For the record, I said months ago that I did NOT believe that there was a REAL plan to round up American/US citizens and put us into “FEMA camps”… being that I am from the “show me state” of missouri.. I felt this claim required more proof that what was offered months/years ago.
Now, the tables have turned, and I surely / sorely stand corrected.
The US congress has approved a bill which AUTHORIZES THE MILITARY to be able to arrest US citizens on US SOIL !!! Not only can they arrest us without cause, they can hold you indefinitely — with no lawyer and no one knowing your location !! ( they can do this now through this “law” that was passed…by labeling you beligerent towards the government thus being a terrorist sympathizer — therefore allowing the military to take you to a secret prison without a trial)
Also this very same short period of days, this week, KBR (security corporation which handles FEMA emergency camps) put out a call to staff these FEMA camps.. and to be ready on a 72 hour notice.
Take these two events together.. same week… FEMA camps being alerted to staff on a short notice, and the US military authorized to arrest people at the drop of a hat.
Who voted yes and who voted no:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-212
Here is the s. 1867 military authorization bill:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.1867:
here is the link to KBR security corporation needing to staff FEMA camps with a 72 hour notice:
http://static.infowars.com/2011/12/i/general/kbr-doc.pdf
Here is the general link to Alex Jones / Infowars — who has been staying on top of this issue.. (I know a lot of people thumb their nose at AJ — but this is just one of MANY news outlets covering this issue — just search on google s.1867 or KBR FEMA if you don’t like Alex Jones or agree with his other work) This issue transcends “personalities”… we need to put any differences aside and deal with this together in unison !
http://www.infowars.com
http://www.prisonplanet.com
We are on the verge of WAR. These camps are NOT for us. Not in my opinion. At least not in the way that people are so up in arms about. If we are nuked the camps may help the survivors but I believe they are for the enemy who is on this very day performing war games to show us that they are ready willing and able to strike. Pakistan, Iran, China and possibly Russia! Lines are being drawn in the sand. Aggressive maneuvers are slung back and forth. America needs the strategic land called Pakistan and China has vowed to defend. Putin is pissed at Hillary but let’s hope he is not stupid. World war III is brewing, let’s hope someone can remove the heat before it boils over. Just my observation!
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
November 17, 2011
(Senate)
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
S. 1867 – National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2012
(Sen. Levin, D-MI)
The Administration supports Senate passage of S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012. The Administration appreciates the Senate Armed Services Committee’s continued support of our national defense, including its support for both the base budget and for overseas contingency operations and for most of the Administration’s initiatives to control spiraling health costs of the Department of Defense (DoD).
The Administration appreciates the support of the Committee for authorities that assist the ability of the warfighter to operate in unconventional and irregular warfare, authorities that are important to field commanders, such as the Commanders’ Emergency Response Program, Global Train and Equip Authority, and other programs that provide commanders with the resources and flexibility to counter unconventional threats or support contingency or stability operations. The Administration looks forward to reviewing a classified annex and working with the Congress to address any concerns on classified programs as the legislative process moves forward.
While there are many areas of agreement with the Committee, the Administration would have serious concerns with provisions that would: (1) constrain the ability of the Armed Forces to carry out their missions; (2) impede the Secretary of Defense’s ability to make and implement decisions that eliminate unnecessary overhead or programs to ensure scarce resources are directed to the highest priorities for the warfighter; or (3) depart from the decisions reflected in the President’s FY 2012 Budget Request. The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress to address these and other concerns, a number of which are outlined in more detail below.
Detainee Matters: The Administration objects to and has serious legal and policy concerns about many of the detainee provisions in the bill. In their current form, some of these provisions disrupt the Executive branch’s ability to enforce the law and impose unwise and unwarranted restrictions on the U.S. Government’s ability to aggressively combat international terrorism; other provisions inject legal uncertainty and ambiguity that may only complicate the military’s operations and detention practices.
Section 1031 attempts to expressly codify the detention authority that exists under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) (the “AUMF”). The authorities granted by the AUMF, including the detention authority, are essential to our ability to protect the American people from the threat posed by al-Qa’ida and its associated forces, and have enabled us to confront the full range of threats this country faces from those organizations and individuals. Because the authorities codified in this section already exist, the Administration does not believe codification is necessary and poses some risk. After a decade of settled jurisprudence on detention authority, Congress must be careful not to open a whole new series of
2
legal questions that will distract from our efforts to protect the country. While the current
language minimizes many of those risks, future legislative action must ensure that the
codification in statute of express military detention authority does not carry unintended
consequences that could compromise our ability to protect the American people.
