contingency plans for national defense are secret because they are for national defense, so there is potentially an enemy involved.

[zaphod2016]

Gazpacho: I appreciate the response. And for the record, I did check your links.

Contingency plans for national defense are secret because they are for national defense, so there is potentially an enemy involved.

Fair enough. However, this is doomed to breed conspiracy theory. Am I the only one who would like more transparency and oversight regarding these contingency plans?

[Foolmewunz]

Gazpacho: I appreciate the response. And for the record, I did check your links.



Fair enough. However, this is doomed to breed conspiracy theory. Am I the only one who would like more transparency and oversight regarding these contingency plans?

You'll have to join the army and work your way up to the Pentagon. Alternately, run for office and get on an oversight committee, or even into the White House.
Maybe become a spook for the NSA or CIA?

I can't really think of a whole lot of other people who should be viewing plans for the national defence. As Gazpacho said, "defence" assumes you're defending against someone... an "enemy". Should they publish these on YouTube (as apparently Alex Jones believes they've done) so that Dr. Evil and his sooon-to-be-invading henchmen can look them up and say, "Hmmm, I think we avoid the easterly route... they've got camps all set up there to detain us."

This is doomed to breed conspiracy theory to those with conspiracy mindsets. But those people would find a conspiracy in the fact that a Chinese fish-seller who normally speaks Cantonese just said to me, "Nice Fish, Mistah? Very Fresh." Hey, how come he's speaking English? Was that some kind of code? And how come he was addressing it to me, when I just HAPPEN TO BE in shipping and have access to containers going to the USA? And what does this have to do with the Customs and Border Protection - CTPAT audit I did last season in Thailand? There are just too many unanswered questions!

Now all of this would mean nothing, ... today. But let's assume that a bomb is found in a container next month in Seattle. I could string together enough coincidences just from my walk at lunch time today, combined with my very ordinary working conditions and situation, to make myself into the grandest of conspirators. It's easy as long as you just want to ask questions, connect dots, and pray for dangling questions to get peoples' juices flowing.

[G-K-4]

There was a thread about this last October. Back then I wrote the following (and all the links still work):
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3056027#post3056027

A lot of the still-current round of "FEMA concentration camp" lore does in fact begin in 1984. (How appropriate.)

There actually was a military "readiness exercise" that year, which included a component of simulated civil unrest. But it was all a drill, not the beginning of any real internment drive. According to Chip Berlet, a lefty researcher of the right, the truth of the matter was exaggerated by a far-right, anti-Jewish, conspiracist newspaper called The Spotlight."The April 23, 1984 Spotlight article ran with a banner headline "Reagan Orders Concentration Camps." The article, true to form, took a problematic swipe at the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith along with reporting the facts of the story. The Harrer article was based primarily on two unnamed government sources, and follow-up confirmations. Mainstream reporters pursued the allegations through interviews and Freedom of Information Act requests, and ultimately the Harrer Spotlight article proved to be a substantially accurate account of the readiness exercise, although Spotlight did underplay the fact that this was a scenario and drill, not an actual order to round up dissidents."
http://www.publiceye.org/rightwoo/rwooz9-14.html
And by the way, if any of you who know about these kinds of exercises from that era, I have a question. Were they just simulations on computer screens and phonecalls and such? Or were there any "real" activities like running around or moving real equipment? (If the former, that gives the conspiracists even less to crow about.) I picture more tabletop RPG than LARP here.

