History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

August 5, 2006 2:48 PM

Forced Labor Camps: On line exhibition, I ran across the Forced Labor Camps: On line exhibition; And at the risk of editorializing can't help but wonder, Why Is Halliburton Building Internment Camps?
posted by Unregistered User (12 comments total)

After rereading passages from Gustaw Herling's "World Apart" had forgotten that Bertrand Russell did the original Introduction to it.
posted by Unregistered User at 2:54 PM on August 5, 2006

I assume Haliburton building camps because there is money to be made. The question should be: Why is the US building internment camps? But internment camps might not be the same thing as the link to forced labor camps,
posted by Postroad at 3:10 PM on August 5, 2006

Thanks for the first link, but I really don't buy the second. KBR does indeed have a contract to build temporary detention centers for the INS. Now, of course, big contracts to Haliburton are always sketchy, but even Human Rights Watch stressed the need to build more detention centers for illegal immigrants, since the old ones are crowded and dirty.

Besides, the Haliburton deal was merely an extension of a pre-existing deal from 2000, from the New York Times article on this deal: "KBR would build the centers for the Homeland Security Department for an unexpected influx of immigrants, to house people in the event of a natural disaster or for new programs that require additional detention space, company executives said. KBR, which announced the contract last month, had a similar contract with immigration agencies from 2000 to last year."

So, forced labor camps? Not so much.
posted by blahblahblah at 3:14 PM on August 5, 2006

They're for liberals and other perpetrators of thoughtcrime, obviously.
posted by psmealey at 3:49 PM on August 5, 2006

They're for liberals and other perpetrators of thoughtcrime, obviously.

While that may or may not be snark, many are still unaware of a little-noticed provision of the latest version of the USA Patriot Act bill. Not to mention the "free speech" zones now in effect. Is it not irrelevant to ask these type questions? Especially with regards to the recent proposals which intend to "allow the secretary of defense to add crimes at will to those under the military court's jurisdiction. Such as the Thousands of troops [that] say they won’t fight. Where does it stop? When should one be concerned? What is the line?
posted by Unregistered User at 4:24 PM on August 5, 2006

About REX 84 and Pynchon's Vineland.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:24 PM on August 5, 2006

Bush called for more 'beds' during his immigration speech a couple months ago. Quite stupid.
posted by delmoi at 4:45 PM on August 5, 2006

UU: Is it not irrelevant to ask these type questions?

It isn't irrelevant to ask, but it seems that you are framing the questions to imply that the answers must be ominous, which just isn't always the case. Haliburton had the temporary INS detention center contract since 2000; the "little-noticed provision" you cite above is about the Secret Service's role in national security events where the president is in attendence; and the "thousands of troops that won't fight" are already criminals from the perspective of US and military law.

I don't necessarily agree with these policies, and some do threaten civil liberties, and I do think we should discuss them, for example, the current proposal on military courts. But I think the reaction here is to the way these issues are being framed -- to explicitly link the Haliburton detention contract to the building of gulags seems a bit much, on every scale (over a million and a half people died in the gulags, for example).
posted by blahblahblah at 4:49 PM on August 5, 2006

What's really odd is that the plans show that the these internment camps will mostly be adjacent to soap, fertilizer and lampshade factories. Except for this one here which appears to adjoin a private hunting preserve favored by Dick Cheney...
posted by George_Spiggott at 5:37 PM on August 5, 2006

to explicitly link the Haliburton detention contract to the building of gulags seems a bit much, on every scale (over a million and a half people died in the gulags, for example).
Just how many people do you think can die in these detention camps Halliburton is building?

Is this going to be the crazy new armband? It is catchy...
posted by Balisong at 6:13 PM on August 5, 2006

First link great, second link tinfoil hat nonsense. So this post is better than average.
posted by LarryC at 6:26 PM on August 5, 2006

First eleven comments great, twelfth comment snarky obnoxious bullshit. So this thread is better than average.
posted by stenseng at 10:59 PM on August 5, 2006