A new operation appears to have been launched in the mass media mind control complex to make people believe that FEMA camps do not exist. Talking head stooge and former drug addict Glenn Beck who gets paid millions of dollars to lie to people on his radio show and on Fox News, actually began talking about FEMA camps recently. Beck promised that his research team would get to the bottom of what’s really going on with these FEMA camps. This is funny, because news of detention facilities being preserved and built in this country for large groups of people is 100% documented and is really nothing new. Of course, it is doubtful that Beck will actually reveal the truth about government detention facilities when his research team finishes their work. It appears as if the only reason why he’s mentioning FEMA camps is so that he can setup phony arguments as to why they don’t exist. Strangely enough, Ron Paul made an appearance on his program and actually told him that the camps don’t exist. Dr. Paul is right on many issues, but he is wrong about the FEMA camps. In fact, it is amazing to see how Dr. Paul has now been turned into a media darling as the corporate media’s old paradigms are being traded for new paradigms to keep people watching their fake news broadcasts. The fact that Dr. Paul won’t expose the phony terror war fraud, the lies about 9/11 and is now claiming that FEMA camps don’t exist is ridiculous. It is time to call a spade a spade.
Beck Mentions FEMA Camps On Fox & Friends
Beck Backs Off Of FEMA Camp Report w/ help From Ron Paul
Let’s look at some of the evidence that there are detention facilities in place that could be used to hold large quantities of people for whatever reason the government deems to be necessary.
First in the 1980s, it was reported by the Miami Herald, the Akron Beacon Journal and other publications on and after July 5th 1987 that Oliver North had assisted FEMA in drafting plans for civil defense. These plans included the suspension of the U.S. Constitution, the imposition of martial law, internment camps and turning control of state and local governments to military commanders and providing FEMA dictator like powers during catastrophic events including times of widespread political dissent. North himself was even asked about these reports during the Iran-Contra scandal by Congressman Jack Brooks but was stopped by the committee Chairman because it touched upon classified information.
We have George W. Bush signing into law a bill that allocated money to preserve Japanese internment camps that were used during World War II.
We have KBR the engineering arm of Halliburton being awarded a $385 million contract to build detention facilities under the guise that they would be used to house illegal aliens.
There is a declassified U.S. Army document posted on the U.S. Army’s official web site outlining U.S. Army Regulation 210-35 which describes standard operating procedures on how to setup a Civilian Inmate Labor Program.
The Associated Press ran a report describing how FEMA is looking for ways to transport large quantities of people via trains during an emergency, much like the Nazis did with Jews back during World War II.
There is also ample anecdotal evidence of people who have reported facilities that appear to be built for the purpose of detaining large quantities of people around the country.
There is also a new bill entitled HR 645 the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act that was proposed by Congressman Alcee Hastings (D-FL) which would authorize and legalize FEMA camp facilities on open and closed military reservations.
It is impossible to dismiss all of this information and say that FEMA camps flat out don’t exist. There is too much anecdotal evidence and mainstream news to say that it is just a wild conspiracy theory. We know there are Japanese internment camps and we know that KBR was given a huge contract to build detention facilities that are not being used to house any illegal aliens at this point in time.
With that said, we have to face the facts that there are detention facilities in existence today and that they are pushing to expand and legalize this insane FEMA camp program. It is pretty sad when there is literally nobody in Washington DC including Dr. Paul that is providing the full truth on anything. Even though Dr. Paul’s campaign for President began as a positive resistance movement it was clearly infiltrated and steered in the wrong direction to ensure its eventual defeat. The globalists plan to get rid of the Federal Reserve, so they don’t really mind the fact that Dr. Paul is over TV speaking out against it. They are just going to replace the Fed with the phony solution of a new central bank and a new debt based currency when the Federal Reserve Note currency collapses.
The entire political process is a joke and there doesn’t appear to be any way to salvage it. The government is a criminal enterprise on every possible level and should be recognized as such. If Glenn Beck actually tells the truth about FEMA’s role in continuity of government operations coupled with what's really happening with these camps, it will be an enormous surprise. It appears as if Dr. Paul’s appearance was setup for Beck to later debunk this FEMA camp information with his bought and paid for research team cronies. Even though it is possible Dr. Paul might not have full access to all of the information about government run detention centers, his stance on other issues such as the phony threat of Al-Qaeda and the false flag terror attacks of 9/11 raises a number of questions. Who out there is providing the full truth about anything in Washington DC? The answer is simple, and that is nobody.
