Tags:
I agree with the argument that the government has a obligation to protect life and peace in case of emergency. What the government does not have is the right to erect secret prison like facilities with no known reason. In fact the FEMA facilities were not known to anyone until someone noticed a tender document on the website.
The government has acted in bad faith in denying FOIA requests by concerned citizens on FEMA camp information. More, I've seen a video where Alex Jones was even denied access to the road leading up to the FEMA facility despite his press credentials. He was told at gun point to turn around and leave the vicinity. All this points to a secret mission, accomplished without an act of congress; under the obscure executive order of the President. In fact, I'd like to know where the funding for these structures have been sourced. I'd bet even the congress does not have a clue as to the source of these funds.
Again, this whole infrastructure of martial law could not have been achieved without secrecy. If you wish, see Inside source reveals FEMA and DHS preparing for mass graves and Ma... courtesy of puppetgov.com.
Imagine a situation that a concerned government requires a facility to house disaster victims. I'd argue there is absolutely no requirement to keep this information secret and flout the norms of government mandate. After all there are no domestic terrorists roaming the streets of America. The "domestic terrorists" argument is being slowly phased in with memos in the recent times as if to say - we now have the facilities to house these alleged domestic terrorists and its okay to go after them.
And the media is being used to subdue the public's perception that "unfortunate events" are being planned by the elites. If you see the chart you'll understand the spike in public interest has gone down after the story by Glenn and co. debunking Web Myths about FEMA camps. That is what is criminal about this operation.
Governments can be described as men without heads. Often they do things for seemingly unknown reasons that appear wrong, are wrong, and shouldn't have occurred. However, that doesn't mean the government has some dastardly plan culled from a sinister playbook.
A fine current example is the recent flyby that Airforce One did in New York City. While local government officials knew ahead of time they were told to tell no one, and they did just that. The result was local fear and hysteria. The reasoning was that Airforce One performed a flyby for photographs. Perhap, perhaps not. Either way, telling the public in advance was the right thing to do but it wasn't done. Governments are like that.
In a legitimate pandemic 500,000 dead bodies might very well be a realistic scenario. In a legitimate terrorist attack, though it appears we've never had one of those, 500,000 dead bodies might also be realistic. I can think of other scenarios as well. As a government, being prepared for 500,000 deaths without rhyme or reason is probably a reasonable preparation.
It is hardly likely however that a government such as ours would be preparing for the prospective of murdering 500,000 of it's own citizens. To begin with, it's a rather small segment of our society to eliminate for whatever reasons and at the same time it is such a large segment that the local fallout and global consequences and repercussions would cause the immediate fall of any legitimately elected government.
The only dastardly plans from sinister playbooks our own government possesses is their desire to continue to kill innocent people in foreign countries and we have done that for 100+ years and probably won't ever stop. War is the only effective devise for depopulation and we don't fight them in our own backyards.
While I agree with, "What the government does not have is the right to erect secret prison like facilities with no known reason" I will also posit that we don't have a right to kill innocent Iraqi's, innocent Afgans and innocent Pakistani's, but we do. Our government does not have a right to spy on us but they do. There are many things governments do in the 21st Century especially, that they don't have a right to do. Where would you like to start?
Jamie said:I agree with the argument that the government has a obligation to protect life and peace in case of emergency. What the government does not have is the right to erect secret prison like facilities with no known reason. In fact the FEMA facilities were not known to anyone until someone noticed a tender document on the website.
The government has acted in bad faith in denying FOIA requests by concerned citizens on FEMA camp information. More, I've seen a video where Alex Jones was even denied access to the road leading up to the FEMA facility despite his press credentials. He was told at gun point to turn around and leave the vicinity. All this points to a secret mission, accomplished without an act of congress; under the obscure executive order of the President. In fact, I'd like to know where the funding for these structures have been sourced. I'd bet even the congress does not have a clue as to the source of these funds.
Again, this whole infrastructure of martial law could not have been achieved without secrecy. If you wish, see Inside source reveals FEMA and DHS preparing for mass graves and Ma... courtesy of puppetgov.com.
