Secretive FEMA Camp Drill Goes Live
General Public:.are. Lobotomized Sheep....@..999.2012..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca The General Public:.are.. Lobotomized Sheep
Voice of Freedom | Since the article was posted, ICE and presumably DHS have
raided Agriprocessors Inc. in Pottsville, Iowa, arresting around 700 people.
...........................
Secretive FEMA Camp Drill Goes Live
The Voice of Freedom
May 12, 2008
Editor’s Note: The following article was posted on May 7, almost a week ago.
Since the article was posted, ICE and presumably DHS have raided
Agriprocessors Inc. in Pottsville, Iowa, arresting around 700 people. As the
post below argues, this round-up is not about illegal immigration but rather
is an exercise to test FEMA’s processing procedures.
May 7, 2008 - The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) along with
other government institutions are currently conducting an 8-day anti-terror
and disaster exercise from May 1st through May 8th called National Level
Exercise 2-08 in the United States. We recently covered this exercise in
great detail using press releases from FEMA and U.S. Northern Command as
source material.
Considering the historical precedent of the government running drills on the
day of the 9/11 attacks as cover for the actual operation, this 8-day long
anti-terror and disaster exercise sparked some concern. According to the
press releases from both FEMA and U.S. Northern Command, drills are slated
to take place in Oregon, Washington State and in the Washington DC or
mid-Atlantic area.
With this in mind, it is incredibly strange to see reports from the Des
Moines Register and the Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier indicating that a
secretive FEMA exercise is taking place in Waterloo, Iowa. According to
these reports, the federal government has leased out the entire National
Cattle Congress fairgrounds until May 25th for an exercise. Early reports
indicate that a large number of mobile home-size trailers and generators
have been moved on to the residence and that both FEMA and the U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are involved in this exercise.
Considering the reported involvement of FEMA and ICE, the trailers and
generators being moved in, as well as the secrecy around this particular
exercise, this has all the hallmarks of a FEMA camp drill. The purpose of
ICE being involved appears to be to round up illegal aliens so they can test
the efficiencies of their processing procedures.
Reports of the National Cattle Congress fairgrounds being leased out until
May 25th by the federal government first appeared in the Waterloo Cedar
Falls Courier’s report.
According to their report, both large mobile home-size trailers and
generators have appeared on the site. In addition, one of the board members
of the National Cattle Congress stated that it was his understanding that
FEMA was involved. An employee of ICE was also on site indicating that they
must have some sort of involvement in what is happening.
The following blurb is taken from the Waterloo Cedar Falls Courier’s report.
Normal operations on the National Cattle Congress fairgrounds have been
suspended for most of May as the federal government has leased out virtually
the entire facility for a training exercise, NCC general manager Doug Miller
said Saturday.
Miller said he could release few details. But activity on the NCC
fairgrounds was apparent Saturday, as contractors installed massive
generators adjacent to many buildings on the NCC fairgrounds and windows of
many of the buildings were covered up, blocking views of any work going on
inside. A number of large mobile home-size trailers also have taken up
residence on the site in the past several weeks.
Miller said the federal government is leasing the fairgrounds through May 25
under an agreement approved by the NCC board. He and others close to NCC
said no entity has leased out the entire fairgrounds for that long a period.
He said it is his understanding that access to the NCC fairgrounds will be
restricted beginning Monday, except for next weekend’s Cedar Falls High
School prom at Electric Park Ballroom.
Miller said he has primarily been dealing with the U.S. General Services
Administration on the arrangements, and that his physical facilities staff
have been cooperating with federal officials on logistics and setup for the
exercise.
Miller said that, other than GSA, he could not identify which agencies are
involved in the exercise. But an individual on site Saturday who identified
himself as an employee of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
referred inquiries to ICE officials in Minneapolis, who could not
immediately be reached Saturday.
Miller also was referring inquiries to federal officials in Cedar Rapids,
and NCC board member Tunis Den Hartog said it was his understanding the
Federal Emergency Management Agency was involved.
The secrecy around this drill and the lack of any formal press release or
announcement by the federal government on what is happening is incredibly
disturbing. In fact, an ICE spokesman declined to comment on the drill and a
news blackout has been imposed at the National Cattle Congress fairgrounds
where all of this activity is taking place.
The following comes from the Des Moines Register’s report.
Federal officials have imposed a news blackout at the National Cattle
Congress fairgrounds in Waterloo, where they have leased almost the entire
property through May 25.
Tim Counts, a Midwest spokesman for U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, known as ICE, declined to say Monday whether an immigration
raid is pending that would use the fairgrounds as a detention center.
"ICE never talks about our investigative activity or possible future
enforcement actions," Counts said. "Regarding the exercise in Waterloo,
there is currently no publicly releasable information about that, so we aren
’t releasing any."
He declined to say whether the "exercise" involves training or an
immigration enforcement operation.
"We expect that at some point there will be additional information
available, but I can’t speculate at what point that might be," Counts said.
The fact that officials from the federal government are being very secretive
about what’s happening here indicates that they are doing something they
know people aren’t going to like. Even the state Governor has been left in
the dark about what’s happening.
Below is another blurb from the Des Moines Register’s report.
Representatives of Gov. Chet Culver and U.S. Sens. Tom Harkin and Charles
Grassley said they had no information about what was happening at the Cattle
Congress fairgrounds.
At Grassley’s request, his staff called ICE officials on Monday.