I trust Ron's intentions. I don't trust his ability/inability to be subverted by the media lords via his desire to spread his message. Even the best of us can be diverted and co-opted through our own desires and best intentions.
I trust Ron's intentions. I don't trust his ability/inability to be subverted by the media lords via his desire to spread his message. Even the best of us can be diverted and co-opted through our own desires and best intentions.
I know I'll probably get flamed for this but I'll say it anyway...
Why does Dr. Paul lose credibility just because he doesn't march in precise lock-step to every non-mainstream theory there is about chem trails, 9/11, detention camps, etc.?
While I don't believe that the official gov't story about 9/11 is entirely truthful, I don't believe that drone planes were flown into buildings. I believe that real people flew those planes, who they worked for is another story. So I can believe some things but not the whole truther enchilada. Does that make me a sheeple or a sold-out like many of you accuse Dr. Paul of being?
Chem trail theories are way out there as far as I'm concerned.
Detention camps - I have not made up my mind on what the purpose may be. But just because I reserve judgment does that make me too easily manipulated by the media?
I think "truthers" need to be careful in their rush to criticize thoughtful, intelligent people like Dr. Paul just because he does not jump on board with every unorthodox paranoid theory that comes up on the 'net.
I know I'll probably get flamed for this but I'll say it anyway...
Well, you asked for it!
I dont recall anyone saying he had to march in lockstep with anyone. But in regard to deterntion camps, there are credible MSM stories, not to mention the legislation. Paul ignores this.
In regard to 9/11, there are also credible sources that call bullshit on the commissions report. We might not know what really happened and exactly who did it, but we know what didn't happen. Paul ignores this.
As flames go, I think I was rather kind to you... That wasn't so bad, was it ;)
I dont recall anyone saying he had to march in lockstep with anyone. But in regard to deterntion camps, there are credible MSM stories, not to mention the legislation. Paul ignores this.
In regard to 9/11, there are also credible sources that call bullshit on the commissions report. We might not know what really happened and exactly who did it, but we know what didn't happen. Paul ignores this.
As flames go, I think I was rather kind to you... That wasn't so bad, was it ;)
Yes, your response was quite reasonable and I thank you for your restraint.
The 9/11 commission's report was probably as high as 75% truthful but the lies, omissions though only representing 25% were grand and pivotal. But because there was a good deal of factual truth in it, it makes it difficult for people - even Ron Paul - to attack it. To fail in demonstrating just one thing to be a lie is to then be dismissed on questioning all the other details.
You see whether we like it or not, the 9/11 commission report comes with an implicit aura of authority and sanctity - after all it was a bi-partisan investigation and witnesses testified under oath - whereas for people to question this authority they must be 100% correct in every single thing they question or they will be dismissed as kooks, buffoons, attention seekers.
Dr. Paul says what he knows for sure and nothing more because he could lose all credibility if he speculates and is wrong. So what he said in an interview with Glenn Beck - as I recall - was that he felt that the government's involvement in 9/11 was its incompetence, its bungling. He says what he knows with certainty.
You and I can speculate because we are nobody's, we represent no one but ourselves. Dr. Paul represents the majority's needs and wishes of his electorate in Texas. What % of his electorate do you suppose asked Dr. Paul to investigate 9/11 for the "real" truth? What % of Dr. Paul's electorate even indicated that they thought the 9/11 commission's report was false? I'd suggest to you that the % of Texans in his congressional district that thought the 9/11 commission report was "bullshit" and told Dr. Paul so was less than 1%.
As for the detention camps, it could be that Dr. Paul - assuming he has been told all the facts along with other elected reps and senators - has been sworn to secrecy so as not to create pandemonium in the public. My belief is that the camps are not so much for detention as in gulags/imprisonment as they are for gov't enforced mass quarantine due to a natural medical disaster like ebola or deadly flu epidemic or due to a biological or radiological weapon having been released. However, that's not to say that though the intent is for quarantine use, our gov't would not ever use the camps for detention, imprisonment. One scenario I could see happening as a possibility would be that if the Mexican government falls, millions of Mexican nationals would surge northward and overwhelm our borders within 48 hours. US authorities would then have no choice but to declare martial law and detain all non-US citizens/legal residents in the camps until order was restored in Mexico by our military.
