It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FEMA Camps, a reasonable explanation as opposed to NWO madness.

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 11:28 AM
link   
I thought I would offer a more sensible and level-headed explanation in opposition of all the FEMA camp threads recently.

The following is my interpretation of these camps, and the elements that make up these sites while considering my own intelligence and common sense, along with my experience of crowd control and security procedures.

To me it all seems obvious, but it seems most have no clue when it comes to emergency management and crowd control.

The following are scenarios directly taken from the FEMA site. These are their stated disasters, and one can assume that these situations are what they are charged with managing.

I would also like to add "Civil Unrest" to the list, because, while it is absent from their list, it is clear that FEMA and the American government deem this to be a national emergency to which FEMA would respond.

* Civil Unrest
* Chemical
* Dam Failure
* Earthquake
* Fire
* Flood
* Haz. Material
* Heat
* Hurricane
* Landslide
* Nuclear
* Terrorism
* Thunderstorm
* Tornado
* Tsunami
* Volcano
* Wildfire
* Winter Storm

Now I'll go through what people have seen at said sites (specifically what has been shown in one YT video) and address each point.

Fencing -
Required to limit access to a secure area which will be used for evacuation, treatment, storage of supply, continuation of infrastructure, separation of infected...

Turnstiles -
Required to control the crowds into each area at each stage. General security measures to prevent/control access. This is not that different to having security measures in your place of work or on public transport systems. Only in this case they need to be thorough because they are dealing with desperate people and possible containment of contagion.

Large holding areas -
Required to treat massive numbers of people, segregate infected, injured and desperate from others. Required for storing essential supplies and materials to repair infrastructure.

Zones (red, blue, green etc...) -
Required to segregate those infected/affected from those who are not. Also required to separate those being evacuated to different areas of the country.

Large buildings -
Required to detain or treat those infected/affected by disease. Also to treat and decontaminate in an enclosed and secure area.

Helicopter landing -
Required for military and officials to gain safe access. In almost any event large enough to require the use of one of these camps, the roads would be impassable either due to the effects of the disaster or by the sheer numbers of those trying to gain entry for assistance.

Rail access -
To bring in supplies to an affected are when roads are impassable. To evacuate civilians. To transport prisoners securely.

Barbed wire -
To prevent infected and desperate people from escaping back into the population. To control and detain dissidents in a civil unrest scenario.

Sentry towers -
See above. Also useful to guard a military installation during a war scenario. Or to secure supplies held there during times of great need.

Furnaces -
While there is little evidence for it, it actually makes sense.
In an outbreak scenario it is likely that any town or city would be locked down. All transport and treatment of those trying to leave would be done through several of these sites and by rail. It is likely that an emergency broadcast system would have told people where to go for treatment and evacuation. Therefore these locations would see potentially massive numbers of those about to pass on. It's sad and not nice to think about, but the only way to deal with such massive numbers of deceased due to a contagious disease is through cremation, especially in populated areas.

Look at American history, specifically the White Plague. Look at the numbers of deaths in single locations (Waverley Hills springs to mind). They struggled to cope with the numbers of dead then, and that was several years into the epidemic.

Just look at what happened in the UK due to Foot and Mouth. Look at the measures that had to be implemented.

I am not suggesting that we have seen evidence of this being in place "just in case", but it certainly makes sense that it should be.
What would you prefer, this disposal of the dead through cremation, or the risk of immeasurable contagion wiping out the entire country?

And finally...

FEMA Coffins -
As shown through EVIDENCE, these are not coffins. They are Casket Liners/Burial Vaults, created to go around coffins in the ground to prevent collapse of the soil above. They are stored on land owned/leased by the company which produces them. They are not suitable for cremation as they are plastic.
They are produced in high numbers and stored until use because it is more cost-effective to produce them in batches than on demand.
Even if FEMA has bought some, it is reasonable to expect that they would be used in the aftermath of any emergency where mass graves or cremation isn't required.
It wouldn't be very good PR to just chuck bodies in the ground or cremate them, if there were numbers easy to deal with.