"During the call, the ICE officials would neither confirm nor deny anything
to Senator Grassley’s staff," said Beth Pellett Levine, a Grassley aide.
The apparent involvement of FEMA and ICE indicate that the purpose of this
exercise is to test their FEMA camp deployment apparatus using the round up
of illegal aliens as a test case. Although there is no way of confirming
that this is 100% the case, if there are round-ups of illegal aliens in this
general area during the next few weeks, it will be pretty obvious at that
point.
Regardless of the goals or aims of this drill, there is no questioning the
fact that the federal government does not want to stop illegal immigration.
The federal government is encouraging this problem so they can dissolve the
borders between the three countries and form a North American Union between
Canada, Mexico and the United States. With all of the hysteria surrounding
the phony war on terror, it is ridiculous that the border has not been
sealed which shows that the open border policy with Mexico is supported by
the Bush administration. Since the vast majority of Americans want something
done about the illegal alien problem, they will think that this is a great
thing, but what they fail to realize is that these camps are not really for
illegal aliens, they are for the average American.
Plans for government run concentration camps are well documented from Rex
84, the Army’s Civilian Inmate Labor Program and the KBR built detention
facilities. This looks like a continuation of this concentration camp agenda
and considering that the government has refused to take real action to stop
the illegal alien problem, why would they want to build a FEMA camp in the
middle of Iowa to run a drill? The answer is simple, they are going to use
the excuse of the illegal alien problem to setup the FEMA camp
infrastructure which will be used to house the average Americans who protest
what this corrupt and out of control government has been doing.
It is incredibly suspicious that the federal government would not openly
announce this exercise and even go out of their way to ensure a media
blackout of their activities. There is little doubt that this is part of
their agenda to setup a large scale FEMA camp apparatus in order to house
large quantities of American citizens. The Nazis used concentration camps to
house and eventually exterminate the Jews and it is frightening to see that
a similar infrastructure is now being set up in America.
Semper Libèr® .
"The General Public:.are.. Lobotomized Sheep" <The General Public:.are.
Lobotomized Sheep....@..999.2012..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca> wrote in message
news:IDLWj.2803$KB3.2229@edtnps91...
They must be getting ready for the big day that will end up keeping Bush in
the whitehouse... Then I can collect on my winnings from Robert, who thinks
this scenario is so improbable, I'm sure he's willing to give me 500/1 odds.
I also wonder how people like KKKaren Jordon are going to feel about US
troops manning roadchecks on our streets in a few years? Does she have her
enhanced DL yet i wonder?
Robert McKenzie
"Semper Libèr® ." <.nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote in
message news:e61Xj.2306$Yp.1639@edtnps92...
Be ready to lose, bud. The election is going ahead and Bush will be out.
There will be a winner in November,
and a new Presidential inauguration in early 2009.
Too bad we didn't have a written agreement as to who wins what. I'd love to
clean out your chequing account,
and perhaps take your house after winning this silly bet. 8-)
Be around the newsgroup when that federal election happens. Watch Obama or
McCain win.
>
> I also wonder how people like KKKaren Jordon are going to feel about US
> troops manning roadchecks on our streets in a few years? Does she have her
> enhanced DL yet i wonder?
It's optional, and U.S. troops won't be seen on a roadcheck on the Pat Bay
Highway or the Island Highway around
Langford. Sorry to dissapoint you bud, but that's not going to happen.
You're too paranoid.
I'll also add in incredibily stupid in regards to how U.S. troops would
operate in Canada if circumstances required,
but you already know how ignorant and silly you've become over the past year
or so on this concept.
Semper Libèr® .
"Robert McKenzie" <rob...@makz.org> wrote in message
news:LSoYj.3710$KB3.1220@edtnps91...
I think you're forgetting the 500/1 odds? If i bet 20 dollars you'd have to
pay me 10,000. So are you good for it? ;-)
> Be around the newsgroup when that federal election happens. Watch Obama or
> McCain win.
Even if they do... don't forget that Bush is still the prez till the end of
the year.
> > I also wonder how people like KKKaren Jordon are going to feel about US
> > troops manning roadchecks on our streets in a few years? Does she have
her
> > enhanced DL yet i wonder?
>
> It's optional, and U.S. troops won't be seen on a roadcheck on the Pat Bay
> Highway or the Island Highway around
> Langford. Sorry to dissapoint you bud, but that's not going to happen.
> You're too paranoid.
Has nothing whatsoever to do with paranoia.... Simply read the agreement for
yourself. It calls for using them for policing, and so monitoring of the
main emergency evacuation/supply routes is certainly goingto be part of
that... So any road you see those triangles on is a guarantee for a
roadblock.... and if you blindly trust government with this kind of power
you're just plain naive.
Aside from that, its all speculation or wishful thinking on your part. Ask
yourself why this agreement was first signed in 2002, then again in 2008 ?
Has anyone read the recent agreement? Does it include mandatory vaccination
and tracking in the event of a "biological terrorist attack"....? How
convenient would that be?
The military of Canada and the US under such an attack would come under
command of NorthCom, and Northern Command will be headed by Air Force
General Ralph Eberhart, the current commander-in-chief of NORAD.... The same
group that was running some 15 drills when 911 took place... some of which
involved the hijacking of jets and flying them into the same buildings. Gee,
what are the odds, eh? Why would anyone have any doubts about these guys?
