Monday, December 17, 2012

Internment/Resettlement Operations Manual


related: Oath Keepers - http://oathkeepers.org and

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/ndaa/

National Responder Support Camp


Solicitation Number: HSFEHQ-10-R-0027
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Office: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Location: Logistics Branch
January 2, 2012
 Badges speaker gif  (89kb) Voice of: Alfonso Bedoya

New Nationwide FEMA Camps Should Raise Eyebrows

     Of all the rumors flying around on the internet, one just refuses to die, and it concerns America's FEMA camps.
     In a nutshell, there seems to be a solicitation of bids occurring for the staffing of FEMA camps within 72 hours of implementation by an order from either Homeland Security or the president.  This situation begs to be investigated, with special consideration paid to the motives of the present administration.
     I went to the source, the FedBizOpps.gov, and searched for the solicitation number HSFEHQ-10-R-0027, titled National Responder Support Camp.
     A search of the history of the amendments to this Solicitation for Contract showed that it had been modified several times, with the last modification -- number 0008, with an original date of letting out to bid with a synopsis of May 13, 2011 -- occurring on December 16, 2011.  This last modification rescinded the solicitation, with said modification's purpose noted as follows:
1. Cancel Solicitation HSFEHQ-10-R-0027.
2. A new draft solicitation will be issued on January 2012 for industry comment.
3. A Pre-Solicitation Conference will be held approximately two week post draft solicitation.
     Okay...score one for the internet and the vigilant citizens who perform an invaluable service to our nation by monitoring the actions of our government and its various agencies.
     I began the laborious task of reading the Invitation to Bid -- this tome is 116, pages with many canned and boilerplate requirements for doing business with Uncle Sam duly enshrined amongst the pages.  The Task Order Request (TOPR) under Scenario I & II under Section J of the Appendix made for another 42 pages.  The required size of the camps was fluid, though they had the required capacity of 301 to two thousand, including security and camp cadre.
     The staffing requirements or cadre for FEMA personnel for these camps -- which are identified as being located in five (5) distinct regions throughout and within the borders of the USA, with camps located in each and every state -- was three to fifteen each.  The size of these camps will vary around 5 acres per 1,000 inhabitants, though they will never be less than 3 acres for populations of 500 or fewer inhabitants within the camps' boundaries.
     This requirement also had a minimum square footage for each inhabitant: either the camp's cadre and first responders of 63 square feet, or approximately 8 feet on each side.  This is slightly less than current Federal Court(s) requirements for housing prisoners, which is approximately 72 square feet.  Perimeter fencing or barricades is required to be six feet high, enclosing the camp, with all traffic in or out to be recorded on a daily log and with security restricting all traffic and access.  The contractor shall also provide fencing and barricades around areas which are "off limits" to occupants.  ID Badges are required and are either blue or red, depending on the carrier is temporary or considered an occupant of the camp.
     The first of several anomalies in the solicitation for bid was in the contractor staffing requirements, which puzzlingly required staff to be fully operational within 72 hours.  Furthermore, "[w]henever practical, displaced citizens will be given the first opportunities for employment within the camp, assuming skills and capabilities are pertinent for the open positions."
     This led me to question the stated purpose of these camps, considering that the successful contractor would need to have personnel ready to go on such short notice, with notification from FEMA, Homeland Security, or the president within 72 hours.  So the question arises: how could the camp utilize "displaced citizens" in the initial staffing unless the contractor knew where and when a disaster, man-made or otherwise would occur beforehand?