The Administration strongly objects to the military custody provision of section 1032, which
would appear to mandate military custody for a certain class of terrorism suspects. This
unnecessary, untested, and legally controversial restriction of the President’s authority to defend
the Nation from terrorist threats would tie the hands of our intelligence and law enforcement
professionals. Moreover, applying this military custody requirement to individuals inside the
United States, as some Members of Congress have suggested is their intention, would raise
serious and unsettled legal questions and would be inconsistent with the fundamental American
principle that our military does not patrol our streets. We have spent ten years since September
11, 2001, breaking down the walls between intelligence, military, and law enforcement
professionals; Congress should not now rebuild those walls and unnecessarily make the job of
preventing terrorist attacks more difficult. Specifically, the provision would limit the flexibility
of our national security professionals to choose, based on the evidence and the facts and
circumstances of each case, which tool for incapacitating dangerous terrorists best serves our
national security interests. The waiver provision fails to address these concerns, particularly in
time-sensitive operations in which law enforcement personnel have traditionally played the
leading role. These problems are all the more acute because the section defines the category of
individuals who would be subject to mandatory military custody by substituting new and
untested legislative criteria for the criteria the Executive and Judicial branches are currently
using for detention under the AUMF in both habeas litigation and military operations. Such
confusion threatens our ability to act swiftly and decisively to capture, detain, and interrogate
terrorism suspects, and could disrupt the collection of vital intelligence about threats to the
American people.
Rather than fix the fundamental defects of section 1032 or remove it entirely, as the
Administration and the chairs of several congressional committees with jurisdiction over these
matters have advocated, the revised text merely directs the President to develop procedures to
ensure the myriad problems that would result from such a requirement do not come to fruition.
Requiring the President to devise such procedures concedes the substantial risks created by
mandating military custody, without providing an adequate solution. As a result, it is likely that
implementing such procedures would inject significant confusion into counterterrorism
operations.
The certification and waiver, required by section 1033 before a detainee may be transferred from
Guantánamo Bay to a foreign country, continue to hinder the Executive branch’s ability to
exercise its military, national security, and foreign relations activities. While these provisions
may be intended to be somewhat less restrictive than the analogous provisions in current law,
they continue to pose unnecessary obstacles, effectively blocking transfers that would advance
our national security interests, and would, in certain circumstances, violate constitutional
separation of powers principles. The Executive branch must have the flexibility to act swiftly in
conducting negotiations with foreign countries regarding the circumstances of detainee transfers.
Section 1034′s ban on the use of funds to construct or modify a detention facility in the United
States is an unwise intrusion on the military’s ability to transfer its detainees as operational needs
dictate. Section 1035 conflicts with the consensus-based interagency approach to detainee
reviews required under Executive Order No. 13567, which establishes procedures to ensure that
3
periodic review decisions are informed by the most comprehensive information and the considered views of all relevant agencies. Section 1036, in addition to imposing onerous requirements, conflicts with procedures for detainee reviews in the field that have been developed based on many years of experience by military officers and the Department of Defense. In short, the matters addressed in these provisions are already well regulated by existing procedures and have traditionally been left to the discretion of the Executive branch.
Broadly speaking, the detention provisions in this bill micromanage the work of our experienced counterterrorism professionals, including our military commanders, intelligence professionals, seasoned counterterrorism prosecutors, or other operatives in the field. These professionals have successfully led a Government-wide effort to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qa’ida and its affiliates and adherents over two consecutive Administrations. The Administration believes strongly that it would be a mistake for Congress to overrule or limit the tactical flexibility of our Nation’s counterterrorism professionals.
Any bill that challenges or constrains the President’s critical authorities to collect intelligence, incapacitate dangerous terrorists, and protect the Nation would prompt the President’s senior advisers to recommend a veto.
Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft (JSF): The Administration also appreciates the Committee’s inclusion in the bill of a prohibition on using funds authorized by S. 1867 to be used for the development of the F136 JSF alternate engine. As the Administration has stated, continued development of the F136 engine is an unnecessary diversion of scarce resources.
Medium Extended Air Defense Systems (MEADS): The Administration appreciates the Committee’s support for the Department’s air and missile defense programs; however, it strongly objects to the lack of authorization of appropriations for continued development of the MEADS program. This lack of authorization could trigger unilateral withdrawal by the United States from the MEADS Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Germany and Italy, which could further lead to a DoD obligation to pay all contract costs – a scenario that would likely exceed the cost of satisfying DoD’s commitment under the MOU. Further, this lack of authorization could also call into question DoD’s ability to honor its financial commitments in other binding cooperative MOUs and have adverse consequences for other international cooperative programs.