Pact would allow U.S. troops into Canada during emergency
Last Updated Tue, 10 Dec 2002
OTTAWA - U.S. troops could find themselves on Canadian territory helping
police and firefighters deal with emergencies under a new pact signed by the
two countries.
[....]
Defence Minister John McCallum said the pact recognizes that threats such as
those posed by terrorists or biological agents don't recognize international
borders, and continues a long tradition of Canada-U.S. co-operation on
dealing with common threats.
The agreement creates a new binational planning group that will draw up
plans for deploying military and civilian forces in the event of emergency,
including terrorist attacks and natural disasters.
The armed forces would be called in to assist the firefighters, paramedics
and police who would be on the front lines of any emergency response.
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/12/09/forces_pact021209
------------
Why the secrecy i wonder?
Canada, U.S. militaries sign cross-border pact -David Pugliese Canwest,
February 23, 2008
Neither the Canadian government nor the Canadian Forces announced the new
agreement, which was signed Feb. 14 in Texas.
The U.S. military's Northern Command, however, publicized the agreement with
a statement outlining how its top officer, Gen. Gene Renuart, and Canadian
Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, head of Canada Command, signed the plan, which allows
the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation
during a civil emergency.
The new agreement has been greeted with suspicion by the left wing in Canada
and the right wing in the U.S.
The left-wing Council of Canadians, which is campaigning against what it
calls the increasing integration of the U.S. and Canadian militaries, is
raising concerns about the deal.
"It's kind of a trend when it comes to issues of Canada-U.S. relations and
contentious issues like military integration. We see that this government is
reluctant to disclose information to Canadians that is readily available on
American and Mexican websites," said Stuart Trew, a researcher with the
Council of Canadians.
"Are we going to see [U.S.] troops on our soil for minor potential threats
to a pipeline or a road?" he asked.
Trew also noted the U.S. military does not allow its soldiers to operate
under foreign command so there are questions about who controls American
forces if they are requested for service in Canada.
http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=43de5906-d292-4512-891c-96b0f9de5bbb
General Public:.are. Lobotomized Sheep....@..999.2012..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca The General Public:.are.. Lobotomized Sheep
Robert doesn't think those US troops wondering the streets in Canada will
walk his mentally ill mother to the gas chambers to be cleansed....Robert
needs some serious deprogramming done to fix his mentally ill outlook on
what's really going on.....with the liberals and Conservitives greements
made with that fucking piece of shit Bush the terrorist scumbag who should
be hung by the neck until that scumbag is dead.....
..............................................
Rumsfeld On Tape: Terror Attack Could Restore Neo-Con Agenda
Former Defense Secretary's conversation with military analysts on political
problems - "The Correction For That...Is An Attack"
May 16, 2008
Shocking excerpts of confidential recordings recently released under the
Freedom of Information Act feature former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
talking with top military analysts about how a flagging Neo-Con political
agenda could be successfully restored with the aid of another terrorist
attack on America.
The tape also includes a conversation where Rumsfeld and the military
analysts agree on the possible necessity of installing a brutal dictator in
Iraq to oversee U.S. interests.
The tapes were released as part of the investigation into the Pentagon's
"message force multipliers" program in which top military analysts were
hired to propagandize for the Iraq war in the corporate media.
In attendance at the valedictory luncheon Rumsfeld hosted on December 12,
2006 were David L. Grange, Donald W. Sheppard, James Marks, Rick Francona,
Wayne Downing, and Robert H. Scales, Jr. among others.
The most extraordinary exchange takes place when Lt. Gen. Michael DeLong
bemoans shrinking political support for Neo-Con war plans on Capitol Hill
and suggests that sympathy for the Bush administration's agenda will only be
achieved after a new terror attack.
Rumsfeld agrees that the psychological impact of 9/11 is wearing off and the
"behavior pattern" of citizens in both the U.S. and Europe suggests that
they are unconcerned about the threat of terror.
DELONG: Politically, what are the challenges because you're not going to
have a lot of sympathetic ears up there until it [a terror attack] happens.
RUMSFELD: That's what I was just going to say. This President's pretty
much a victim of success. We haven't had an attack in five years. The
perception of the threat is so low in this society that it's not surprising
that the behavior pattern reflects a low threat assessment. The same thing's
in Europe, there's a low threat perception. The correction for that, I
suppose, is an attack. And when that happens, then everyone gets energized
for another [inaudible] and it's a shame we don't have the maturity to
recognize the seriousness of the threats...the lethality, the carnage, that
can be imposed on our society is so real and so present and so serious that
you'd think we'd be able to understand it, but as a society, the longer you
get away from 9/11, the less...the less...
Click here for the "audio clip".
http://prisonplanet.com/audio/160508clip1.mp3
In another exchange, after assuring that comments are "off the record,"
Rumsfeld and one of the military analysts agree that Iraq could use a
"Syngman Rhee" to take control of Iraq. Syngman Rhee was the ruthless
authoritarian dictator of South Korea from after World War II through the
Korean War to 1960. If the invasion of Iraq was about liberating the Iraqis
from a tyrant in the form of Saddam Hussein why is Rumsfeld talking about
installing an even more brutal dictator?
Click here for the audio "clip".
http://prisonplanet.com/audio/160508clip2.mp3
Newsvine has the recording in full.
http://jfxgillis.newsvine.com/_news/2008/05/12/1482373-correctly-political-liquid-lunch-with-donald-rumsfeld
Terrorist Rumsfeld's admission that the correction for dwindling support of
the Neo-Con imperial crusade is another terror attack is perhaps the most
startling and blatant indication that 9/11 was an inside job.
