Detention or Forts?

Detention or Forts?

www.abovetopsecret.com

The only odd thing that occurred prior to setting off happened while I was gassing up in our small town. My daughter was pumping the gas and a lady she knew pulled up to an adjacent pump. My daughter started telling her where we were going and that we were taking things to the refugees. The lady told my daughter that she had been told the Red Cross was not allowing any one to deliver supplies. When I returned to the car from paying for the gas my daughter informed of this. I told her that the Red Cross would not be preventing the members of our church from entering our own cabin, so it really didn't matter. It was at that point we decided to stop back by the house and get my daughter's camera so that she could take pictures if required.

(visit the link for the full news article)

In the frontier days we built forts against the indians we were invading. Could we now be building forts against ourselves, the "cold dead hands"? If people stayed in their homes in an invasion or riot within, how would we get food, water, etc.? Collecting masses of people in "detention camps" would stand a chance of saving the populace. Maybe there are tunnels and camps in order to ship food and etc., where the "cold dead hands" people couldn't take it by force. We may need to be protected from our own, airports can screen for weapons and the underground facilities would protect those who can't protect themselves. I'm sceptical of those who try to instill fear of "detention camps", some of them may be the ones we need to be protected from. Consider.

www.abovetopsecret.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 16-12-2008 by Alikospah]