Overseas Construction Funding for Guam and Bahrain: The Administration has serious concerns with the limitation on execution of the United States and Government of Japan funds to implement the realignment of United States Marine Forces from Okinawa to Guam. The bill would unnecessarily restrict the ability and flexibility of the President to execute our foreign and defense policies with our ally, Japan. The Administration also has concerns over the lack of authorization of appropriations for military construction projects in Guam and Bahrain. Deferring or eliminating these projects could send the unintended message that the United States does not stand by its allies or its agreements.
Provisions Authorizing Activities with Partner Nations: The Administration appreciates the support of the Committee to improve capabilities of other nations to support counterterrorism efforts and other U.S. interests, and urges the inclusion of DoD’s requested proposals, which balance U.S. national security and broader foreign policy interests. The Administration would prefer only an annual extension of the support to foreign nation counter-drug activities authority in line with its request. While the inclusion of section 1207 (Global Security Contingency Fund)
4
is welcome, several provisions may affect Executive branch agility in the implementation of this authority. Section 1204 (relating to Yemen) would require a 60-day notify and wait period not only for Yemen, but for all other countries as well, which would impose an excessive delay and seriously impede the Executive branch’s ability to respond to emerging requirements.
Unrequested Authorization Increases: Although not the only examples in S. 1867, the Administration notes and objects to the addition of $240 million and $200 million, respectively, in unrequested authorization for unneeded upgrades to M-1 Abrams tanks and Rapid Innovation Program research and development in this fiscally constrained environment. The Administration believes the amounts appropriated in FY 2011 and requested in FY 2012 fully fund DoD’s requirements in these areas.
Advance Appropriations for Acquisition: The Administration objects to section 131, which would provide only incremental funding – undermining stability and cost discipline – rather than the advance appropriations that the Administration requested for the procurement of Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellites and certain classified programs.
Authority to Extend Deadline for Completion of a Limited Number of Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) Recommendations: The Administration requests inclusion of its proposed authority for the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of Defense to extend the 2005 BRAC implementation deadline for up to ten (10) recommendations for a period of no more than one year in order to ensure no disruption to the full and complete implementation of each of these recommendations, as well as continuity of operations. Section 2904 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act imposes on DoD a legal obligation to close and realign all installations so recommended by the BRAC Commission to the President and to complete all such closures and realignments no later than September 15, 2011. DoD has a handful of recommendations with schedules that complete implementation close to the statutory deadline.
TRICARE Providers: The Administration is currently undertaking a review with relevant agencies, including the Departments of Defense, Labor, and Justice, to clarify the responsibility of health care providers under civil and workers’ rights laws. The Administration therefore objects to section 702, which categorically excludes TRICARE network providers from being considered subcontractors for purposes of the Federal Acquisition Regulation or any other law.
Troops to Teachers Program: The Administration urges the Senate’s support for the transfer of the Troops to Teachers Program to DoD in FY 2012, as reflected in the President’s Budget and DoD’s legislative proposal to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and Title 10 of the U.S. Code in lieu of section 1048. The move to Defense will help ensure that this important program supporting members of the military as teachers is retained and provide better oversight of 6 program outcomes by simplifying and streamlining program management. The Administration looks forward to keeping the Congress abreast of this transfer, to ensure it runs smoothly and has no adverse impact on program enrollees.
Constitutional concerns: A number of the bill’s provisions raise additional constitutional concerns, such as sections 233 and 1241, which could intrude on the President’s constitutional authority to maintain the confidentiality of sensitive diplomatic communications. The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress to address these and other concerns.
Dutch, I’m frankly surprised that you ever saw FEMA as an emergency response organisation. When have they ever been of the slightest help during a real disaster? They were set up as a shadow government by, of all people, Dick Cheney and his NeoCon buddies.
Now the military has been granted the powers to enable the true FEMA agenda. God help you all.
Reblogged this on abraveheart1.
Pretty much old news. They had it in committe back in the early fall. Then they found it would not pass, so they tied it to the defence budget(nobody wants to be seen as not supporting our troops) So it was tacked on. The bill is SB1867, which declares that beligerant people will be detained.
This breaks the 3rd 4th 5th 6th and 7th amendments. But then this prez Barry, does not care.
I know for a fact that Alex Jones is a felon, a bully, abuser, I was there, saw him do it.
Always, always, warn or alert people there are differences among people over Jones.
He could be CIA, communist, who knows, but he’s not to be trusted.
People can tell you the truth 99% of the time, but the one lie, the 1% could be the killer, true?