How much more evidence do we need to confirm that the Neo-Con hierarchy in
control of the U.S. government are instigating and exploiting terror in the
pursuit of their own domestic and geopolitical agenda?
As Jerry Mazza writes today, "In the seven years since the day, exhaustive
and still growing evidence proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the US
government, spearheaded by the Bush administration, planned, orchestrated
and executed the 9/11 false flag operation. As openly advocated by wide
swaths of elites, from the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), of
which Rumsfeld has been a member, to the likes of Zbigniew Brzezinski (in
his The Grand Chessboard), only an attack "on the order of Pearl Harbor"
would, in Brzezinski's words, cause the American people to support an
"imperial mobilization," and a world war."
Placing the new evidence against previously revealed 9/11-related acts on
the part of Rumsfeld, his guilt is overt and obvious. Recall that it was
Rumsfeld who enthusiastically penned the "Go Massive" memo, gleefully
declaring the Bush administration finally had the green light to kill: "Not
only UBL (Usama bin Laden). Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and
not."
The longing for a new terror attack to corral the masses back behind the
Neo-Con agenda is a shared fetish amongst Neo-Cons, policy wonks and
academics alike.
In August last year Philadelphia Daily News columnist Stu Bykofsky openly
called for "another 9/11" that "would help America" restore a "community of
outrage and national resolve".
Lt.-Col. Doug Delaney, chair of the war studies program at the Royal
Military College in Kingston, Ontario, told the Toronto Star last July that
"The key to bolstering Western resolve is another terrorist attack like 9/11
or the London transit bombings of two years ago."
The same sentiment was also explicitly expressed in a 2005 GOP memo, which
yearned for new attacks that would "validate" the President's war on terror
and "restore his image as a leader of the American people."
Also in July 2007, former Republican Senator Rick Santorum suggested that a
series of "unfortunate events," namely terrorist attacks, will occur within
the next year and change American citizen's perception of the war.
And the month before that, the new chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party
Dennis Milligan said that there needed to be more attacks on American soil
for President Bush to regain popular approval.
Comments posted on the left-wing Huffington Post website in response to the
Rumsfeld tape indicate that even some of the most hardcore conspiracy
debunkers have had their beliefs shaken to the core by the former Defense
Secretary's admission.
"I have been a very staunch opponent of conspiracy theories," writes one,
"but to hear the man most responsible for stopping foreign threats to
American lives musing that a successful attack on the USA is somehow a
"cure" for us... it almost makes me want to make a tinfoil hat with the nuts
I made fun of."
"Semper Libèr® ." <.nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote in
message news:fgrYj.3759$KB3.1736@edtnps91...
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 080519-0, 05/19/2008
> Tested on: 5/19/2008 10:15:10 PM
> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
>
Robert McKenzie
Bets are two way streets. If I lose, I would have owed you $10,000 on a
$20.00 bet If you lose, I get the $10,000. Do you have that in the chequing
account?
But doesn't mean anything since there is no written agreement that such a
bet exists, and I would need to know your real
name, first.
>
>> Be around the newsgroup when that federal election happens. Watch Obama
>> or
>> McCain win.
>
> Even if they do... don't forget that Bush is still the prez till the end
> of
> the year.
Nothing new there, Their inauguration isn't until a constitutionally
mandated date in Janaury. But that is more of
a caretaker and transitional role to provide continuity. The same thing (to
a lesser time frame) exists in Canada,
since the new Prime Minister isn't sworn in until after the Writ of Election
is returned.
You kept going on about cancellation of the election. Re-read what you wrote
in the past.
>> > I also wonder how people like KKKaren Jordon are going to feel about US
>> > troops manning roadchecks on our streets in a few years? Does she have
> her
>> > enhanced DL yet i wonder?
>>
>> It's optional, and U.S. troops won't be seen on a roadcheck on the Pat
>> Bay
>> Highway or the Island Highway around
>> Langford. Sorry to dissapoint you bud, but that's not going to happen.
>> You're too paranoid.
>
> Has nothing whatsoever to do with paranoia.... Simply read the agreement
> for
> yourself. It calls for using them for policing, and so monitoring of the
> main emergency evacuation/supply routes is certainly goingto be part of
> that... So any road you see those triangles on is a guarantee for a
> roadblock.... and if you blindly trust government with this kind of power
> you're just plain naive.
You are too. Such an agreement would take place in what emergency it applies
to, and it would have to be a big one,
and even then the U.S. troops would be under the command of the Canadian
Forces not operating 100% on their own.
Monitoring of evacuation and supply routes would mostly be done by the local
constabulary, not solely by the U.S. Army.
It is an agreement, not a directive of command issued by the U.S.
government.
Breathe easy and stop panting in panic. It would take a huge disaster or
emergency to bring in U.S. troops, since the first
military response would be from the Cdn. Forces.
> Aside from that, its all speculation or wishful thinking on your part. Ask
> yourself why this agreement was first signed in 2002, then again in 2008 ?
> Has anyone read the recent agreement? Does it include mandatory
> vaccination
> and tracking in the event of a "biological terrorist attack"....? How
> convenient would that be?
I doubt it requires mandatory vaccination. That doesn't usually help in
earthquakes. unless there is a disease such as cholera,
or other similar types in volumes to warrant protective measures. If you
don't want the vaccination, there's no compulsory
regulation that applies to you.