Imagine a situation that a concerned government requires a facility to house disaster victims. I'd argue there is absolutely no requirement to keep this information secret and flout the norms of government mandate. After all there are no domestic terrorists roaming the streets of America. The "domestic terrorists" argument is being slowly phased in with memos in the recent times as if to say - we now have the facilities to house these alleged domestic terrorists and its okay to go after them.
And the media is being used to subdue the public's perception that "unfortunate events" are being planned by the elites. If you see the chart you'll understand the spike in public interest has gone down after the story by Glenn and co. debunking Web Myths about FEMA camps. That is what is criminal about this operation.
How about we start with their mouthpiece Glenn Beck and Co.?
We can't question the governments foreign policy ( on the presumption of security ) but we can't allow them to get away with plotting against their own people. Oh and the government is being sued for their domestic wiretap folly.
Jeff said:Governments can be described as men without heads. Often they do things for seemingly unknown reasons that appear wrong, are wrong, and shouldn't have occurred. However, that doesn't mean the government has some dastardly plan culled from a sinister playbook.
A fine current example is the recent flyby that Airforce One did in New York City. While local government officials knew ahead of time they were told to tell no one, and they did just that. The result was local fear and hysteria. The reasoning was that Airforce One performed a flyby for photographs. Perhap, perhaps not. Either way, telling the public in advance was the right thing to do but it wasn't done. Governments are like that.
In a legitimate pandemic 500,000 dead bodies might very well be a realistic scenario. In a legitimate terrorist attack, though it appears we've never had one of those, 500,000 dead bodies might also be realistic. I can think of other scenarios as well. As a government, being prepared for 500,000 deaths without rhyme or reason is probably a reasonable preparation.
It is hardly likely however that a government such as ours would be preparing for the prospective of murdering 500,000 of it's own citizens. To begin with, it's a rather small segment of our society to eliminate for whatever reasons and at the same time it is such a large segment that the local fallout and global consequences and repercussions would cause the immediate fall of any legitimately elected government.
The only dastardly plans from sinister playbooks our own government possesses is their desire to continue to kill innocent people in foreign countries and we have done that for 100+ years and probably won't ever stop. War is the only effective devise for depopulation and we don't fight them in our own backyards.
While I agree with, "What the government does not have is the right to erect secret prison like facilities with no known reason" I will also posit that we don't have a right to kill innocent Iraqi's, innocent Afgans and innocent Pakistani's, but we do. Our government does not have a right to spy on us but they do. There are many things governments do in the 21st Century especially, that they don't have a right to do. Where would you like to start?
Jamie said:I agree with the argument that the government has a obligation to protect life and peace in case of emergency. What the government does not have is the right to erect secret prison like facilities with no known reason. In fact the FEMA facilities were not known to anyone until someone noticed a tender document on the website.
The government has acted in bad faith in denying FOIA requests by concerned citizens on FEMA camp information. More, I've seen a video where Alex Jones was even denied access to the road leading up to the FEMA facility despite his press credentials. He was told at gun point to turn around and leave the vicinity. All this points to a secret mission, accomplished without an act of congress; under the obscure executive order of the President. In fact, I'd like to know where the funding for these structures have been sourced. I'd bet even the congress does not have a clue as to the source of these funds.
Again, this whole infrastructure of martial law could not have been achieved without secrecy. If you wish, see Inside source reveals FEMA and DHS preparing for mass graves and Ma... courtesy of puppetgov.com.
Imagine a situation that a concerned government requires a facility to house disaster victims. I'd argue there is absolutely no requirement to keep this information secret and flout the norms of government mandate. After all there are no domestic terrorists roaming the streets of America. The "domestic terrorists" argument is being slowly phased in with memos in the recent times as if to say - we now have the facilities to house these alleged domestic terrorists and its okay to go after them.
And the media is being used to subdue the public's perception that "unfortunate events" are being planned by the elites. If you see the chart you'll understand the spike in public interest has gone down after the story by Glenn and co. debunking Web Myths about FEMA camps. That is what is criminal about this operation.
All that you've said is true.
However, Glen Beck isn't someone that rates any recognition with me. I have no television and see him on rare occasions on web videos. He's another actor, nothing more. He doesn't deserve the recognition he's getting, good or bad.
