FEMA Puts Out Contract For Emergency Camps to House “Displaced Citizens”

[3kgt]

Whether IW cites the NYT on a few articles or not doesn't really matter to me. The fact is they use sensationalist claims before facts to gain readers/attention.
No thanks..

 

[pcosmar]

Whether IW cites the NYT on a few articles or not doesn't really matter to me. The fact is they use sensationalist claims before facts to gain readers/attention.
No thanks..

So,
What are the facts?

And what good are the facts if no one reads or knows them?

 

[ZanZibar]

Whether IW cites the NYT on a few articles or not doesn't really matter to me. The fact is they use sensationalist claims before facts to gain readers/attention.
No thanks..

Exactly. Too much of it is conjecture to be considered reliable.

 

[NidStyles]

Whether IW cites the NYT on a few articles or not doesn't really matter to me. The fact is they use sensationalist claims before facts to gain readers/attention.
No thanks..

I think his track record proves that what they are doing it reasonably trustworthy. You probably would not even know what the TSA is doing without IW. No one reported on it until they did. Being critical of IW is fine, but projecting that criticism onto the people sharing what they see on that site is not so fine. You are attacking the OP here, and it's unjustifiable.

That would be like me blaming you for posting a MSM article that was filled with hyperbole and irrationality and complaining that you were allowed to share it here. If you do not like seeing any content from IW, the solution is simple, don't read it. You have no the right to tell others not to post it or read it.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Exactly. Too much of it is conjecture to be considered reliable.

“Belligerents who also happen to be U.S. citizens do not enjoy immunity where non-citizen belligerents are valid military objectives,” said Jeh C. Johnson, the Defense Department general counsel, in a speech at Yale Law School.

Not conjecture.

 

[pcosmar]

Exactly. Too much of it is conjecture to be considered reliable.

What source of news and information do you consider to be reliable?

I have never been an Alex Jones fan nor an Infowars apologist.
But they have broken stories and reported on what others in the MSM will not.

I look at several sources and listen to a "heads up" from any and all..

Just who DO you consider "reliable". and what is your criteria for such?

 

[ZanZibar]

What source of news and information do you consider to be reliable?

I have never been an Alex Jones fan nor an Infowars apologist.
But they have broken stories and reported on what others in the MSM will not.

I look at several sources and listen to a "heads up" from any and all..

Just who DO you consider "reliable". and what is your criteria for such?

People I know and trust and have built relationships with, although I realize they can't cover nearly everything nor can everyone do that with the media.

The honest truth is that one must get their news from a variety of news sources, not a single source.

 

[pcosmar]

The honest truth is that one must get their news from a variety of news sources, not a single source.

Ok,
So what part of this story do you consider to be misleading or conjecture?

Exactly. Too much of it is conjecture to be considered reliable.

What was not factual,, that you felt the need to post,

Can we please quit citing Infowars? They are notoriously unreliable as a news source.

about it?

 

[Anti Federalist]

The honest truth is that one must get their news from a variety of news sources, not a single source.

Fair enough, and that's what I do, and, much more often than not, have found that the InfoWars stories have been accurate.

 

[ZanZibar]

Fair enough, and that's what I do, and, much more often than not, have found that the InfoWars stories have been accurate.

I've found enough of them to NOT be accurate in that I can't trust anything they write (just like NBC for example).

 

[NewRightLibertarian]

They both have the same levels of integrity in their reporting.

Nah, the mainstream media carries water for the establishment while Infowars fights the establishment. Infowars has much more integrity because they don't do propaganda for evil interests.

 

[iamdigital]

i like infowars. it almost always has other links to backup its articles. most of the haters just dont put the effort into a little research which is required.

the main point is that these camps are/can get built. nobody will know who will populate them until the day comes, so speculation is normal. infowars is giving their alternative view and its 100% legit to do so.

you have the freedom to do whatever you want with information like this. you can take it on board or you can reject it. you can agree with some of it and can differ with other parts. its up to you. just dont shoot the messengers and call on people to not post links. it sickens me. especially on a Ron Paul forum.

 

[ZanZibar]

i like infowars. it almost always has other links to backup its articles. most of the haters just dont put the effort into a little research which is required.

The articles I have actually read from them I did indeed do a fact check. And IW was factually inaccurate.

 

[bolil]

So can we talk about the issue at hand, which is by no means outside the bounds of probability... Why are they activating the camps now? What is it they are preparing for exactly? What do they have planned or information on...

 

[pcosmar]

I've found enough of them to NOT be accurate in that I can't trust anything they write (just like NBC for example).

I don't follow closely enough to say..
Got a few examples?
Just so i can compare to the inaccuracies of others,, (Faux,CNN, Blaze Etc)

 

[ZanZibar]

I don't follow closely enough to say..
Got a few examples?
Just so i can compare to the inaccuracies of others,, (Faux,CNN, Blaze Etc)

They had a story once about Iran photoshopping a crowd in or out of a rally. Come to find out it wasn't a manipulation, it was a completely different photo.

They also had a story about the DHS doing DUI checkpoints on some holiday which was completely false; the local LEOs were doing DUI checkpoints.

There are other examples that I can't recall right off the top of my head. But as I said, I've caught them in enough inaccurate that they just can't be trusted.

 

[AFPVet]

Fair enough, and that's what I do, and, much more often than not, have found that the InfoWars stories have been accurate.

Me too While anyone can put a spin on any information, if the information itself is good, why does it matter?

 

[John F Kennedy III]

i like infowars. it almost always has other links to backup its articles. most of the haters just dont put the effort into a little research which is required.

the main point is that these camps are/can get built. nobody will know who will populate them until the day comes, so speculation is normal. infowars is giving their alternative view and its 100% legit to do so.

you have the freedom to do whatever you want with information like this. you can take it on board or you can reject it. you can agree with some of it and can differ with other parts. its up to you. just dont shoot the messengers and call on people to not post links. it sickens me. especially on a Ron Paul forum.

This.

 

[Danke]

They also had a story about the DHS doing DUI checkpoints on some holiday which was completely false; the local LEOs were doing DUI checkpoints.

There are other examples that I can't recall right off the top of my head. But as I said, I've caught them in enough inaccurate that they just can't be trusted.

This one?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/02/29/the-tsa-is-coming-to-a-highway-near-you/

 

[Zippyjuan]

For facts on this issue- here is an official summary of the bids being requested: https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=9b165d4c3814cbd33f7f48dcdaadf059&tab=core&_cview=1

The contractor shall construct and operate a Responder Support Camp (RSC) in which to stage responders and other authorized personnel and assets deployed for occurrences or events requiring a federal government response. The National Responder Support Camps contract will be used by FEMA, or by other federal agencies through FEMA, consistent with the specific authorities of the agency utilizing the contract's services.

FEMA's mission is to support our citizens and first responders to ensure that as a nation we work together to build, sustain, and improve our capability to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from and mitigate all hazards. During disaster situations or other events, FEMA federal, state and local responders may need a place that provides shelter, food, and additional basic needs. Hence the need for the procurement of effective and efficient Responder Support Camps is present.