> The military of Canada and the US under such an attack would come under
> command of NorthCom, and Northern Command will be headed by Air Force
> General Ralph Eberhart, the current commander-in-chief of NORAD.... The
> same
> group that was running some 15 drills when 911 took place... some of which
> involved the hijacking of jets and flying them into the same buildings.
> Gee,
> what are the odds, eh? Why would anyone have any doubts about these guys?
What are the odds of you actually being smart about how this agreement would
apply?
> Pact would allow U.S. troops into Canada during emergency
> Last Updated Tue, 10 Dec 2002
> OTTAWA - U.S. troops could find themselves on Canadian territory helping
> police and firefighters deal with emergencies under a new pact signed by
> the
> two countries.
> [....]
> Defence Minister John McCallum said the pact recognizes that threats such
> as
> those posed by terrorists or biological agents don't recognize
> international
> borders, and continues a long tradition of Canada-U.S. co-operation on
> dealing with common threats.
>
> The agreement creates a new binational planning group that will draw up
> plans for deploying military and civilian forces in the event of
> emergency,
> including terrorist attacks and natural disasters.
>
> The armed forces would be called in to assist the firefighters, paramedics
> and police who would be on the front lines of any emergency response.
> http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/12/09/forces_pact021209
This is 6 years old. Lots have changed since then.
As for the answer provided by the left wing Council of Canadians, the answer
is simply any foriegn troops in
Canada are under the command of Canadian Forces.
If you have a problem with this, write your MP and complain. If you have a
better idea as to disaster management,
I am sure the Victoria Fire Department, the Capital Regional District, and
the Solicitor General's Ministry which
operates the Provincial Emergency Programme would certainly be interested in
what you have to say.
Otherwise if there is a disaster on Soutern Vancouver Island, you might as
well pack your guns, your boy toy Mark Hansel
and the both of you go off to live in the forest in the Malahat for a few
months. There is going to be any need for your paranoia and obviously you're
not going to be much help in the rescue efforts to help other people.
You seem to be a self-professed expert on everything. First it was Magna
Carta (and every country which is a member of the Commonwealth and uses
British Common Law has everything wrong in terms of their interprestation).
then it was 9/11, and now it is disaster management.
Must be interesting to be a self-centered know all little shit as you are.
Semper Libèr® .
I see i now have to teach you basic mathematics. Obviously you've never been
to a racetrack.
> >> > I also wonder how people like KKKaren Jordon are going to feel about
US
> >> > troops manning roadchecks on our streets in a few years? Does she
have
> > her
> >> > enhanced DL yet i wonder?
> >>
> >> It's optional, and U.S. troops won't be seen on a roadcheck on the Pat
> >> Bay
> >> Highway or the Island Highway around
> >> Langford. Sorry to dissapoint you bud, but that's not going to happen.
> >> You're too paranoid.
> >
> > Has nothing whatsoever to do with paranoia.... Simply read the agreement
> > for
> > yourself. It calls for using them for policing, and so monitoring of the
> > main emergency evacuation/supply routes is certainly goingto be part of
> > that... So any road you see those triangles on is a guarantee for a
> > roadblock.... and if you blindly trust government with this kind of
power
> > you're just plain naive.
>
> You are too. Such an agreement would take place in what emergency it
applies
> to, and it would have to be a big one,
> and even then the U.S. troops would be under the command of the Canadian
> Forces not operating 100% on their own.
Nope. US troops are not allowed to be under foreign control. They would be
under control of Northern Command.
U.S. to create North American command zone - 17 Apr 2002
WASHINGTON - U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld revealed plans
Wednesday to establish the Northern Command, a new military zone stretching
across North America, including Canada, the U.S., Mexico and the Caribbean
The 2002 United Command Plan will establish the zone on Oct. 1. Rumsfeld
said the Northern Command, or Northcom will complement existing Pacific,
European, Central and Southern command zones.
Rumsfeld said Northcom will take over homeland defence and will prepare
battle-ready joint forces to defend the United States from attacks from
abroad.
For the first time, tanks, troops, planes and ships will report to a single
headquarters to defend both the United States and the North American
continent.
The establishment of the new zone means every part of the globe will be
covered by the U.S. military, he said.
Northcom will be based at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs,
Colo., along with the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD.
The Northern Command will be headed by Air Force General Ralph Eberhart, the
current commander-in-chief of NORAD.
Unlike NORAD, Northcom will be made up of American military personnel only.
No Canadian forces will be assigned to it.
Written by CBC News Online staff
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/04/17/northcom020417.html
Robert McKenzie
If this was a real two person bet, it wouldn't be similar to that at the
racetrack, and you're also missing
one other important part of your equation. I'd have to accept that 500/1
odds (a person taking a bet at the
track obviously accepts the odds).
But you're going to lose out anyway. The election is going ahead, despite
your disappointment
Which is a joint aspect. It was stated (but not shown in your item) that
there is provision for Cdn Forces to assume
command of US troops once they get here, so again you're wrong.
> U.S. to create North American command zone - 17 Apr 2002
> WASHINGTON - U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld revealed plans
> Wednesday to establish the Northern Command, a new military zone
> stretching
> across North America, including Canada, the U.S., Mexico and the Caribbean
>
> The 2002 United Command Plan will establish the zone on Oct. 1. Rumsfeld
> said the Northern Command, or Northcom will complement existing Pacific,
> European, Central and Southern command zones.
