Monday, February 10, 2014

Supreme Court justice predicts internment camps in America’s future

Justice Antonin Scalia
Justice Antonin Scalia
Original Article

02/05/2014

A distinguished member of the U.S. Supreme Court gave a sobering reminder of how history can and likely will repeat itself when the conditions are right. Justice Antonin Scalia said that he would not be surprised if Americans were once again imprisoned in concentration camps by the federal government.

The 77-year-old justice was answering questions after giving a classroom lecture to a group of law students in Honolulu. One student asked about the deplorable 1944 Korematsu v. United States decision, in which the U.S. Supreme Court verified the constitutionality of the president ordering the mass-imprisonment of Americans in the name of national security.

Scalia cited the wartime “panic” as a reason Americans accepted President Franklin Roosevelt’s hostile treatment of citizens of his own country.

As the Associated Press reported:

“Well of course Korematsu was wrong. And I think we have repudiated in a later case. But you are kidding yourself if you think the same thing will not happen again,” Scalia told students and faculty during a lunchtime Q-and-A session.

Scalia cited a Latin expression meaning, “In times of war, the laws fall silent.”

“That’s what was going on — the panic about the war and the invasion of the Pacific and whatnot. That’s what happens. It was wrong, but I would not be surprised to see it happen again, in time of war. It’s no justification, but it is the reality,” he said.

The Korematsu case stemmed from President Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066, which divided the country into “Military Areas” and in a real sense instituted martial law in the United States. Control of civilian territory was granted to to military commanders and the Secretary of War, who were authorized to take any freedom-restricting actions they deemed necessary to secure the homeland.





19 comments :

Mark said...

YOU THINK!!!???

Mark said...

This has been going on for decades, "rockers," and young girls getting it on. So who is the real culprit here, the "rockers" getting the invite, or the young and tender WANTING TO DO IT with the rock star? By the way, where was mom and dad all these decades overseeing their young and tender daughters before the big nasty grungy "rocker" did the nasty with young and tender. And if these rockers are/were doing it with legally under age girls, I have never seen any indictments. Hmm.... But it is much easier for the state to go after John Doe down the street if he happens to fall for young and tender a few doors away. Why? Because John Doe has no money.

Mark said...

Mr. Smith: If you have studied law as you say you have then you must be aware at least by now that the state and federal governments of the USA are loathe to ever admit they have erred, then take steps to correct the error. And I am also sure that you are aware that the Jews, when forced to register had to then the end result was internment. Regrettably, I see this as the next step by the government. What will trigger this is a horrendous crime - that will be the impetuous for such actions by the government.

Mark said...

"Problems with cars parking on the side of the road, several emergency calls to the home and news that a convicted sex offender was living in the home
have all created tensions. Combine that with worries about declining
property values, and residents near the home are less than happy with
People Inc., which sponsors the home." And I would take a confident guess that 'a convicted sex offender was living in the home' was the straw that broke the Camel's back. Hurry, get em out of there! This person may be handicapped, wheel-chair bound, crippled, mentally unable to care for him/herself. HURRY, the neighborhood is in great danger - get the tow hook. Call your Congressman, start to picket, and most IMPORTANT, call the MEDIA to help you smear the developmental disabilities home. HURRY! And I will say with confidence that "People's Inc.," will fold up like origami.

Anonymous said...

The Jews were originally forced to register. Then they had huge living restrictions placed on them that confined them to ghettos. Any Jew who disobeyed their living restrictions or failed to register was severely punished. What group does that make you think of today?

anonymous said...

The first groups of people forced to register and to be subject to living restriction in Nazi Germany, even before the Jews, were the "sex offenders", or as they called them, sexual deviants

dlc said...

Its already happening. Look at what they do to sex offenders in Florida.

Anonymous said...