Right now the Supreme Court just sent the Janice Jackson nipple slip case, yup the one from the Superbowl eons ago, back to the 3rd Circuit suggesting the 3rd Circuit reinstate the fine imposed on CBS (or whichever station it was) that was originally imposed. A purely wasteful use of taxpayer time and money, which is endemic to a Democracy. A Glen Beck Fiasco would be equally as wasteful. Some things are best ignored, they then go away.
Jamie said:How about we start with their mouthpiece Glenn Beck and Co.?
We can't question the governments foreign policy ( on the presumption of security ) but we can't allow them to get away with plotting against their own people. Oh and the government is being sued for their domestic wiretap folly.
Jeff said:Governments can be described as men without heads. Often they do things for seemingly unknown reasons that appear wrong, are wrong, and shouldn't have occurred. However, that doesn't mean the government has some dastardly plan culled from a sinister playbook.
A fine current example is the recent flyby that Airforce One did in New York City. While local government officials knew ahead of time they were told to tell no one, and they did just that. The result was local fear and hysteria. The reasoning was that Airforce One performed a flyby for photographs. Perhap, perhaps not. Either way, telling the public in advance was the right thing to do but it wasn't done. Governments are like that.
In a legitimate pandemic 500,000 dead bodies might very well be a realistic scenario. In a legitimate terrorist attack, though it appears we've never had one of those, 500,000 dead bodies might also be realistic. I can think of other scenarios as well. As a government, being prepared for 500,000 deaths without rhyme or reason is probably a reasonable preparation.
It is hardly likely however that a government such as ours would be preparing for the prospective of murdering 500,000 of it's own citizens. To begin with, it's a rather small segment of our society to eliminate for whatever reasons and at the same time it is such a large segment that the local fallout and global consequences and repercussions would cause the immediate fall of any legitimately elected government.
The only dastardly plans from sinister playbooks our own government possesses is their desire to continue to kill innocent people in foreign countries and we have done that for 100+ years and probably won't ever stop. War is the only effective devise for depopulation and we don't fight them in our own backyards.
While I agree with, "What the government does not have is the right to erect secret prison like facilities with no known reason" I will also posit that we don't have a right to kill innocent Iraqi's, innocent Afgans and innocent Pakistani's, but we do. Our government does not have a right to spy on us but they do. There are many things governments do in the 21st Century especially, that they don't have a right to do. Where would you like to start?
Jamie said:I agree with the argument that the government has a obligation to protect life and peace in case of emergency. What the government does not have is the right to erect secret prison like facilities with no known reason. In fact the FEMA facilities were not known to anyone until someone noticed a tender document on the website.
The government has acted in bad faith in denying FOIA requests by concerned citizens on FEMA camp information. More, I've seen a video where Alex Jones was even denied access to the road leading up to the FEMA facility despite his press credentials. He was told at gun point to turn around and leave the vicinity. All this points to a secret mission, accomplished without an act of congress; under the obscure executive order of the President. In fact, I'd like to know where the funding for these structures have been sourced. I'd bet even the congress does not have a clue as to the source of these funds.
Again, this whole infrastructure of martial law could not have been achieved without secrecy. If you wish, see Inside source reveals FEMA and DHS preparing for mass graves and Ma... courtesy of puppetgov.com.
Imagine a situation that a concerned government requires a facility to house disaster victims. I'd argue there is absolutely no requirement to keep this information secret and flout the norms of government mandate. After all there are no domestic terrorists roaming the streets of America. The "domestic terrorists" argument is being slowly phased in with memos in the recent times as if to say - we now have the facilities to house these alleged domestic terrorists and its okay to go after them.
And the media is being used to subdue the public's perception that "unfortunate events" are being planned by the elites. If you see the chart you'll understand the spike in public interest has gone down after the story by Glenn and co. debunking Web Myths about FEMA camps. That is what is criminal about this operation.
You don't get it do you ? The purge on 6 million eastern European Jews could have been prevented if the German citizens had not kept silent during the Nazi regime.
You don't believe the civilian inmate labor program is a walk in the park ? Do you realize that those people who don't have a clue about these FEMA camps will be taken to these camps without their full knowledge on whats behind the curtain ? They will be dumped there under the pretext of their protection; only to be told later on that they have no choice ?
We will not be silent when these bigots are planning a repeat of 1939 Germany.