That was six years ago, and has most certainly been revised since then.
> Rumsfeld said Northcom will take over homeland defence and will prepare
> battle-ready joint forces to defend the United States from attacks from
> abroad.
Internal to within the United States, not including Canada in that aspect.
Re-read what you wrote there.
> For the first time, tanks, troops, planes and ships will report to a
> single
> headquarters to defend both the United States and the North American
> continent.
> The establishment of the new zone means every part of the globe will be
> covered by the U.S. military, he said.
Well that doesn't make much sense, since the U.S. has a military facility in
most places worldwide and can reach almost
every major centre.
> Northcom will be based at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs,
> Colo., along with the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD.
Nothing new there. NORAD has been at Peterson AFB for decades. The
supplementary facility to that is Cheyenne Mountain where the NORAD
operations centre is. Peterson AFB is a parallel facility.
> The Northern Command will be headed by Air Force General Ralph Eberhart,
> the
> current commander-in-chief of NORAD.
Is he there still, after 6 years?
> Unlike NORAD, Northcom will be made up of American military personnel
> only.
> No Canadian forces will be assigned to it.
But there would utlimately be a Canadian link to NorthComm as there is a
Canadian link to NORAD, even though it
is not a direct command link.
>
> Written by CBC News Online staff
> http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/04/17/northcom020417.html
You're paranoid over nothing.
If you figure the U.S. Army from Fort Lewis is going to crash into Surrey
and Delta and the Navy SEALS will be landing
at Ogden Point in the dark of night and the U.S. Military suddenly declares
martial law in Victoria and Vancouver, you really have a messed up head,
almost as messed up and fried as Mark Hansel's.
One wonders what you will be like when the security is upgraded during the
2010 Olympics.
Better move up to Pitt Island on the Central Coast to save your sanity. And
for company take your sock puppet Mark Hansel with you. A few months
together in the forest and collecting mussels and seafood off the beach will
do you both good.
Semper Libèr® .
So given your certainty that Bush will be gone by Jan 2009... tell me what
odds you'll agree to. Surely 100/1 ?
Semper Libèr® .
>
> "Semper Libèr® ." <.nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote in
> message news:8uJYj.3996$KB3.2162@edtnps91...
be
> > under control of Northern Command.
>
> Which is a joint aspect. It was stated (but not shown in your item) that
> there is provision for Cdn Forces to assume
> command of US troops once they get here, so again you're wrong.
I don't know how to put this any clearer.... It is ILLEGAL for US troops to
be under foreign command, AND the Northcom jurisdiction includes ALL OF
NORTH AMERICA. So that includes Canada, right? These agreements set up
alleged authority for them to "assist the firefighters, paramedics and
police" during an outbreak or "emergency".... which CSIS has promised us is
coming, and in fact say is "overdue".
> > U.S. to create North American command zone - 17 Apr 2002
> > WASHINGTON - U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld revealed plans
> > Wednesday to establish the Northern Command, a new military zone
> > stretching
> > across North America, including Canada, the U.S., Mexico and the
Caribbean
> >
> > The 2002 United Command Plan will establish the zone on Oct. 1. Rumsfeld
> > said the Northern Command, or Northcom will complement existing Pacific,
> > European, Central and Southern command zones.
>
> That was six years ago, and has most certainly been revised since then.
as opposed to being cancelled, yes... It was revised three months ago.
Harper didn't mention it to the Canadian people, because the Canadian
government has now granted full permission, so they came come into Canada
any time Northcom commands it. Canada is now essentially a protectorate of
the US.
I really don't care if you believe this or not... They signed these deals
for a reason. You would think people who claim to love this country would be
somewhat concerned about this, but apparently not.... So they have nobody to
blame but themselves.
David Johnston
<•nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote:
>
>"Robert McKenzie" <rob...@makz.org> wrote in message
>news:PlLYj.4037$KB3.3395@edtnps91...
>>
>> "Semper Libèr® ." <.nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote in
>> message news:8uJYj.3996$KB3.2162@edtnps91...
>> > Nope. US troops are not allowed to be under foreign control. They would
>be
>> > under control of Northern Command.
>>
>> Which is a joint aspect. It was stated (but not shown in your item) that
>> there is provision for Cdn Forces to assume
>> command of US troops once they get here, so again you're wrong.
>
>I don't know how to put this any clearer.... It is ILLEGAL for US troops to
>be under foreign command,
I doubt that.
General Public:.are. Lobotomized Sheep....@..999.2012..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca The General Public:.are.. Lobotomized Sheep
The funny part about Robert, say if Bush does invade Iran before his term is
up and puts in martial law, and becomes the prez for the next twenty years,
I wonder if Robert will run away and never return to news group...
Robert McKenzie
>
> "Robert McKenzie" <rob...@makz.org> wrote in message
> news:PlLYj.4037$KB3.3395@edtnps91...
>>
>> "Semper Libèr® ." <.nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote in
>> message news:8uJYj.3996$KB3.2162@edtnps91...
>> > Nope. US troops are not allowed to be under foreign control. They would
> be
>> > under control of Northern Command.
>>
>> Which is a joint aspect. It was stated (but not shown in your item) that
>> there is provision for Cdn Forces to assume
>> command of US troops once they get here, so again you're wrong.