     Another anomaly was the requirement that the "off limits" area was to be enclosed before anything else:
The contractor shall also provide fencing and barricades around areas which are "off limits" to occupants. Fencing and barricades are required within 36 hours for "phased" setup timeframes, and 72 hours for the rest of the initial setup timeframe.
Next question: just what is this "off limits" area to be used for, since the bid proposal specified only two (2) classes of occupants of the camp -- temporary or occupant as first responder?  Furthermore, it indicates that there may be a camp within the camp, or an area that is to be utilized by another group that is not revealed in the bid solicitation...your guess is as good as mine.  Most Americans would not like the ambiguity of this area's function!
Another question arose on the Term of the Contract (F.3), which reads as follows:
The contract shall be effective as of the execution date of the base contract, and shall continue up to five years if all four one-year options are exercised, except that delivery orders placed prior to the expiration date shall remain in full force and effect until deliveries have been completed and payments, therefore, have been made. The final delivery order shall not exceed two years.
     The nature of the duration seems to belie a long-term use for these camps, which is also not fitting the transitory nature of natural disasters, with most communities being habitable again after a relatively short period of time.  We're talking months, not years.
Under the Principal Place of Performance (F.4), this solicitation implies that all of the areas outlined below must be staffed:
The effort required under this contract shall be performed in the United States. Task Orders will designate the exact locations where services will be provided. The five (5) areas of coverage are broken down as follows:
Area 1: Includes the states of CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, NH, NJ, PA, VT, NY, WV, VA, RI
Area 2: Includes the states of KY, TN, MS, AL, GA, SC, NC, FL
Area 3: Includes the states of CO, IA, IL, IN, KS, MI, MN, MO, MT, ND, NE, OH, SD, UT, WI, WY
Area 4: Includes the states of AR, LA, NM, OK, TX
Area 5: Includes the states of AZ, CA, ID, NV, OR, WA
The language is specific in that all requirements are performed in the United States.  However, the language does not specify that it would be a phased approach or even a localized area that experiences a natural disaster -- simply the entire nation.
In the Task Order Proposal Request, there is a specific requirement for large vehicle parking:
Special Requirements:
- Outsized Vehicle Parking within Security Area (> 2.5 ton vehicles): Estimate required space and add to acreage requirement.
- Outsized vehicle parking outside security area (> 2.5 ton vehicles): Estimate required space and add to acreage requirement.
- Mission Support Work Area(s): Minimum square footage, Accessibility
     These requirements suggest that the type of vehicle(s) will be either solely high-occupancy (i.e., buses) or large trucks or heavy equipment combined with buses.  The interesting point about this section is that the authors allude to a "Security Area" and an "Unsecured Area" with no specific requirements coming forth.
     To sum up: the solicitation to bid for the staffing of FEMA camps within 72 hours is a curious proposition, since it appears to predict a calamity that will affect the entire nation simultaneously --completely unlike a location-specific natural disaster. 
     This may be nothing more than a preparedness exercise by Homeland Security to see if anyone besides the military would be able to meet these stringent requirements for rapid deployment.  However, what I found most striking was the "off limits" areas within each camp and staffing with "displaced persons" and the "Mission Support Work Area(s)," all undefined.   As citizens, we need to know the exact purpose of these camps, given President Obama's propensity to bend our constitutional republic to his own purposes!
(All documents can be found at this website for the GSA Federal Business Opportunities.)
article source:
http://EndtheLie.com/2012/05/02/exposed-military-internmentresettlement-operations-manual/
related: NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act)