Pingback: SOP Notes » Friday December 9.2, 2011
The FEMA Prisons, or Camps as they are called, are for people like myself. Or anyone who speaks negatively of the U.S.government or agencies attached. Even public school. I’m 60 now and my husband and I heard about REX 84 (FEMA) more than 30 years ago. After we already had children whose births are registered so they were made slaves the day they were born. Did you know that when you get a license to marry and then do so, the state becomes a third party to the marriage. This is what gives them power over your children too.The plans of the NWO have been in the making for many generations. It’s actually very impressive. I couldn’t begin to cover in a couple of paragraphs what’s been going on for so many years while American’s have been watching football or watching American Idol or shopping for the newest game station. It makes me sick. And personally I think it’s too late. I’m sick of the talk. No one is doing anything at all. Women’s liberation movement was also part of the plan. When women went to work…who took care of the family? The sooner the children went to a public (government) school the sooner they could be brainwashed. And gee, poor mom’s need a life of their own, right? People are really very stupid. They’re a herd animal, can’t think on their own. And that includes me too. Even though I was brought out of my slumber so many years ago, it’s so easy to go with the flow. To some degree anyway. But once you have some knowledge it’s hard to ignore. And there’s a price to pay when you know and speak of these issues. I don’t have any friends and some of my relatives think I’m nuts. The Truther Girl just did a video on Thanksgiving at the families home and how was she going to talk with anyone. She wasn’t really aloud to talk about reality. And she wasn’t informed when it came to the things they all wanted to talk about. I could relate totally.
Yes I agree that the camps could be used for other things but I believe they are meant for American’s who speak out against the government. Without going into detail. Do some googling and see for yourself.
As for A.Jones…who cares if he’s a felon? Nowadays who isn’t. That doesn’t mean a damn thing. I’m so familiar with the courts and judicial system that what I used to think was a fair system is so corrupt and illegal it will make your head swim.
And watch out, this ball is still rolling. Pretty soon you will be detained for thought crimes. Surely you’ve heard of that. Don’t laugh. God, I hate being right about this stuff. Anything but this.
Well, Dutch, I’ve known about this too. What I didn’t know was about you being on a watch list. First, I was angry, then sad and completely frustrated . . . powerless. And, as usual, comic relief popped into my head.
If you don’t have a job, you could be a terrorist.
If you grow, harvest, store or eat food, you could be a terrorist.
If you drink alcohol, you could be a terrorist.
If you stand upright, you could be a terrorist.
If you think or are a critical thinker . . .
I could go on, but you get the redneck comparison. It’s such BS.
I have to wonder if they want the masses to be scared at all costs. The typical things Cheney did to scare people isn’t working anymore. I know all of this goes deeper than that and it’s simply beyond comprehension. I have never once in my life used the word evil to describe a group of individuals. But if a group is intent on slowly ruining our lives and killing us, how does that make them any different than the despots from the past who did so in a quick manner?
Ruh-Ro, I guess I’ll be on that list now too. Hell, I’ve had an FBI file since 1970. They’ve probably kept one on everyone since J. Edgar.
Annie
Dutch,
Your friends in the military may say “no” right now to rounding up/hurting civilians…but there may be ways the powers-that-be-trying will get around that mindset–what about mandatory vaccines with mind-controlling adjuvents? What about the mercury dental fillings in our teeth? What about the aluminum in our toothpaste–and baking powder present in so many breads and baked goods–and deodorant–and cookware such as aluminum foil? Wouldnt these act as internal antennaes to pick up radio signals or ELF waves–emanating from cell phones and towers and H A A R P? What about CHEMTRAILS with mind-controlling nano-particles?
Why so many electronic “toys” for us to play with? What about the use of drone-bots?
Dutch,I’m like you I thought maybe they were preparing for something we the public wasn’t aware of. But now I AM SHOCKED! I didn’t like John McCain much in the first place but really am shocked that He of all people would sponsor a bill that would give ANY President this much power!!
I study Bible prophesy & have for years and I knew some prophesies were coming true but this sets my endtimes clock way up!! I wondered for years how America & our eople could ever be taken over and now I can see it all! Afraid for my kids & Grandkids because they are totally unaware & call me nuts if I even mention anything they think is a conspiracy! Thank you for confirming what I’ve been up all night researching!!!…I’ll be watching for more until they come take me away…lol!
Hi Dutch!!!
So glad to see you’re back…about T-shirts…what about using the same idea that tattoo sites use…put your designs on a website that can be downloaded at a fee, then people can go to Zazzle.com and make their own T-shirts, mugs, etc.
You don’t have to worry about the production, shipping, etc.
Hope this helps!
L&L,
CelticMoon