>
> I don't know how to put this any clearer.... It is ILLEGAL for US troops
> to
> be under foreign command, AND the Northcom jurisdiction includes ALL OF
> NORTH AMERICA. So that includes Canada, right? These agreements set up
> alleged authority for them to "assist the firefighters, paramedics and
> police" during an outbreak or "emergency".... which CSIS has promised us
> is
> coming, and in fact say is "overdue".
It is ILLEGAL for any foreign troops to act in Canada without permission
from the federal government. One thing
you certainly do not understand is that U.S. troops if they come into
Canada, will be under the Command of Canadian
Forces and will only be here if requested by the federal government. The
agreement sets in the mechanics for that to
happen, but the U.S. does not have any ultimate authority to just send
troops across the border.
The key words here is "assist" and "emergency". This can be a natural
disaster such as earthquake, flooding or terrorist
attack.
And yes we are over due for a major earthquake in Southern B.C. It doesn't
take a CSIS brief to know that.
If Canadian Forces cannot cope with the emergency, then why not ask for
additional assitance from our friends in Washington
State, and have them bring up resources from Fort Lewis and Yakima?
>
>> > U.S. to create North American command zone - 17 Apr 2002
>> > WASHINGTON - U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld revealed plans
>> > Wednesday to establish the Northern Command, a new military zone
>> > stretching
>> > across North America, including Canada, the U.S., Mexico and the
> Caribbean
>> >
>> > The 2002 United Command Plan will establish the zone on Oct. 1.
>> > Rumsfeld
>> > said the Northern Command, or Northcom will complement existing
>> > Pacific,
>> > European, Central and Southern command zones.
>>
>> That was six years ago, and has most certainly been revised since then.
>
> as opposed to being cancelled, yes... It was revised three months ago.
> Harper didn't mention it to the Canadian people, because the Canadian
> government has now granted full permission, so they came come into Canada
> any time Northcom commands it. Canada is now essentially a protectorate of
> the US.
>
Northcomm Commands it, but Northcomm is also a a part of NORAD which is
jointly managed by Canada and the
United States and has been since the 1950's.
Canada is not a protectorate of the United States. Geez you really get
flipped out on these things.
> I really don't care if you believe this or not... They signed these deals
> for a reason. You would think people who claim to love this country would
> be
> somewhat concerned about this, but apparently not.... So they have nobody
> to
> blame but themselves.
Of course they signed the deals for a reason. Does "shared resources" mean
anything to you? No? How about "joint agreements? Still getting a blank
response?
And you're certainly not the only one who claims to love this country.
You really should stop shaking over nothing, pal.
Be glad we have the resources available when its needed.
If you can come up with a better idea, send it off to the federal government
and Canadian Forces Command. I'm sure they would be interested in what you
have to offer.
Robert McKenzie
Waste of time explaining things to you, but here goes once again.
The November elections culminating in the election of a new President will
take place. That new President will be
sworn in at the Inauguration set for late January. I've said Bush would be
gone by February, 2009.
Robert McKenzie
"The General Public:.are.. Lobotomized Sheep" <The General Public:.are.
Lobotomized Sheep....@..999.2012..WBCHNC.News.ukuscan.ca> wrote in message
Bush won't invade Iran, Mark. You're hoping for something that won't exist.
I wonder if the aspect that Bush did not invade Iran and there's a new
President that Mark will run away and never
return to newsgroup.
But that isn't likely to happen.
Semper Libèr® .
So given your CERTAINTY that Bush will be gone by FEBRUARY 2009... tell me
Semper Libèr® .
"David Johnston" <da...@block.net> wrote in message
news:g3lc34lokmnhmtip1...@4ax.com...
PDD25/
Defining clearly our policy regarding the command and control of American
military forces in UN peace operations. The policy directive underscores the
fact that the President **will never relinquish command of U.S. forces**.
However, as Commander-in-Chief, the President has the authority to place
U.S. forces under the operational control of a foreign commander when doing
so serves American security interests, just as American leaders have done
numerous times since the Revoluntary War, including in Operation Desert
Storm. The greater the anticipated U.S. military role, the less likely it
will be that the U.S. will agree to have a UN commander exercise overall
operational control over U.S. forces. Any large scale participation of U.S.
forces in a major peace enforcement operation that is likely to involve
combat should ordinarily be conducted under U.S. command and operational
control or through competent regional organizations such as NATO or ad hoc
coalitions. [emp add]
==========
That regional organization is Norther Command, as i stated before....
Notwithstand that, i frankly don't know why you would want any military in
Canada doing "police work"...
Semper Libèr® .
>
> "Semper Libèr® ." <.nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote in
> message news:emqZj.4476$KB3.1485@edtnps91...
> >
> > "Robert McKenzie" <rob...@makz.org> wrote in message
> > news:PlLYj.4037$KB3.3395@edtnps91...
> >>
> >> "Semper Libèr® ." <.nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote in
> >> message news:8uJYj.3996$KB3.2162@edtnps91...
> >> > Nope. US troops are not allowed to be under foreign control. They
would
> > be
> >> > under control of Northern Command.
> >>
> >> Which is a joint aspect. It was stated (but not shown in your item)
that
> >> there is provision for Cdn Forces to assume
> >> command of US troops once they get here, so again you're wrong.
> >
> > I don't know how to put this any clearer.... It is ILLEGAL for US troops
> > to
> > be under foreign command, AND the Northcom jurisdiction includes ALL OF
> > NORTH AMERICA. So that includes Canada, right? These agreements set up
> > alleged authority for them to "assist the firefighters, paramedics and
> > police" during an outbreak or "emergency".... which CSIS has promised us
> > is
> > coming, and in fact say is "overdue".