Exposed: Military Internment/Resettlement Operations Manual

Read the document for yourself below.  It is now embedded in full so you don not even have to leave this page to read it!
Smile!  You are a civilian internee  
- http://endthelie.com/2011/12/09/smile-you-are-a-civilian-internee/
Document
Mirror
FEMA preparing National Responder Support Camps- eerily similar to KBR's - National Quick Response Team
Investigating KBR's FEMA camp - National Quick Response Team

Top Search Terms Used to Find This Page:

video source: http://youtu.be/i5Aszid4Tlk (15m)
Investigating KBR's FEMA camp "National Quick Response Team"
article source: http://EndtheLie.com/2011/12/07/investigating-kbr%e2%80%99s-fema-camp-%e2%80%9cnational-quick-response-team%e2%80%9d/
By Madison Ruppert, Editor of End the Lie

This image is more relevant than ever, especially the prescient choice to include KBR
     On November 16th, 2011, KBR, Inc. (formerly Kellogg Brown & Root) sent out a document to various entities regarding the establishment of a  National Quick Response Team for their current contracts with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) as well as for "anticipated future contracts."
     The nature of this quick response team is highly unusual given that it is built around a 72 hour period for initial setup and 24 hours for incremental services, meaning that the contractors would have to set up equipment within 72 hours and be operational within 24.
     The date of this call for contracts is quite noteworthy given that it is the day after S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act Fiscal Year 2012, was introduced.
     In fact, it was likely drafted the exact same day (November 15th) as S.1867 was introduced given the fact that an email was sent out by a Kentucky state employee at 10:44 AM on the 16th.
     After the Senate passed S.1867, which allows for the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or trial, the plans outlined in this project overview are quite suspicious, to say the least.
     This project is also worrisome because it does not appear to be a one-off or short-term contract. The document states, "Upon completion of evaluation, certain subcontractors may be invited to establish a Master Services Agreement (MSA) with pre-established lease rates and terms and conditions."
They emphasize the fact that it is a contingency project and that "it should be stressed that lead times will be short with critical requirements due to the nature of emergency responses."
     The document also highlights the need for subcontractors to "be flexible and able to handle multiple, shifting priorities in an emergency environment.  Supply lines needed must be short but not necessarily pre-positioned."
     Among the many services listed in the project overview are: catering services, temporary fencing and barricades, hand washing stations, laundry services, medical services, office trailers/administration area, potable water, power generation/fuel delivery/supply and electrical distribution, refuse collection, shower and toilet units, tentage/flooring/electric and HVAC/ECU and waste water removal.
     The project overview appears to have been hastily put out, as there are some errors like the last line of the "Waste Water Removal" section which reads, "Subcontractor shall respond within two (1) hour to emergency request."  Also worth noting is the oddly pixelated KBR logo, which does not match the quality of the rest of the document, although this could be an artifact from the compression when it was uploaded to the web.
     After expressing doubt over the authenticity of the document due to the logo, which to me indicated a possible forgery, I was directly contacted by a reader who received the email the day it was released.
     This reader sent it to Michael Rivero of What Really Happened and it likely eventually made its way to Jones but the reader is not a state employee and this individual specifically requested to keep the contact info of the state employee private.
     InfoWars covered this story and in doing so either willfully or unknowingly published the contact information and name of a state employee, against the wishes of the individual who forwarded the email featured in the article.
In a video (seen below), Alex Jones claimed that he received information from a state employee, which is likely either a mistake on his part or a misrepresentation, as the information was never leaked to begin with and was originally emailed by a non-state employee.
     I do not take pleasure in criticizing others, especially in this field, but his claim that it was an "internal KBR document" which was "not for public eyes" and is "restricted info" is another misunderstanding or misrepresentation.
     This was a publicly available document, and there is absolutely no indication anywhere that it was restricted or for official use only.