So after all of this, I propose that these sites are nothing more than FEMA doing their job and being prepared for almost every scenario they can imagine while limiting costs as far as possible.
They are multipurpose sites designed to deal with several different scenarios as described, to the best of their ability.

You don't need to create an imaginary scenario to excuse the existence of these sites. Their existence is both required and will be appreciated in an emergency severe enough to require their use.

I have stated all the above because I am really quite fed up with seeing thread after thread detailing all these NWO scenarios with little evidence and little thought, while those creating and supporting them completely disregard what evidence there is to support an entirely innocent explanation.

This thread is in response to that, an effort to show that these sites are MORE LIKELY innocent in nature, and actually reflect what the role of FEMA is. Therefore, they are doing their job.

I would welcome any more discussion on this, in a sensible fashion.

If there is anything about these sites that you think is highly suspicious and that I haven't confronted, please add it, I'd like to see the discussion by sensible people to show a perfectly reasonable explanation as opposed to wild speculation.

So, what do you think, FEMA "Death Camps" or just FEMA doing their job?




posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


I could understand one or two facilities that were fenced in,just in case of some kind of outbreak.However all of these facilities are fenced along the perimeter,with the razor wire set to the inside of the fence.A huge area fenced. Smaller quarentine areas I could see a security fence for precautions,but not around the entire place.

They are designed as prison camps.You can look back at history and see the design.
I can just see FEMA backed by Homeland Security and Black Water troops rounding people up at gun point.Telling them that this is being done for their saftey,if they don't comply leathal force is athorized.
In other words,you let us save your lives or we'll kill you.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I can see where the OP is trying to come from, but I'm sorry, I do not think FEMA ever does their job anyways.

Or we could argue that point and say 'Thanks for the great job dealing with Katrina! Good thing you guys were prepared for the worst!'

Not to mention looking at one of their logos. Translate the Latin. I can't say that makes sense either.

It says 'Peace and to WAGE WAR DESERVING'

Why would the Federal Emergency Management Agency wage war? What is there to wage war on? Disaster?



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   
I agree with the OP. All these aspects you describe would be required in the event of a catastrophe or fatal contagion. The Govy, arguably struggled to deal with the displaced populace from Katrina. A lot of criticism was levelled at them. Much of it along the lines of, "WTF?! Why don't you do something?" Now they have done something (with a level of transparency) the words are changed around to, "What have you done? WTF?!"

As another poster says, he can picture a darker scenario. So can we all. It doesn't make it true or even part of an existing plan. As far as I know there isn't an authentic piece of paperwork or evidence from Official sources that describes this scenario. People love getting all het up over it. Some folk prefer horror movies to comedies. Each to their own and it's mostly just fun.

Of the major subscribers to this type of conspiracy, I doubt a FEMA camp full of evidence would dissuade even one from the idea. No evidence is enough to build this house of cards on. I heard a conspiracy that the Govt invented cars to poison the population with. I said there's no ****** evidence! It's BS." He said, "There's cars! There's your evidence."

I've S&Fd your post so I can skim through the replies.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by daddyroo45
 


But what would be the use in having only one or two of these sites with these abilities across the entire nation?

It makes sense that each site be able to be used for any number of purposes, including detention and control of criminals, infected civilians and so on.

You can't deal with a massive number of infected people due to an outbreak in LA at a FEMA camp with wire on the fences in NY.

That would make absolutely no sense, especially when it wouldn't cost a lot to update the sites in LA with wire to allow for this use also.

I completely agree that FEMA camps would be used to detain civilians, and that people should be worried if they are likely to be designated as one of those to be detained.