In a 1990 issue of the Covert Action Information Bulletin, Diana Reynolds writes more details about the facts, the exaggeration, and the historical background of REX-84. (And since it comes from a Left source, I expect a lot of you won't like this article. It does give some of the background of Federal government preparation for mass arrests and detention of political opponents. But the article also makes it clear that REX-84 was not the implementation of any actual internment.)
http://www.publiceye.org/liberty/fema/Fema_0.html

More recently, the concentration camp meme got more traction, but only because people have (willfully?) misunderstood the report. In early 2006, we learned that Kellogg Brown and Root had received a contingency contract for the construction of new ICE detention facilities should the government want them. Note that this was a contingency contract.
http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B62C8724D%2DAE8A%2D4B5C%2D94C7%2 D70171315C0A0%7D&dist=SignInArchive&param=archive&siteid=mktw&dateid=38741%2E5136277662%2D858254656

But, of course lots of folks concluded that this meant they were already being built. That's not to say this isn't a problem, and that there is no threat to citizens who "look like illegal immigrants" or to political dissidents in the U.S. But in this particular case, a lot of people who should know better are jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

And I would reiterate that there is a difference between a simulation and a physical reality, and between a drill and a policy.

Have you ever played a role-playing game? Does that mean that you were actually prepared to throw a magic missile, really?

Have you ever practiced evacuating your house in a fire? Does this mean that your cat must be afraid that at any moment you will put him in cat carrier in the cellar and throw away the key, even when there is no fire?

I understand the caution, but when the evidence for a real threat does not exist, you get the opportunity to move on.

[zaphod2016]

the truth of the matter was exaggerated by a far-right, anti-Jewish, conspiracist newspaper called The Spotlight

How ironic... These types deny that the Holocaust camps were real, and yet, believe they exist here in America.

In a 1990 issue of the Covert Action Information Bulletin, Diana Reynolds writes more details about the facts, the exaggeration, and the historical background of REX-84. (And since it comes from a Left source, I expect a lot of you won't like this article. It does give some of the background of Federal government preparation for mass arrests and detention of political opponents. But the article also makes it clear that REX-84 was not the implementation of any actual internment.)

It would appear that Diana Reynolds is *the* source for the REX 84 story. Everything I have seen on this subject references her. Strange that such serious charges cannot be confirmed by other sources.

Have you ever practiced evacuating your house in a fire?

Yes.

Does this mean that your cat must be afraid that at any moment you will put him in cat carrier in the cellar and throw away the key, even when there is no fire?

I'm a dog guy, but I understand what you are saying.

This also illustrates what I am saying: informed citizens need to know what these plans are, at least on some limited level, to properly prepare for an emergency.

Here is Florida, Hurricanes are a real threat. This is why everyone in state government, local government, on the city council, and concerned folk like me are all VERY CLEAR what the plan is should disaster strike. The plan begins at home (candles, water, canned food), expands to the town (help the elderly evacuate, organize sandbagging effort), expands to the state (escape via posted evacuation routes), and eventually the feds (sooner or later, FEMA show up....we hope).

This is pretty obvious stuff- we have a real threat, we have a clear plan, and if the *stuff* hits the fan, y'all know what you should be doing.

So I have no doubt that there are plenty of contingency plans at all levels of government; in case of terrorist attack, in case of biowarfare, in case of nuclear attack, in case aliens invade, etc.

I also understand that we cannot readily publish all details. (i.e. if the Russians nuke us, we all hide in location X) If the enemy knows our contingency plan, they can use it against us.

But- let us say the Russians nukes us later this evening. What the heck am I supposed to do? Is there a bomb shelter? Should I evacuate via the Hurricane route?

As a former New Yorker, the most obvious example is 9/11. Had there been a clear, public plan for responding to terrorist attack, I have no doubt we could have saved more innocent lives. For example; if your building is hit by any suspected terrorist attack, evacuate via this route. During the confusion of 9/11, some people actually returned to the towers after the first plane hit, which IMO is a real tragedy, because it might have been prevented with proper planning.

However, this presents a catch-22; if it is publicly known that during an attack people will evacuate via a given route, a terrorist might cause an event, and then attack again at some point of the evacuation route- causing even more chaos and loss of life.

This is a real pickle, any way you slice it. Too much transparency, and our plans can be used against us. Too little transparency, and the potential to abuse this power will remain.