The Fema camp bill is back... The Fema camp bill is back...
The Fema camp bill is back... 
johng
11 y
875
RR
February 9, 2013
Source: Lee Rogers, BlacklistedNews.com
It looks as if Representative Alcee Hastings a Democrat from Florida has decided to reintroduce his FEMA Camp bill. A few years ago I was the first person to write an article about this awful piece of legislation. Fortunately, I was successful in exposing it to a much larger group of people via the alternative media and the bill did not move forward in the legislative process. The latest iteration of this bill has been introduced as House Resolution 390 otherwise known as the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act. This bill would authorize not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers to be run by FEMA under the command of the Secretary of Homeland Security.
I was extremely critical of an earlier version of the bill which was proposed in the 111th Congress as HR 645. The bill used vague language to give the Secretary of Homeland Security carte blanche power to use these facilities for anything that the Secretary felt was appropriate. In other words if the Secretary of Homeland Security felt like using them as death camps than potentially that could have been considered a lawful use of the facilities according to the language in the bill. In this new version it looks like Representative Hastings got the message and decided to remove the vague language even though the Secretary of Homeland Security would still be in charge of the proposed facilities.
One of the minimum requirements of a national emergency center as defined by the bill is that it is capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster. It basically sounds like a concentration camp. Similar types of facilities were setup by Franklin Delano Roosevelt during World War II to house large numbers of Japanese Americans. In other words, there is historical precedence for the federal government forcibly relocating large numbers of people into government run concentration camps. There is an increasing amount of rhetoric from the federal government and corporate media that Constitutionalists, gun owners and other liberty minded people might be considered potential terrorists. Would it really be a stretch to think that these facilities could be used to house people that they consider to be enemies?
Considering how much the federal government has lied to the American people in the past, you would be absolutely insane to set foot in one of these proposed national emergency centers. For anybody who believes this is conspiracy theory talk, you have to understand that nobody in the federal government is going to openly propose that they are building facilities to detain large numbers of Americans during a martial law scenario. If they did they’d be widely criticized and the legislation would go nowhere. Instead they are going to make it sound as if these facilities are to be used for a beneficial purpose in order to conceal what they could ultimately be used for which is why they are called national emergency centers instead of FEMA camps or concentration camp facilities. It is the same concept used by the power structure in George Orwell’s book 1984 where the government agency called the Ministry of Love is in reality the Ministry of Torture.
Not only that, but why do we need the federal government specifically establishing national emergency centers on closed military installations? These are places that were designed to control who can enter and who can leave. Interestingly enough, one of the limitations included in the new version of the bill is that it does not authorize any federal officer or employee to force an individual to enter a national emergency center or prevent an individual from leaving a national emergency center. This is funny because a member of the U.S. military is technically not considered a federal officer or employee. So even though a federal officer or employee wouldn’t be able to force a person into one of these facilities or prevent them from leaving, it does not necessarily prevent a member of the military from performing these functions. Considering that members of the military would most likely be the ones responsible for the security of such a facility, it makes the limitation entirely meaningless.
To summarize, it looks as if the new bill has been changed to deflect the most damning criticisms posed towards earlier versions but it still is a dangerous piece of legislation. It is no secret that the federal government already has facilities that can hold large numbers of people if they have the need to do so. The Bush 43 regime approved the refurbishment of the old Japanese internment camps and in the mid-2000s KBR was literally given a multi-million dollar contract to build detention facilities.
In the 1980s, Lt. Col. Oliver North was questioned during the Iran Contra hearings about his role in the development of a continuity of government plan known as Readiness Exercise 1984 or Rex 84 for short. This plan involved the implementation of martial law which included the detainment of large numbers of American citizens who the federal government deemed to be threats to national security. Subsequently, the Miami Herald on July 5th 1987 did a story on this same continuity of government plan even going into how FEMA would run these internment facilities during a declaration of martial law.
In addition to what we just covered with KBR and the refurbishment of the old Japanese internment camps, there have been many people who have identified strange government facilities around the United States that appeared to be setup for the purpose of holding large numbers of people. As a result, this bill if passed into law would simply expand upon pre-existing facilities and create a more robust FEMA camp infrastructure. Keep in mind that the bill authorizes a minimum of 6 national emergency centers but that’s just the minimum. Potentially this bill could authorize the establishment of many national emergency centers or FEMA camps and that is not acceptable.
http://www.blacklistednews.com/The_Fema_Camp_Bill_is_Back%21/24133/0/38/38/Y/...
not a surprise really. from RT:
The House Intelligence Committee’s Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and ranking member Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) will attempt to breathe new life into CISPA on Wednesday.
The bill will be identical to the version of CISPA that passed the House last spring, but was defeated on the Senate floor in August mainly because the upper house was hammering out its own cyber security bill.
CISPA would allow for the voluntary sharing of Internet traffic between private companies and the government. The bill is purportedly intended to help the US government, especially the intelligence community, to investigate cyber threats and ensure the security of networks against cyber attack, especially those emanating from countries like China and Iran.
The bill would also allow the federal government to provide classified cyber threat information to private firms, and protect them from legal action in the course of sharing private information.
Opponents of the bill say it would allow companies to hand over a user’s private browsing information to the government, allowing authorities to spy on American citizens rather than simply track down cyber threats.
Fight for the Future, a non-profit group “working to extend the Internet’s power for good,” has already kicked off an online petition asking voters to call their representatives on the House Intelligence Committee and express their opposition to the bill.
Rogers claimed a recent series of cyber attacks against US banks and newspapers galvanized Congress to once again pass the information sharing bill.
“American businesses are under siege," the Beltway tech blog The Hill cites Rogers as saying.
"We need to provide American companies the information they need to better protect their networks from these dangerous cyber threats. It is time to stop admiring this problem and deal with it immediately,” he continued.
Several leading US papers, including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Washington post have all recently fallen victim to cyber spying. Following attacks on the Federal Reserve’s website as well as on several US banks, The head of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano warned in January that a "cyber 9/11", which could cripple critical infrastructure like water, electricity and gas, may happen "imminently".
"We shouldn't wait until there is a 9/11 in the cyber world. There are things we can and should be doing right now that, if not prevent, would mitigate the extent of damage," she warned before urging Congress to pass cyber security legislation.
During his first major policy speech on cyber security in October, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta took a similar rhetorical route, warning the United States faced the prospect of “a cyber-Pearl Harbor.”
“An aggressor nation or extremist group could gain control of critical switches and derail passenger trains, or trains loaded with lethal chemicals," Panetta said. "They could contaminate the water supply in major cities, or shut down the power grid across large parts of the country."
Panetta claimed that CISPA fell "victim to legislative and political gridlock, " urged that the bill should be passed “to safeguard our national security.”
The White House threatened to veto CISPA last year, saying the bill would not protect the nation’s critical infrastructure or guarantee the privacy of consumer information that could be shared by companies.
Despite reticence about CISPA, President Obama is expected to issue an executive order aimed at strengthening US cyber security next week.
The order, which is expected to be released after Obama delivers his State of the uniion address on Tuesday, will purportedly set up a voluntary program of cyber security standards for firms operating critical US infrastructure, two former officials briefed on the plan told Bloomberg.
In October, Obama signed a separate directive authorizing the National Security Agency and other military units to take more aggressive action to defeat attacks on the country’s web of government and private computer networks.
http://rt.com/usa/news/cispa-congress-reintroduce-act-825/