I don't think Dr. Paul has ignored 9/11 or the detention camps. He is choosing in the first case to be precise in what he says in public and also to be responsive to the stated priorities of his congressional seat's electorate. In the second situation, it may very well be a case where he's sworn to secrecy and is unable to share the facts he has been told with his electorate and with the general public.
That's how I interpret Dr. Paul's actions and frankly I'd do the same if I were in his shoes.
If Paul wants to represent his TX district, more power to him. Go home, and stay home. When it comes to national and "Constitutional" issues, keep off the boob tube and just bring the pork home to the Great State Of Texas. IOW, be a typical CONgressman, if that job is so fucking important to him.
"I'd suggest to you that the % of Texans in his congressional district that thought the 9/11 commission report was "bullshit" and told Dr. Paul so was less than 1%. "
You're could be right. But he was running for president. He used those "truthers" and small "l" libertarians for his own ends. Rather cynical of him. They gave him their energy and goodwill, and he gave them shit.
"In the second situation, it may very well be a case where he's sworn to secrecy and is unable to share the facts he has been told with his electorate and with the general public. "
Omerta. Right.
If that is the case, I have even less respect for him now than I did 2 minutes ago. It's conjecture, sure, but if that happened then he is also a traitor. He has sworn loyalty not to the Constitution but to his political handlers that forced him to swear that oath. You seem to excuse this. I am not nearly so kindhearted.
But, like I said, it's conjecture.
"As for the detention camps, it could be that Dr. Paul - assuming he has been told all the facts along with other elected reps and senators - has been sworn to secrecy so as not to create pandemonium in the public. "
But pandemonium is exactly what we need, especially if it is the result of citizens learning who those detention camps are built for, them. People are getting armed up. And they aren't suddenly taking up hunting.
The "Ron Paul Revolution", remember? Well, let there be a real revolution. Nothing else will fix the situation. Only IMO Paul can stay home. He's useless.
a. He used those "truthers" and small "l" libertarians for his own ends. Rather cynical of him. They gave him their energy and goodwill, and he gave them shit.
b. Omerta. Right.
If that is the case, I have even less respect for him now than I did 2 minutes ago. It's conjecture, sure, but if that happened then he is also a traitor. He has sworn loyalty not to the Constitution but to his political handlers that forced him to swear that oath. You seem to excuse this. I am not nearly so kindhearted.
a. How did he "use" the truthers and the libertarians?
The truthers had a very focused self-serving agenda that was not shared by 95% of Americans. The truthers were no doubt infiltrated by gubment types as well as certain lobby groups. In other words it was a group that had some genuine AmericaFirst individuals, but also many flakes and untrustworthy types.
The truther group was hoping to gain legitimacy and increase its profile and influence in DC by attaching itself to the coat tails of a political figure like Kucinich or Dr. Paul, regardless if the groups unsavory types tarnished the reputation and ruined the career of those politicians.
I think the truthers were taking advantage of Dr. Paul (and Kucinich), not the other way around.
As for the libertarians, Dr. Paul told them straight up that he was running as a GOP candidate and several times when he was asked if he would run as a 3rd party candidate should he not win the GOP Presidency candidacy, he said "no." So how did he let the libertarians down? That they hoped that he would change his mind down the stretch is not Dr. Paul's fault.
b. IF Dr. Paul has been sworn to secrecy, it's because he and other Congressional members have been asked to keep the knowledge of quarantine camps under raps by the Oval Office. And how does this represent anything remotely unconstitutional? Where is it in the constitution that you and I have the right to know every single detail per what the President and Congress know regarding how government is prepared to control/contain a medical epidemic/emergency or sovreignity threat posed by another nation's government's implosion?
It's kind of a catch-22, but it occurs to me that those who believe government to be the absolute most loathsome are the very ones condemning Paul for being a traitor to THE CAUSE, whatever that is. If everything is a conspiracy, then it doesn't matter which one we resist. How's that for some reductio ad absurdum? It sounded better when I thought it than when I typed it.