It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


FEMA - Necessary evil?

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 23 2009 @ 07:00 AM
Okay, I am British and i don't understand quite why everyone seems to put FEMA into some evil empire NWO typecast. Surely FEMA is there to make the decisions that humans cloud with emotion, such as who shall live and who shall die if a seriously extreme event should occur (Yellowstone super volcanoe, Nuclear blast, chemical/biological weapon).
It takes a certain clinical and clear thinking to avoid an entire Nation/populous being destroyed. You must enforce a quarantine in certain situations. Could you condem your hometown and all within it to save the Nation/ what about your family. Humans do not like admitting our own mortality and Panic is definitely a killer. Hurricane Katrina was probably not their finest hour but at least you have an organisation many countries do not. These are serious issues and believe many people around the world mis-interpret FEMA's preparations for a a possible extreme event as evidence of the Government seeking to take over everyone and everything.

FEMA Mission

DISASTER. It strikes anytime, anywhere. It takes many forms -- a hurricane, an earthquake, a tornado, a flood, a fire or a hazardous spill, an act of nature or an act of terrorism. It builds over days or weeks, or hits suddenly, without warning. Every year, millions of Americans face disaster, and its terrifying consequences.

On March 1, 2003, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) became part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The primary mission of the Federal Emergency Management Agency is to reduce the loss of life and property and protect the Nation from all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters, by leading and supporting the Nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation.

DHS Mission

Statutory Authority

Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, PL 100-707, signed into law November 23, 1988; amended the Disaster Relief Act of 1974, PL 93-288. This Act constitutes the statutory authority for most Federal disaster response activities especially as they pertain to FEMA and FEMA programs.

FEMA History

FEMA has more than 2,600 full time employees. They work at FEMA headquarters in Washington D.C., at regional and area offices across the country, the Mount Weather Emergency Operations Center, and the National Emergency Training Center in Emmitsburg, Maryland. FEMA also has nearly 4,000 standby disaster assistance employees who are available for deployment after disasters. Often FEMA works in partnership with other organizations that are part of the nation's emergency management system. These partners include state and local emergency management agencies, 27 federal agencies and the American Red Cross.

Anyone who could enlighten me as to why this Organisation which seems like a sensible and rational organisation funded responsibly is a bad thing i would love to know why and produce evidence because it all seems like word of mouth nonsense to me. FEMA maybe the last line of defence to save the USA from a calamity.

As ever your thoughts are appreciated.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 07:35 AM
Good morning LT Mikey,

From an American standpoint, and more specifically a Floridian one, I understand natural disasters and the after effects/recovery fairly well.
My family and I have ridden out hurricanes up to Category 3 intensity... anything above that and we evacuate as soon as possible. The power of these storms is amazing.

Anyways. let me address your question. Before the existence of FEMA, the states were in charge of their own preparedness plans, with the assurance of the federal government to back them up as best they could. The states would help each other out as well... for example, immediately prior to Katrina striking Louisiana, Gov. Blanco had requested assistance from her fellow Gulf states, namely Florida, and each provided what they could in terms of teams, assistance, funding, etc. Sadly, Florida could not provide very much as we had been hit by 4 hurricanes that previous summer (of 2004), and we had very little left in the tank, even after FEMA assistance.
Long story short, the states helped each other out and did a pretty fine job of it as well.

We did not need FEMA. Even if a cataclysmic earthquake struck California, the other states and the federal government could team up and provide quality assistance.

We are wary of FEMA because it supercedes the authority of the states and pretty much ALL OTHER agencies in any area declared a disaster zone.
It is given pretty much carte blanche when it comes to power and authority in these situations, and is pretty much above reproach.

I hope this answer provides you with some insight into how some of us Americans view FEMA.

Have a great day!

[edit on 23-5-2009 by GuiltyByDesign]

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 07:48 AM
It would be a great system Fema...if they weren't so racist. Why they desire to save more minorities or help them out more and let the whites struggle on their own, it is a type of weeding out of an entire race...god forbid there was a huge disaster, there'd be no white people left in America, they'd get all the minorities together and leave us to fend for ourselves! How I know, my friend was in a hurricane, of all groups she and her family only got 5,000 dollars to rebuild while the minorities were put in NEW houses!

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 07:52 AM
reply to post by ldyserenity

I believe the 'racism' you refer to is more along the lines of the Federal goverment assumes (hastily) that a greater percentage of white homeowners will have insurance than minority homeowners.

Just my observation.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 07:55 AM
reply to post by GuiltyByDesign

True, but just cause we're white don't mean we got money they as I am are below poverty level and we all live in mobile homes, so everyone should get equal consideration. Most of the people in charge do have the money for insurance, but I don't. So maybe not racism, but stereotyping?

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 08:00 AM
reply to post by ldyserenity

I could definately agree with FEMA being guilty of stereotyping. I know many people who lived in mobile homes who lost them and were given a small amount of money to rebuild what they had. Some of them are still living in travel trailers and trying to save what little money they can to buy another home. Very sad situation.

