MAY 18, 1998
Hidden threats -- part 2
© 1998 WorldNetDaily.com

Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film. Last week, I reluctantly shared with you part one of some of the hidden threats "We the People" face from our government leaders. Despite the remarkable response from readers, I want to underscore that none of this is really new. All this information, and more, has been circulating in the constitutional conservative community for years. Much of this kind of documented, factual information is pooh-poohed as the paranoid ramblings of the radical right- wing wackos by "the controllers" who would treat us like mushrooms. I have often noted that some people just don't want to be confused with facts which contradict their preconceived opinions. The director of resource management for the U.S. Army has confirmed the validity of a memorandum relating to the establishment of a civilian inmate labor program under development by the Department of Army. The document states, "Enclosed for your review and comment is the draft Army regulation on civilian inmate labor utilization" and the procedure to "establish civilian prison camps on installations." (Chereith Chronicle, June 1997) In the wake of Senate hearings in 1975, the steady development of highly specialized surveillance capabilities, combined with the exploding computerized information technologies, have enabled a massive data base of personal information to be developed on millions of unsuspecting American citizens. It is all in place awaiting only a presidential declaration to be enforced by both military and civilian police. In 1982, President Ronald Reagan issued National Security Directive 58 which empowered Robert McFarlane and Oliver North to use the National Security Council to secretly retrofit the Federal Emergency Management Agency to manage the country during a national crisis. In 1984 "REX exercises" simulated civil unrest culminating in a national emergency with a contingency plan for the imprisonment of 400,000 people. REX '84 was so secretive that special metal security doors were installed on the FEMA building's fifth floor, and even long-term officials of the Civil Defense Office were prohibited entry. The alleged purpose of this exercise was to handle an influx of refugees created by a war in Central America, but a more realistic scenario was the detention of American citizens.
State of Emergency Under REX, the president could declare a state of emergency, empowering the head of FEMA to take control of the internal infrastructure of the United States and suspend the Constitution. The president could invoke executive orders 11000 through 11004 which would:

  1. Draft all citizens into work forces under government supervision;
  2. Empower the postmaster to register all men, women and children;
  3. Seize all airports and aircraft;
  4. Seize all housing and establish forced relocation of citizens.
FEMA, with a black budget allegedly provided by the Department of Defense, has worked closely with the Pentagon in an effort to avoid the legal restrictions of Posse Comitatus. While FEMA may not have been directly responsible for these precedent-setting cases, the principle of federal control was seen during the Los Angeles riots in 1992 with the federalization of the National Guard and during the siege at Waco, where Army tanks were involved in the final conflagration.
Government Violence Is "Legitimate"? The deputy attorney general of California commented at a conference that anyone who attacks the state, even verbally, becomes a revolutionary and an enemy by definition. Louis Guiffreda, who was head of FEMA, stated that "legitimate violence is integral to our form of government, for it is from this source that we can continue to purge our weaknesses." It is significant to note that the dictionary definition of terrorism -- "the calculated use of violence" -- corresponds precisely to the government's stated policy of "the use of legitimate violence." Hold on, a reasonable person who can read might ask: Who are the real terrorists? Guiffreda's remark provides a revealing insight into the thinking of those who have been charged with oversight of the welfare of the citizens in this country. Apparently, if one's convictions or philosophy do not correspond with the government's agenda, that individual may find himself on a government enemy list thereby making him/her a "target" to be "purged" by the use of "legitimate violence." The stories of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence are the stories and sacrifices of the American Revolution. These were not wild-eyed, rabble-rousing ruffians. They were soft-spoken men of means and education. They had good lives, which included security, but they valued liberty more. Despite the comfort of their life style they pledged: "For the support of this declaration, with firm reliance on the protection of the divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor." Honor ... honor is not and should not be an anachronism. Sadly, it is a principle and concept fading into obscurity. History books don't tell us much of what happened in the Revolutionary War. We didn't just fight the British. We were British subjects at that time and we fought our own government! No wonder our founding fathers had a hatred for standing armies, and allowed, through the second amendment, for everyone to be armed. Philosopher George Santayana once noted, "He who does not learn from history" (Russia, Germany, Czechoslovakia, China, et al.) "is destined to repeat it."