You can go join the movement to warn the gullible citizens or you can just waste away the precious time. Its your choice.
Jeff said:All that you've said is true.
However, Glen Beck isn't someone that rates any recognition with me. I have no television and see him on rare occasions on web videos. He's another actor, nothing more. He doesn't deserve the recognition he's getting, good or bad.
Right now the Supreme Court just sent the Janice Jackson nipple slip case, yup the one from the Superbowl eons ago, back to the 3rd Circuit suggesting the 3rd Circuit reinstate the fine imposed on CBS (or whichever station it was) that was originally imposed. A purely wasteful use of taxpayer time and money, which is endemic to a Democracy. A Glen Beck Fiasco would be equally as wasteful. Some things are best ignored, they then go away.
Jamie said:How about we start with their mouthpiece Glenn Beck and Co.?
We can't question the governments foreign policy ( on the presumption of security ) but we can't allow them to get away with plotting against their own people. Oh and the government is being sued for their domestic wiretap folly.
Jeff said:Governments can be described as men without heads. Often they do things for seemingly unknown reasons that appear wrong, are wrong, and shouldn't have occurred. However, that doesn't mean the government has some dastardly plan culled from a sinister playbook.
A fine current example is the recent flyby that Airforce One did in New York City. While local government officials knew ahead of time they were told to tell no one, and they did just that. The result was local fear and hysteria. The reasoning was that Airforce One performed a flyby for photographs. Perhap, perhaps not. Either way, telling the public in advance was the right thing to do but it wasn't done. Governments are like that.
In a legitimate pandemic 500,000 dead bodies might very well be a realistic scenario. In a legitimate terrorist attack, though it appears we've never had one of those, 500,000 dead bodies might also be realistic. I can think of other scenarios as well. As a government, being prepared for 500,000 deaths without rhyme or reason is probably a reasonable preparation.
It is hardly likely however that a government such as ours would be preparing for the prospective of murdering 500,000 of it's own citizens. To begin with, it's a rather small segment of our society to eliminate for whatever reasons and at the same time it is such a large segment that the local fallout and global consequences and repercussions would cause the immediate fall of any legitimately elected government.
The only dastardly plans from sinister playbooks our own government possesses is their desire to continue to kill innocent people in foreign countries and we have done that for 100+ years and probably won't ever stop. War is the only effective devise for depopulation and we don't fight them in our own backyards.
While I agree with, "What the government does not have is the right to erect secret prison like facilities with no known reason" I will also posit that we don't have a right to kill innocent Iraqi's, innocent Afgans and innocent Pakistani's, but we do. Our government does not have a right to spy on us but they do. There are many things governments do in the 21st Century especially, that they don't have a right to do. Where would you like to start?
Jamie said:I agree with the argument that the government has a obligation to protect life and peace in case of emergency. What the government does not have is the right to erect secret prison like facilities with no known reason. In fact the FEMA facilities were not known to anyone until someone noticed a tender document on the website.
The government has acted in bad faith in denying FOIA requests by concerned citizens on FEMA camp information. More, I've seen a video where Alex Jones was even denied access to the road leading up to the FEMA facility despite his press credentials. He was told at gun point to turn around and leave the vicinity. All this points to a secret mission, accomplished without an act of congress; under the obscure executive order of the President. In fact, I'd like to know where the funding for these structures have been sourced. I'd bet even the congress does not have a clue as to the source of these funds.
Again, this whole infrastructure of martial law could not have been achieved without secrecy. If you wish, see Inside source reveals FEMA and DHS preparing for mass graves and Ma... courtesy of puppetgov.com.
Imagine a situation that a concerned government requires a facility to house disaster victims. I'd argue there is absolutely no requirement to keep this information secret and flout the norms of government mandate. After all there are no domestic terrorists roaming the streets of America. The "domestic terrorists" argument is being slowly phased in with memos in the recent times as if to say - we now have the facilities to house these alleged domestic terrorists and its okay to go after them.
And the media is being used to subdue the public's perception that "unfortunate events" are being planned by the elites. If you see the chart you'll understand the spike in public interest has gone down after the story by Glenn and co. debunking Web Myths about FEMA camps. That is what is criminal about this operation.
"Destroying the New World Order"
THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE SITE!
© 2024 Created by truth. Powered by