Overall though, I'm more concerned with it's broad-ranging powers and only being accountable to the President then how it doles out it's assistance money. When FEMA can usurp an entire state's authority, that is frightening.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 08:04 AM
Okay, i follow the logic of State to State AID and federal aid. What if the consequences were bigger such as Nuclear Fallout or a State Unwilling to risk its own Populous to assist?

What if the Presidents home State was in Jeopardy? Would he take the correct action and condem them to quarrantine and death or would attempt to help them and thereby Jeopardise your entire Nation.

Is a Human being able to make a Decision without Emotion or does it require a Body with extreme executive power to override any emotional/ emotive decision as they have the best interests of the many over the few?

This is quite powerful stuff and i understand why people get angry with the lack of oversight and the Undermining of your rights and the principle "Of the People, For the People" but surely there is a point where National Survival is more important than constitutial points?

Abraham Lincoln himself (your greatest leader) suspend much of it such as Habeas Corpus (sic).

Are we all Prisoners to principle or are we Pragmatic for the purposes of survival and re-establishment of a peaceful society?

The points being raised are good, but i'm not too sure about the Racism thing being highlighted. I cannot abide it and i don't think that FEMA could get away with being Racist could it?

(Thinking on KATRINA i'm not sure at all)

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 08:06 AM
reply to post by GuiltyByDesign

Right that's so very true, and they can and do do this. They control who lives and dies, And in that regard it's very frightening. So there will only be rich white folks who saved themselves and minorities, and you know like rich white folks only make up about a fifth of the population here.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 08:25 AM
LT Mikey,

You raise some interesting questions.

At what point do we, as a nation, say that survival is paramount to principles? What are we willing to die for, and what are we willing to accept to survive and move on?

As for Abraham Lincoln being our greatest leader, that is an issue for another time my friend. He is definately remarkable, but I'm not so sure of his greatness.

The nuclear fallout scenario would be beyond even FEMA to handle. It is a large and growing entity, but something of that magnitude is far beyond anything we in America have yet to run into, and as such I'm pretty such you would see us reaching out to Canada, Mexico, and our ancestral brothers in Europe to help. I would not even really want to begin to figure out the repurcussions of that nightmare.

Quarantine procedures are under the CDC, or at least that is my understanding. And until martial law were to be declared in the area, the CDC would have overaching authority, along with the state and fed, to oversea it's promulgation. Martial law being declared would then allow FEMA to take control of the situation from the CDC. In the event of a national pandemic, like H1N1, FEMA would be SEVERELY taxed, as would every other agency we have. I do no believe there is any entity other than the entirity of the US government and the US military that would be capable of dealing with a crisis like that, and even then the military would be subservient (sp) to FEMA in that regard.

And with regards to racism and FEMA...


I can see why you would think that racism plays a role in the decision making process of who lives and dies.

I think it's more of a financial decision.

White people, usually earning more money and enjoying a higher quality of living than minorities, are able to readily leave the area of an impending disaster. Minorities who may be poor or at the poverty line either are usually unable to leave, due to finances or fear of looting of personal property when they leave... or they are unwilling to leave due to ignorance or medically challenged family members.

[edit on 23-5-2009 by GuiltyByDesign]

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 09:09 AM
OKAY, so the Racism thing is actually a more pragmatic generalisation that the White Man will look after himself but the poor sections of society are generally ethnic minorities.

That makes a Surreal logic, especially if we start looking at demographics of states. The hispanic community in Florida or Texas Maybe?

Its hard for europeans to appreciate the complexities of the United States, as every state has different laws and statutes. In europe we have National Laws so it is the same in every County or region. yet in the US different states have different laws on Guns and Drivers Licenses. I know i am digressing but is there a need to standardise your Laws beyond all the states?

(I think this shows more about my character as i like standardisation and centralisation which probably means i like big government, but only if the Government maintains the Covernant, that they put the people first).

[edit on 23/5/09 by LT mikey]

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 09:20 AM
LT Mikey,

There has been a recent push for far more federal 'oversight' of states laws and how they are applied.

The states see this differently, of course.

In the Northeast, most states are fairly compliant with changing their laws to line up more favorably with the federal goverment. The noticable holdout is New Hampshire, which has a penchant for free thinking individuals and lifestyles.

Likewise, in the Southeast and Midwest, many states prefer to administer their laws as their citizens see fit. These laws are tailored for the states... Texas does things how it deems correctly, and what is good for Texas might not be good for Colorado, and vice versa.

American reluctance to 'national' level programs and laws goes back to our Founding Fathers, who feared a large federal goverment and drafted the Constitution to keep Americans' government small and serving the people. What has ended up taking place, however, is the Constitution is being dissolved, the goverment expanding, and the people are now becoming it's servants.

Also consider that to many Americans, our states are similar in size and sometimes budget with many European countries. We are proud to be American (for the most part), and many of us are proud of our home state and the uniqueness of it.

I hope that provides some insight.

posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 12:48 PM
To all who have contributed, many thanks i have come away with a fair amount of information and i feel somewhat better equiped. Its always good to have a thread that promotes intelligent debate and doesn't descend into an entrenched argument about who is right and wrong. Debate and rational free speech is the way forward.

I didn't know that New Hampshire had a panchant for alternative/ free thinking lifestyles, something to throw in the ring at boring dinner table conversations!

new topics

top topics


log in