For those who are trying to get a handle on the claims of FEMA camps, please check out the article link provided below. The majority of the information on the subject floating around is produced by fear mongers and tin foil mad hatters. Take a moment to read a more measured and researched approach to this subject. There is very little meat on the bone, so to speak, of the claims of FEMA concentration camps: http://twitclicks.com/ohng If you have any information that provides some concrete proof of the camps, please provide a link in the thread, thanks
Proof? Here you go. Civilian Inmate Labor Camp Program (Army Regulation 210-35) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Inmate_Labor_Program PDF File http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf National Emergency Centers Act (HR 645) http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-645 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.645 Congress Seeks to Authorize & Legalize FEMA Camp Facilities http://www.roguegovernment.com/Cong...e_FEMA_Camp_Facilities/14007/0/13/13/Y/M.html KBR awarded Homeland Security contract worth up to $385M http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Sto...171315C0A0}&dateid=38741.5136277662-858254656 Rex 84 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84 FEMA camp footage (Concentration Camps in USA) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P-hvPJPTi4
The labor would be provided by persons under the supervision of the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Turns into: Civilian Inmate Labor Camp Program should Martial Law need to be implemented in the United States. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS Turns into: DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS should Martial Law need to be implemented in the United States. The Rex-84 Alpha Explan (Readiness Exercise 1984, Exercise Plan; otherwise known as a continuity of government plan), indicates that FEMA in association with 34 other federal civil departments and agencies, along with other Nato nations.
The mundane turns into a conspiracy with the exact same information...albeit with personal assumptions of the motivation changed.
Well, you are simply choosing to look at things from your own narrow perspective, thinking that the government is completely benevolent and has no ill-intentions when all evidence, when viewed from a CRITICAL perspective, has shown otherwise. You have to read between the lines and know how to properly interpret what you're reading, understanding that often times things are vague for a reason. A person could read the Patriot Act or the Military Commissions Act and say it's tyrannical, when another person will read it with their own interpretation and say it's harmless and that it only applies to "terrorists" (a common establishment argument in favor of such legislation) and exists to make us safer. In a lot of ways it boils down to whether you trust corrupt government or are suspicious of corrupt government. Most people who actually follow what's going on are suspicious of government, and they have every reason to be. People who believe that government serves only to help the poor pathetic sods lording over them will likely brush it off, thinking it could never happen here in the United States.
Section 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) says "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies," gives the executive the power to invoke martial law, meaning that for the first time in over a century, the president could authorize the use of the military in response to a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack or any other condition deemed necessary by the President in a situation where its determined that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain public order.
You don't go into any detail regarding any of the programmes or legislation and what you see "between the lines", though I assume: Civilian Inmate Labor Camp Program - filters down to you as some dispotic plan to get civilian's to build gulags and party headquarters for the "New World Order." Perhaps not so extreme? I don't know...but there does not seem to be anything wrong with unburderning the US prison system, with programmes to get these people in to "meaningful work."...or to house them on army land (what is desribed as "Fema Camps" - even though 34 other agencies were/are involved.) Another mooted plan was/is to get them to build bigger immigration facilities...I'm not quite sure building bigger immigration holding facilities is "meaningful work" but it isn't anything too "out there." I read a few sites about this and most removed the word "inmate" from the text and concentrated on"civilian". That isn't "reading between the lines", that is removing words that are inconvinient, wouldn't you say? From theforbiddenknowledge.com: "An anonymous source who worked at the plant said that the train cars were prison cars ordered and paid for by the United Nations. He also said that the boxcars had shackles and racks built inside by another company before they left Oregon." Given the camps are also, imo, designed to hold already convicted prisoners, train cars with shackles isn't anything alarming. There also seems to be distrust by Americans of the UN - co "collaborators" in the so-called "New World Order." , obviously. I accept the notion of: "whether you trust...governments" , in interpreting documents - relating to this and other issues - so don't expect you to alter your perceptions any time soon. But, I do watch your writings for mixing things up (sometimes)...and a lot of the time - just getting it wrong. Recent e.gs point me towards the G20 protests, where the RSB windows were smashed up - you got it wrong (You even missed a golden opportunity to spin that story towards your own POV, because you hadn't got your ducks lined up.) Hasn't that been repealed? http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.869.IH:- ...I need some clarity on this. One provision of the Act, Section 1076, has created outrage among grassroots activists, based on an article that swept through email and independent media rounds: "Bush Moves Towards Martial Law." BORDC has compiled some resources to clarify what Section 1076 actually says, and how the Insurrection Act was changed. Section 1076 Major changes: Changed the title of the law from "Insurrection Act" to "Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act" Specifies situations in which the President can invoke martial law (natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident or other condition in which the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain public order). These had not been specified before. Spells out the President's obligation to inform Congress within 14 days when he determines to exercise the authority, and every 14 days thereafter, during the exercise of the authority. This had also not been specified under the Insurrection Act. Compare the previous Insurrection Act to the current "Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act" for yourself. Use the following links: HR 5122 Section 1076 is the Defense Appropriations Bill in which changes to the Insurrection Act appear. Choose the ENR (enrolled) version of the bill. Insurrection Act—See sections 331-335. Congressional Remarks: Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) spoke in favor of the changes to the Insurrection Act, referencing the Administration's poor response to Hurricane Katrina. Kennedy seems to believe the provision does not grant any additional powers to Bush, but merely specifies which emergency situations will be covered by his existing powers: "As I understand the amendment, it defines when the President can call on the Armed Forces if there is a major public emergency at home. The amended statute now lists specific situations in which the troops can be used to restore public order. This includes natural disasters, epidemics or other serious public health emergencies, and terrorist attacks or incidents that result in domestic violence to such an extent that State authorities are unable to maintain public order. These were not mentioned specifically before. While the amendment does not grant the President any new powers, it fills an important gap in clarifying the President's authority to respond to these new kinds of emergencies." Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) spoke out vehemently against the provision, as part of an overall defense of the National Guard as a body, which is best employed locally, by the Governor of the state in which the Guard is stationed, and not siphoned off as an auxiliary national force by the White House and Pentagon. Below are two quotes from his statements on September 29, 2006 in the Senate. Read his complete statement. "It also should concern us all that the conference agreement includes language that subvert solid, longstanding posse comitatus statutes that limit the military's involvement in law enforcement, thereby making it easier for the President to declare martial law. There is good reason for the constructive friction in existing law when it comes to martial law declarations..." "Also, it seems the changes to the Insurrection Act have survived the conference because the Pentagon and the White House want it. It is easy to see the attempts of the President and his advisors to avoid the debacle involving the National Guard after Hurricane Katrina, when Governor Blanco of Louisiana would not give control of the National Guard over to President and the Federal chain of command. Governor Blanco rightfully insisted that she be closely consulted and remain largely in control of the military forces operating in the State during that emergency. This infuriated the White House, and now they are looking for some automatic triggers--natural disasters, terrorist attacks, or a disease epidemic--to avoid having to consult with the Governors. http://www.bordc.org/threats/hr5122.php
Fema camps were what the Japanese interment camps were during WW2. IF I understand correctly the power to use miliatry force during a national emergency, is to vague and I am suspicious of the governments actions ever since 9/11. I conclude that this could be a possibility, but I wont be living in a city by then, so I cannot see it affecting me much.
If this happens, never give in, never stop fighting back, please. if they lock us away we're never escaping, ever. Fight tooth and nail, scream and claw and bite and get away. Don't let them reduce you to cattle more than they already have.