Civil unrest would be a national emergency, and therefore FEMA would be involved in dealing with it. But there is still no evidence to show that some of these sites are designed solely for that purpose, or that there is a massive plan being followed to round up millions of people for extermination or detention.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ohh_pleasee
It says 'Peace and to WAGE WAR DESERVING'


I just went directly to the FEMA site, and the logo states "US DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY". There is no Latin in this logo.

I did however co a Google search and found two others both false. With Latin text and a seriously funny added triangle.

I don't know what Logo you've seen (probably one of the ones returned by a google search), but I would suggest you've seen a fake created by someone determined to convince you that FEMA are evil.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Exactly.

FEMA did a bad job with Katrina, no doubt. But how much of that bad job was due to poor funding, government inaction and, ultimately, Bush?

I think they're now doing everything they can to be fully prepared for any one of a number of scenarios. But because they are doing it, people are suspicious.

And then you have people like Alex Jones making loads of money off of this insane fear and delusion, fabricating "proof" or blindly accepting falsehoods in order to support his ideas and sell a few more books.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Oh man is that a breath of fresh air! Sense has been spoken!

As a survivalist sorta guy i've read plenty about the many, many SitX that could hit at any time so i'm glad the government is prepared for this.

Look at the history of the world many random events have caused population displacement, we have refugee camps all over the world at the moment, mostly due to war and famine but also illness and poverty are big causes. When an event happens the most terrible damage almost always occurs in the aftermath, scared and crazy people often driven insane by the horrific things they've seen all over the place -often wildly overreacting or looting.

Back in WW2 both sides had loads of camps, the main cause of death was illness -interestingly the germans had lower death rates than many axis camps because of the use of ZyklonB to disinfect everything and the policy of removing hair to get rid of lice. The death toll was still massive, both outside and inside the camps. -sometimes it is necessary to do seemingly dodgy things for the benift of everyone. hehe That's not to say that these things -ZyklonB for example- can't be used for evil too.

Picture your town being hit with a bioweapon, you and your family are trapped in your house while infected gangs of looters roam the area driven crazy by the 'rage' virus then a US army jeep pulls up and drives off the deranged people banging at your door and it's followed by a FEMA jeep - they offer you a lift to the camp, it's well protected, they have foods and are shipping poeple out to unaffected areas of the country -would you still refuse to go to the camp?

How about a SGE (Sudden Geological Event) suddenly ripping everything three miles east of you into a giant pit of magma and sulfa, the thick poisonous cloud has started to billow towards you and the air is getting hard to breath. You grandma has already choked to death, you budgie's long gone then all of a sudden a bus pulls up outside with FEMA in huge white letters on the side, they have a gas mask for you and are delivering people to a camp for evacuation -you still gonna fight for your right to stay?

one more, how about the economic collapse causes California to break down and armed gangs of looters head for your Nevada home? Your daughter was at the mall when the looters stormed it and you don't know what's happened to her, that was a few hours ago and now you're in your basement and your two little sons are crying while your wife paces the room in a panic -you're clutching you shotgun waiting for someone to break down the door looking for food, ammunition or womenfolk - would you still oppose the idea of locking these people in a fema camp for processing?

One last thing, I am an avid fence climber - before i worked there i always used to clime the security fences to get into the local rock festival, the short cut from my old job to my house involved a 12foot security fence -in short i can clime a fence, barbed wire on top is no problem for me -not i'm not saying this to show off, i want to tell you how to clime a security fence with barbed wire on top...

Ok, your standard non-fema security fence you talk about is chainlink design and if you have strong hands you should be able to hold tight and push out with your knees so you can slowly crawl up it - take small steps and keep pushing into the fence with your knees. Soon you'll be at the top, here the overhang has three lines of barbed wire supported by a pole -grasp the pole and again brace your feet against the fence. work your hands up the pole till you hold it near the end and careful to not barb your feet crawl up the wire and over the lip supporting your knee with the non barbed section of wire. You are now above the lip and able to clime down the other side,