The Jews were not only put on registries by the Germans, but they were subject to residency restrictions as well. These residency restrictions forbade Jews from living outside the ghettos. In much the same way, sex offenders today must register and must follow oppressive living restrictions. Even before Hitler went after the Jews, he went after the sex offenders, or as he called them, sexual deviants.

Guest said...

Jews were not only put on registries by the Germans, but they were subject to residency restrictions as well. These residency restrictions forbade Jews from living outside the "ghettos." Of course, sex offenders must now deal with residency restrictions and registries. The first group of people the Nazis went after were not the Jews but the "sex offenders", or as the Nazis said, sexual deviants.

dlc said...

What the H..L is wrong with people today? Have the forgotten their constitutional rights! This is a licensed place. The state found it appropriate to give them a license to operate, Let's all smear those with disabilities, put them on a list with the "dreaded" sex offenders. Get real folks! These are not the demons that the f.....g media portrays!

dlc said...

The public is lead around by the MEDIA if the MEDIA say's its so, it must be fact! The sheeple have lost their way, forgotten about their hard won freedoms, and are being lead to eventual slaughter. I wonder how they feel knowing that they are the grist for the government mill?

Anonymous said...

Oh, yes, and as I forgot to mention yesterday, Hitler also hated sex offenders (or sexual deviants, as the Nazis called them.) The sexual deviants were put on a registry and persecusted as well.

Sex Offender Issues said...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_concentration_camp_badges#Table_of_camp_inmate_markings

g4change said...

Um...being with a 17-year-old does NOT make one a pedophile!!! They have to be pre-pubescent and the other has to be 18 or over. In many states, 17 or 16 is the legal age. This article is pure crap!

keith said...

He likes 17 yr olds not 7 yr olds. Dylan is pissed she didn't become famous like mommy or that ronan has gotten famous.

Being touched at 7 would not damage a person or create this much rage. Life itself is the source of pain and we look for scapegoats in our parents.

RedRedMane said...

The trouble with this blog entry is that the "punch-line" never quite got delivered. The "point" of this entire article is that when the new FEMA Camp detention program finally gets legislated into function, it will more tban likely be the SEX OFFENDERS who will be rounded up FIRST!!! The writing is plainly written on the wall. First, it will be the cannonized "paedophiles" ( that's anyone who ever did ANYTHING sexually "unconventional" - this includes being kissed by a girl when you were in kindergarden ) who'll be rounded up. Then, it will probably be the felons, regardless of how long ago their crime was committed! Then they'll probably go after the drug addicts. Then they'll probably roud up all those ugly, worthless "transients" ( that's the homeless people.) They will surely start rounding up political dissenters, too!!! Again, the writing is clearly written on the wall...all the "indicators" are in place. It's just a few new "tough-on-crime" laws away!!

Stephen David Brown said...

"Not a pedophile per se." Way to call someone a pedophile without calling someone a pedophile... per se. *sigh* An Ad Hominem attack discredits the person making the accusation. State the facts of the matter and readers/listeners can make their own inferences. It's just another way to discredit someone without actually making an argument of any substance.

Chris Allen said...

Courtney Love stated that the first blowjob she ever gave was to Ted Nugent... and that she was 12 years old at the time, which means Nugent would have been 28 years old.


If her allegation is true (I'm inclined to believe it), there are likely many more women out there who Nugent preyed upon when they were far younger than the "17 year olds" you folks are discussing here.


But even with a 17 year old, if the adult is far older than they are (as Nugent was), it's not right. In fact, it's not right even with an adult woman---because he's using his fame, his position of "authority" to get sex.


Put it this way:



If any of these women simply met Nugent on the street (if he had never been famous), would they immediately jump into bed with him? Likely, most would not, and a fair amount of them would run away screaming because he's such an asshole. It's bad enough when you do it to adults who are either under your authority or under the sway of your fame... it's far worse to do it to someone who's underage... and if you are doing it to 12 year olds, it IS pedophilia.

wiseoldsnail said...

the law is clear : a child cannot legally give consent