     The notion that a corporation would secretly release an open bid for contracts is somewhat ludicrous in and of itself, especially given that they could not care less if we find out about this seeing as under S.1867 the military would be able to do just about whatever it wants in terms of detaining Americans.
Unfortunately, Jones published the employee's name and email address in full, regardless of the source's wishes.
     As a small disclaimer, I am not in any way meaning to attack Jones or the work of his writers, I am simply pointing out facts, just as I did with "Dr." Nick Begich.
     I always encourage people to do their own research, come to their own conclusions and give me feedback on what they find. Most of the information Jones covers in his documentaries and on his radio show and his writers cover on their websites is easily verifiable and documented.
     They have actually posted my work and the work of Richard Cottrell a few times in the past and I truly appreciate that and hope that they will continue to get the information I cover out to additional readers.
Hopefully that note will save me from being inundated with hate mail from Jones fans (although I do appreciate the hate mail just as much as the positive mail).
     The individual who provided me with the original email and the original PDF told me, "She has nothing to do with releasing this info, I felt it needed to be shared."  The individual said in the first email, "This email originated with me. I can and will vouch for it's [sic] authenticity. I will upon request forward you the original email I received. I receive notices from my state's business development office of federal contracts available for bid."  Reading the document tickled my investigative bone so I did some digging and found the information of the individual listed as the contact in the PDF, Bob Siefert.
     After an exhaustive search I found another PDF entitled "US Army Sustainment Command Logistics Civil Augmentation Program brief to NDIA Small Business Conference 16 Nov 11" released by Tommy Marks, Executive Director of LOGCAP.
     It might be worth noting that this document was released on November 16th as well, the same date as the KBR project overview and the email from the state employee. Tommy Marks has a .mil contact address but the document is hosted on the National Defense Industrial Association Tennessee Valley Chapter's website.
On the final page of this document I found Siefert's contact information. Both his office and cell phone numbers are listed but he did not answer either phone.
     At the time I called he was not answering repeated calls to his office and his cell phone was turned off or refusing incoming calls entirely.
     To be sure the contact information was correct, I called the KBR headquarters in Texas and spoke to an operator who manually connected me to Siefert's office.
     Unfortunately, he did not pick up then either so I left a message, although I am not holding my breath for a response. After all, a reverse telephone search and a few key strokes would bring him to End the Lie and I seriously doubt he would respond after seeing who I am and what I do.
     Anyone else can feel free to call him. His office number is (281) 721-3191, his cell is (713) 822-8251 and his email (also listed in the project overview PDF) is bob.siefert@kbr.com
     What has become disturbingly clear is that the infrastructure is in place, the legislation is on its way to becoming law and the American people seem to be content with watching it happen.
     We must remember: this is not going to be some vacation where Americans are given comfortable room and board for free while sitting around in the sun reading books and playing sports, this is military detention we are talking about.
     Knowing that the Army has a so-called civilian inmate labor program in place already, along with the infrastructure and - if S.1867 is signed into law = the authority to round up and imprison countless Americans to be held without charge or trial for as long as they please.
     Under S.1867 they can also simply ship anyone off to any foreign nation or any foreign entity, so even hoping that you might get to stay in the United States in a prison camp might be foolish.
     Let us not forget that the federal government already carries out extrajudicial executions abroad with impunity, so at this point nothing is off the table or out of the realm of possibility.
     Our government is totally out of control. There is no way to look at what is going on around us and deny it any longer.
     Hopefully the American people will wake from their slumber and rise up to restore our Constitutional      Republic that protects our liberties at all costs before it is too late.
     Here are the documents linked to in this article in case they are taken down or not available elsewhere:

Top Search Terms Used to Find This Page:


Sunday, December 20, 2009



o'bamastapo - Are you a domestic terrorist? (linked to an interactive quiz)

Terrorism Awareness and Prevention: "Quiz: Who are terrorists"? 
(former quiz source, now taken down: http://www.pa-aware.org/who-are-terrorists/quiz.asp, it was published by: The Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency, Harrisburg, Pa.)

 See the quiz on "The Wayback Machine" at: http://web.archive.org/web/20071015222630/http://pa-aware.org/who-are-terrorists/quiz.asp



  • Are your reluctant or afraid of speaking privately or publicly against the current government and it's policies?
  • Do you oppose same-sex marriage?
  • Are you against laws that give preferential treatment to "special classes" of people?
  • Do you oppose restrictions on firearms?
  • Does your Church or organization refrain from speaking against government policies our of fear from retribution?
  • Do you oppose lax immigration laws?
  • Do you oppose the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs?
  • Do you oppose continuation of free trade agreement?
  • Are suspect of foreign regimes?
  • Do you fear Communist regimes?
  • Do you oppose a "one world" government?
  • Do you bemoan the decline of U.S. stature in the world?
  • Are upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India?
  • Are you against big government?
  • Do you possess "subversive" literature?
  • Are you one who make numerous references to the U.S. Constitution?
  • Are you a "property rights" advocate?
  • Are you a "defender of the U.S. Constituion against federal government and the U.N?"
  • Do you have a copy of the book "Unintended Consequences" or have you read it?
  • Are you a member of a domestic militia group?
  • Do you support Constitution based States Rights?
  • Have you one who has or do you one who believe in "police the police?"
  • Are you a computer hacker?
  • Have you ever supported or promoted jury nullification or secession?
  • Do you consider yourself as being "a loner"?
  • Do you support Traditional American Values?
  • Do you support the 2nd amendment and your right to keep and bear arms?
  • Are you against more taxation?
  • Do now or have you ever possessed the anti-income tax film "America: Freedom to Fascism."
  • Do you Favor Abolishing the IRS?
  • Are you against Abortion?
  • Are you an anti-abortion activist or oppose abortion?
  • Do you possess images of, display, or are you in possession of the Gagsden "Don't Tread on Me" flag?
  • Are you a "conspiracy theorist?"
  • Do you display political paraphernalia supporting a third-party candidate?
  • Have you ever displayed Constitutional Party, Campaign for Liberty or Libertarian material?"
  • Do you support Congressman Ron Paul or Constitution Party Candidate Chuck Baldwin or their policies?
  • Are you against any Obama policies?
  • Are you a Christian?
  • Do you wear or publicly display any religious symbols?
  • Are you a member of any local lobbying groups, Muslim civil rights organizations, anti-government policies or anti-war protest groups?

You maybe under suspicion somewhere as a domestic terrorist.
Are you "An Enemy of the State?"

http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/08/change.html

"Democracy:     Involves the government ruling and making laws for the "greater good" of all people, they may abolish personal rights in doing so.  Democracy is government by and for the people.  They may or may not be republics -- that is, government limited by constitution or charter.  The tricky part of "democracy" is defining "the people" and then deciding what counts as "by the people" and what counts as "for the people."  In a sense, that could be considered the content of democratic practice.
Republic:
     Involves the government using and abiding by the constitution heavily.  Personal rights are respected and cannot be taken away.  This helps to avoid tyranny and mobocracy  (the majority makes laws and governs by passion, prejudice, or impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences.)   Republics are the common and "standard" type of governments found today, not democracies, despite what many people (who may not know the definition of either) think.  Just as democracies may or may not be republics, republics may or may not be democracies. 
The difference between Democracy and Republic:
     Democracy and Republic are two forms of government which are distinguished by their treatment of the Minority, and the Individual, by the Majority.  In a Democracy, the Majority has unlimited power over the Minority.  This system of government does not provide a legal safeguard of the rights of the Individual and the Minority.  It has been referred to as "Majority over Man."  In a Republic, the Majority is Limited and constrained by a written Constitution which protects the rights of the Individual and the Minority.  The purpose of a Republic form of government is to control the Majority and to protect the God-given, inalienable rights and liberty of the Individual.