>
> It is ILLEGAL for any foreign troops to act in Canada without permission
> from the federal government.
which is now moot, since Harper has already given it to them in a formal
agreement, which i posted.
Any of this sinking in yet?
U.S. to create North American command zone - 17 Apr 2002
WASHINGTON - U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld revealed plans
Wednesday to establish the Northern Command, a new military zone stretching
across North America, including Canada, the U.S., Mexico and the Caribbean
The 2002 United Command Plan will establish the zone on Oct. 1. Rumsfeld
said the Northern Command, or Northcom will complement existing Pacific,
European, Central and Southern command zones.
Rumsfeld said Northcom will take over homeland defence and will prepare
battle-ready joint forces to defend the United States from attacks from
abroad.
For the first time, tanks, troops, planes and ships will report to a single
headquarters to defend both the United States and the North American
continent.
The establishment of the new zone means every part of the globe will be
covered by the U.S. military, he said.
Northcom will be based at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs,
Colo., along with the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD.
The Northern Command will be headed by Air Force General Ralph Eberhart, the
current commander-in-chief of NORAD.
Unlike NORAD, Northcom will be made up of American military personnel only.
No Canadian forces will be assigned to it.
Written by CBC News Online staff
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/04/17/northcom020417.html
Semper Libèr® .
and you have the tea leaves to prove it.
Of course you said the same thing about Iraq... so...
David Johnston
<•nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote:
>> The November elections culminating in the election of a new President will
>> take place. That new President will be
>> sworn in at the Inauguration set for late January. I've said Bush would be
>> gone by February, 2009.
>
>So given your CERTAINTY that Bush will be gone by FEBRUARY 2009... tell me
>what odds you'll agree to. Surely 100/1 ?
>
I'll take that bet. It was stupid when rightwingers were fantasizing
that Clinton would try to refuse to leave office and it is stupid now
that people are fantasizing the same thing about Bush.
Semper Libèr® .
It would ONLY be stupid to consider it if it were IMpossible.... In fact it
is hard to imagine many topics that would be more important for people to
consider and investigate, assuming they actually cared about their
fundamental rights and liberties. So you are either willfully ignorant of
the facts, or just plain stupid. Do your homework... this is just to get you
started.
HOMELAND SEC COMMITTEE NOT ALLOWED TO SEE MARTIAL LAW PLAN
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=WivB-Qr8mPo
REP KUCINICH WARNS *WE'RE LOSING OUR DEMOCRACY AMERICA!*
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=dlmgKQTkRM8
Bush / Cheney to Attempt Possible Coup
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=K3dAnSMzUlo
New presidential directive gives Bush dictatorial power
National Security & Homeland Security Presidential Directive establishes
"National Continuity Policy"
The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, signed
on May 9, 2007 declares that in the event of a "catastrophic event", George
W. Bush can become what is best described as "a dictator":
"The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for
ensuring constitutional government."
This directive, completely unnoticed by the media, and given no scrutiny by
Congress, literally gives the White House unprecedented dictatorial power
over the government and the country, bypassing the US Congress and
obliterating the separation of powers. The directive also placed the
Secretary of Homeland Security in charge of domestic "security".
The full text is below
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHI20070521&articleId=5720
American concentration camps
On January 24, 2006, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) component awarded an Indefinite
Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contingency contract to Halliburton
subsidiary Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR) to "support ICE facilities in the
event of an emergency"-in essence, American concentration camps-Business
Wire reported
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=l0pfGOH4uxA
Rule by fear or rule by law?
Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of single-bid
contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) to build
detention camps at undisclosed locations within the United States. The
government has also contracted with several companies to build thousands of
railcars, some reportedly equipped with shackles, ostensibly to transport
detainees.
According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR contract is part
of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which sets as its goal the
removal of "all removable aliens" and "potential terrorists."
Fraud-busters such as Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, have complained
about these contracts, saying that more taxpayer dollars should not go to
taxpayer-gouging Halliburton. But the real question is: What kind of "new
programs" require the construction and refurbishment of detention facilities
in nearly every state of the union with the capacity to house perhaps
millions of people?
Sect. 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), "Use of
the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies," gives the executive the power
to invoke martial law. For the first time in more than a century, the
president is now authorized to use the military in response to "a natural
disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack or any other condition in
which the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to the
extent that state officials cannot maintain public order."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/04/ED5OUPQJ7.DTL
David Johnston
<•nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote:
>
>"David Johnston" <da...@block.net> wrote in message
>news:0mph341nahed9p8ev...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 25 May 2008 03:34:27 GMT, "Semper Libèr® ."
>> <.nopolicestates????!?~Hj...@freedom4all.org> wrote:
>>
>> >> The November elections culminating in the election of a new President
>will
>> >> take place. That new President will be
>> >> sworn in at the Inauguration set for late January. I've said Bush would
>be
>> >> gone by February, 2009.
>> >
>> >So given your CERTAINTY that Bush will be gone by FEBRUARY 2009... tell
>me
>> >what odds you'll agree to. Surely 100/1 ?
>> >
>>
>> I'll take that bet. It was stupid when rightwingers were fantasizing
>> that Clinton would try to refuse to leave office and it is stupid now
>> that people are fantasizing the same thing about Bush.
>
>It would ONLY be stupid to consider it if it were IMpossible....
It is impossible. Bush can't stay.