Now with an inverted lip you have to crawl over the top of the fence into an overhanging area of wire which you must then work your way over and under to get back from the fence to clime down -this is in fact much harder than a 'normal' out facing lip. It's by no means impossible, i tell you this as someone who has done both directions with a heavy rucksack on, i know my fences


Really i'm a little disapointed that fema didn't use the more secure Y design fence, a lip going either way. Oh and they should have used razor wire, it's much harder with razor wire -hehe even i avoid it because if you slip or missaim a foot throw it's easy to slice through your wrist, achilles tendon or something awful like that. The stuff they have stored inside could become the most valuable thing in the area if it's time ever comes, i don't want some stupid kids breaking in and smashing up the waterfilters which are supposed to keep my friends alive (if too many people want to use mine it could cause problems)

You shouldn't be trying to stop them preparing to protect you in the event of a emergency, you should be trying to stop secrets in government - force them to tell you how everything works, what everything is, what all the plans are -nothing good can come of secret plans for disaster management, what you plan to do if invaded can be secret, what you plan to do if a sitX happens should be widely known by everyone and all meetings about it, reports, etc should be available on line, no one should be excluded from having their say.

Take away the places bogeymen can hide and we won't need to worry about them.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
There was a report released recently that explored the possibility of Pakistan and Mexico collapsing. Think about if Mexico became a failed state and there were millions of refugees flooding over the border all at once with nowhere to go. It seems logical that we would need somewhere to house these people, at least temporarily.

Any major terrorist attack such as a nuke or other NBC attack on a large metropolitan area would require some sort of refugee camp as well. I wouldn't want to end up there, but its better than having a bunch of makeshift cluster*bleep* superdome disasters all over the place. Frankly, I'm glad there is some sort of contingency plan rather than saying "screw it" and letting everything go to hell.

The only reason the government would want to round us up like cattle is if we started roaming the streets aimlessly like cattle. If you prepare ahead of time for natural and man-made disasters then you won't be one of the sheeple and you won't need to be corralled as such. Just hope you don't get trampled by a sheeple stampede, or cannibalized by hoards of starving sheeple. Bottom line, i think you have a better chance of combating the forces of DISORDER rather than some sort of Fourth Reich ORDER.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by NatureBoy
 


While I agree with everything else, I am not so sure on the open discussion of these sites from FEMA.

They are secure sites, but I don't think they're staffed or monitored 24hrs. The potential for damage to be done to them prior to use would increase if these sites were openly discussed with the public.

Imagine if a true terrorist attack occurred in a major city, and these sites were also targeted to disable an adequate response.
The damage would be immeasurable.

Those who could be saved and evacuated would have nowhere to go.

I don't think it should be widely know that these sites exist or where they are until they're needed. But because this isn't practical, they'll just refuse to comment on them when asked and let people talk where they feel like it.
Unfortunately, this does cause conspiracies and wild speculation, but it's a small price to pay to keep these sites operational. It's a fair compromise.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


ok i sort of agree, thats a good point about the terrorists - i still think the people should know how help in the event of a sitX will come, they can make plans around those of the government - what if i don't know they're coming to save me and go insane and start killing people, looting, etc? hehe more likely what if i head off 'into the bush' to escape with hundreds of other people who all get in trouble and cause terrible waves of chaos to each other.

How about i don't know fema will need the road cleared near my house so i don't go out and do it and it takes them a few extra hours and in that time my pregnant wife has suffered a major anurism and is bleeding to death with no access to medical attention.

Ok these are all wildly unlikely (apart from the bush one) but you get my drift, people should plan TOGETHER with the government - the odds that a terrorist would think to destroy the camps and be able to are very slim, they would be far better off tactically hitting waterworks, powerstations, bridges, etc rather than an empty camp which probably has most the important stuff underground anyway..

Oh and considering the amount of money invested in these things they dam well better be monitored 24/7! I would always have a few offical looking guards to shake a fist at any weirdos hanging around.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by NatureBoy
 


Well, there have been numerous examples of secondary attacks designed to maim the first responders to an incident.