source: The United States of America is a Republic.
A 'tongue-in-cheek' quiz jesting "Are you a terrorist?" -- http://quizilla.teennick.com/tests/4833864
The opine below is reposted from:
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/05/13/you-are-the-homegrown-terrorist-threat/
     If you're an American reading this, then under expansive definitions being used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and several states in their counterterrorism training, you just might be a domestic terrorist.
     The FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force in Phoenix, Ariz., distributed a brochure (Images: 1 , 2 ) to local law enforcement agencies a few years ago which defines terrorism as individuals or groups within the U.S. who engage in criminal activity to promote political or social changes.  This is correct, as far as it goes, but the brochure then gives a listing of "suspicious" activities, telling law enforcement officers: "If you encounter any of the following, call the Joint Terrorism Task Force."
     Some of the things for which you should be reported as a suspected terrorist include the usual things, like weapons of mass destruction, and hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and Neo-Nazis, but also includes people who "Make numerous references to US Constitution," "Claim driving is a right, not a privilege" and "Attempt to 'police the police.'"
     In addition, "People whose political motivation is usually Marxist/Leninist philosophy," - "defenders" of the US Constitution against federal government and the UN, computer hackers, and "Lone Individuals" should also be reported.
     Do you fall under any of those categories?  I certainly do; more than one, in fact.  So I'm probably under suspicion somewhere as a domestic terrorist.
     Last week, the state of Alabama Department of Homeland Security got scrutinized for an interactive terrorism awareness training section of its Web site, which said much the same things.  The bureaucrats removed the entire training after it wound up on digg.com, a popular Web site where users can promote news to the site's front page.
     In Alabama, it seems, promoting gun rights can also get you branded a domestic terrorist.
     Alabama's site was based on a similar one from the state of Pennsylvania, which in addition to all of the above, says that promoting jury nullification, secession, or the belief that all governments must ultimately become corrupted by power also makes you a domestic terrorist worth watching.
     But it gets worse.
     But you see, I once read 'Unintended Consequences' and was quite impressed with the book.  Then one day I attended a FBI security briefing for technology security and was confronted with an image of the book - strongly implying those who own or read the book were terrorists.  [Fahrenheit 451?)]
     But now I find I'm considered a terrorist by many other government agencies!  Seriously, I wonder when I shall be arrested and "Detained." . . .
     The state of Virginia also says I'm a terrorist. (PDF)  Why there?  Because I'm a "property rights advocate."  Seriously, in Virginia, you're a TERRORIST if you advocate for property rights.  [Agenda 21?]  I think they're going to need to build more jails to house us all. . . .
     Incredibly, none of this is in jest.  These various government agencies honestly believe *I* am a "domestic terrorist."  That is so sad.  Indeed, this once-great country has nowhere to go but down. - Ogre's Politics & Views
     Ogre also put together a nice interactive quiz which you can use to determine if you are a domestic terrorist.  I scored a 70, which apparently means there;s a cell with my name on it in Guantanamo Bay.  [FEMA Relocation Camps?]
     It's clear that in every meaningful way, the government considers ordinary Americans the enemy; their actions speak it unmistakably.
All Americans know that there are among us those who are or would be real terrorists, not to be confused with law abiding citizens who respect our American Heritage, it's Founding Values, and who respect the Constitution and the rights of individuals versus an over-reaching government.  -- rfh

references:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060110071648/www.homelandsecurity.alabama.gov/tap/anti-gov_grps.htm
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/images/FBI-MCSOTerroristFlyer-Front.jpg
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/images/FBI-MCSOTerroristFlyer-Back.jpg
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/12/hon-james-david-manning-phd-explains.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/09/obamastapo-papers-please.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/08/change.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/08/obamastapo-report-friends-neighbors.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/08/obamastapo-rise-of-state-national-guard.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/08/obamastapo-and-you-thought-it-couldnt.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/12/oczars-who-are-they-whatre-their.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/10/ohumpty-dumpty-not-near-enough-or-soon.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/10/opine-is-america-fast-becoming-3rd_16.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/09/somethings-not-right-in-washington.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/07/rise-of-state-enemies-list-are-you-on.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/07/warning-veterans-2nd-amendment.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/07/2nd-amendment-eric-holders-secret.html
http://harrolds.blogspot.com/2009/07/2nd-amendment-hr-2159-hr-45-are-you.html
Constitution Society: Founding Documents Online Books History Links Quotations: American Values
TimeLine of: the Magna Carta Declaration of Arbroathsmall speaker icon History of: The US Bill of Rights Constitution + more Amendments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  
at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please, avoid posting advertisements. Content comments are welcomed, including anonymous. Posts with profanity will not be published.