"FEMA RED / BLUE LIST" Marked For TERMINATION

On March 13th 2008 there was a secret closed door meeting of The United States House Of Representatives in Washington. During the last 182 years in the history of The United States, this is only the sixth time a secret meeting has been held by The House. Even though Representatives are sworn to secrecy by House Rules XVII, some of the members were so shocked, horrified, furious, and concerned about the future of America by what was revealed to them inside the secret meeting, that they have started to leak this secret information to independent news agencies around the world.

The mass media said almost nothing about the secret meeting of the House, mentioning only one of the items being discussed. (The new surveillance techniques that are going to be used by the U.S. Government to watch all American citizens). The story was first released in a newspaper out of Brisbane, Australia revealing the contents of the secret U.S. Government meeting and plans for America including all of it's citizens. Shortly there after, David J. Meyer from Last Trumpet Ministries found it and made it more available for the world to see.

Readers may find the link below useful. The link is posted not to frighten but to worn. The more people aware of what is actually going on, the better.

Source: http://www.uaff.us/deathcamps.htm

U.S. Army Gearing Up for Something ... Big?

First Received – May 7. Readers Comments May 13, 2008

Here is a copy of your article. I had sent it on to my brother-in-law, who works for Home Land Security. He said, "I am not at liberty to tell you what is going on, but I suggest you learn Spanish real fast!". He was a fireman in a large U.S. City until he was given a gun and sent for Home Land Securiity Training. I get the impression that we now have embedded Home Land Security agents in the Fire Departments and Police Forces across the nation to help with the impending Marshall Law should it be declared soon!
Keep up the good work!

Received – Wednesday May 7, 2008

This afternoon, I received a call from my niece in Texas. Her husband is in the service. They live near the base in an area where many other families in the service live. Yesterday, she received a visit from some kind of army personnel, as well as many of her girlfriends who also have husbands serving. From what I understand, this is what took place. She was given several locations as well as dates and times to show up for "commodities", as well as a location on base they were required to show up today. She said the area on base they were told to go to, she was familiar with, only this time, there were large tents set up, one of which they were told to go to. She told me her fears were she would be told her husband was going to be sent overseas, however this wasn't the case.

She said they were told that they would be taken care of, and to begin to stock up on non perishables. They were given a voucher for what she stated were "large sacks" of beans, rice and other "non perishables". Also informed that generators would be provided. Times and dates to pick up these commodities. They were also handed out some kind of contract that the "spouses" of personal were required to sign. It stated they were not at liberty to share this information with civilians. Her and several others when asking about what is going on, they were told the Army takes care of their own. This took place in Texas.

Anyone with any further info please email us @:
cpolblog@hotmail.com

House Goes Behind Closed Doors To Debate Surveillance Bill

The House has held a closed session for the first time in 25 years, discussing a hotly contested surveillance bill.

Republicans had requested privacy for what they termed "an honest debate" on the new Democratic eavesdropping measure.

The bill is opposed by the White House and most Republicans in Congress.

Lawmakers were forbidden to disclose what was said during the hour-long late-night session.

The extent to which minds were changed, if at all, should be more clear Friday, when the House is expected to openly debate and then vote on the bill.

President Bush has vowed to veto the surveillance measure, saying it would undermine the nation's security.

Bush opposes it in part because it wouldn't provide retroactive legal immunity for telecom companies that may have helped the government eavesdrop on their customers without court permission after the 9/11 terror attacks.
WCPO.com/news/

LAST NIGHTS SESSION WAS ONLY THE FOURTH TIME IN 176 YEARS THAT CONGRESS CLOSED ITS DOORS TO THE PUBLIC

Word has begun leaking from last nights special, closed-door session of the United States House of Representatives.

Not only did members discuss new surveillance provisions as was the publicly stated reason for the closed door session, they were also bluntly warned about:

· the imminent collapse of the U.S. economy to occur by September 2008,

· the imminent collapse of US federal government finances by February 2009,

· the possibility of Civil War inside the USA as a result of the collapse,

· advance round-ups of "insurgent U.S. citizens" likely to move against the government,

· The detention of those rounded-up at "REX 84" camps constructed throughout the USA,

· the possibility of retaliation against members of Congress for the collapses,

· the location of "safe facilities" for members of Congress and their families to reside during expected massive civil unrest

· the necessary and unavoidable merger of the United States with Canada (for its natural resources) and with Mexico (for its cheap labor pool),

· the issuance of a new currency - THE AMERO - for all three nations as the proposed solution to the coming economic armageddon.

Members of Congress were FORBIDDEN to reveal what was discussed and ABC News via WCPO web site in the report above CONFIRMS congress members were FORBIDDEN to talk about it!

Several are so furious and concerned about the future of the country, they have begun leaking info. More details coming later today and over the weekend. SPREAD THE WORD!!!

Source: http://www.halturnershow.com/

Rule by fear or rule by law?

What is of most concern is the article below is featured in the mainstream media.

"The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgment of his peers, is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government whether Nazi or Communist."
- Winston Churchill, Nov. 21, 1943

Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law, arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of "an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."

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."

The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on a list of "terrorist" organizations, or who speaks out against the government's policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and noncitizens alike.

Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), to ensure "continuity of government" in the event of what the document vaguely calls a "catastrophic emergency." Should the president determine that such an emergency has occurred, he and he alone is empowered to do whatever he deems necessary to ensure "continuity of government." This could include everything from canceling elections to suspending the Constitution to launching a nuclear attack. Congress has yet to hold a single hearing on NSPD-51.

U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice (Los Angeles County) has come up with a new way to expand the domestic "war on terror." Her Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (HR1955), which passed the House by the lopsided vote of 404-6, would set up a commission to "examine and report upon the facts and causes" of so-called violent radicalism and extremist ideology, then make legislative recommendations on combatting it.

According to commentary in the Baltimore Sun, Rep. Harman and her colleagues from both sides of the aisle believe the country faces a native brand of terrorism, and needs a commission with sweeping investigative power to combat it.

A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who "engage in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name of animal rights" as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights supporters ... the list goes on and on. According to author Naomi Wolf, the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of roughly 775,000 "terror suspects" with the number increasing by 20,000 per month.

What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own citizens?

The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the president to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by law.

Source: sfgate.com