We had the same scenario in the UK with the IRA.

Several times they'd set off something, and then there would be a warning about another device intended to catch those coming in to help the survivors of the first.

IMO it would make sense that if a group were to attack a major city with a major incident, they'd attack any known plan to safeguard the citizens too. And these FEMA sites would be a relatively easy target, while doing a lot more damage to infrastructure if the initial event was large enough to require evacuation and the use of one of these sites.

I certainly understand where you're coming from, and I agree it would be nice to be told openly about these preparations, but they do this by saying "we have a plan, we just can't discuss it" and then all hell breaks loose with accusations of secrecy and wild speculation.

They really can't win in this scenario, they are doing their job and creating a back-up plan, one that they can't really discuss. And they're assuring the public that they are doing everything required, but people just don't accept it.
And then you have a thousand people on boards like this finding the physical evidence of that plan, what their government is assuring them it is doing but can't openly discuss, and turning it into something completely insane and evil.



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Zyklon B makes a hell of a de-licer....especially if you can recategorize humans as "lice".



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


That's very true, just recently in Ireland i think its the Rira or some splinter group have been causing accidents just so they can kill whoever comes to deal with it!

Funny that we're both English, i suppose it's easier to have our less concerned viewpoint when we know were not going to end up in them if we're wrong


I still think that the damage done to peoples ability to plan by keeping them secret outweigh the threat of terrorist strike but it is an eventuality and they ARE preparing for all eventualitys so i can understand why they would do it.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


AT LAST ...... Someone has said something sensible about these FEMA ''Death Camps''.

It is also my view that since everyone critised FEMA for their mis-handling of various National Emergencies, that they have now gone and done something sensible about it.

With a country as large and geographically diverse as the US, it makes perfect sense to have these 'camps' scattered around the country.

It is far easier to help the population should an Emergency occur using these already up-and-running camps than by having to make one 'in the field' ad hoc. By making these camps all-purpose, it also makes them far more flexible to situations and gives FEMA a fighting chance of responding well to any given situation.

You as American citizens would/will/have been the first ones to say ''What has FEMA done to help us''. Well, you now have your answer.

At least you have an organisation who's remit is Civil Defence, we in the UK dont even have that.



posted on Feb, 10 2009 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 

Bush, Bush, Bush get over it.
FEMA being rolled into DHS after 9-11-01 created some problems that Katrina brought to the forefront. However the largest factor in ALL the problems with the Katrina response were due to corrupt local and State Government, who used funds provided for Emergency Response readiness and training for other pet projects or personal agendas and did little or no emergency disaster planning. Open your eyes, stop being a Bush hater.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
As far as I know there isn't an authentic piece of paperwork or evidence from Official sources that describes this scenario.


This articles lists a couple of laws which describe the scenario:

SF GATE



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by skid
 


can anyone give a logical explanation for foriegn troops being on american soil?



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


The question isn't what are these camps for, its quite obvious they are to house people, whether those people will be under lock-down or just trying to escape some disaster is the question. The fact is that the last time we had camps like these they were used to detain the Japanese unconstitutionally after Pearl Harbor.

So why are they building them now? Some might say they're just planning for something that MIGHT go wrong, others say the government KNOWS what's coming, is doing nothing to prevent it, and will use these camps as detention centers... Eventually we'll find out the truth, I don't buy into the wild claims about the camps, but I don't rule out them being used for terrible evil perpetrated against the American people, especially given the government's track record...

[edit on 15-2-2009 by Titen-Sxull]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 10:44 PM
link   
Yes they said these camps were being built in case they had to lock up the illegal aliens, that's all it is, nothing to worry about.
That's why they built the really big one in Alaska, the one that holds at least 500,000 people, it's all those illegal Mexicans in Alaska, there's a lot got to be at least 1 or 2 ?
No ones giving me a shot, unless it's a bullet.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join