moonbattery.gif


« Open Thread | Main | Anarchy + Communism = Moonbattery »


February 3, 2009

Crooked Congressman Proposes Concentration Camps

Remember Alcee Hastings, the federal judge who after being impeached for corruption became a Democrat Congresscrook and Co-Chair of Shrillary Rotten's presidential campaign? Nancy "Culture of Corruption" Pelosi wanted him to head the House Intelligence Committee, but was forced to back off due to the outraged reaction to having a known criminal in charge of our security. Yet Hastings still has security concerns:

Rep. Alcee L. Hastings, D-Fla., has introduced to the House of Representatives a new bill, H.R. 645, calling for the secretary of homeland security to establish no fewer than six national emergency centers for corralling civilians on military installations.
The proposed bill, which has received little mainstream media attention, appears designed to create the type of detention center that those concerned about use of the military in domestic affairs fear could be used as concentration camps for political dissidents, such as occurred in Nazi Germany.

Hastings may be best known for saying this about Sarah Palin:

Anybody toting guns and stripping moose don't care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks.

Yet Saracuda isn't the one proposing concentration camps. Maybe Hastings actually believes his own rhetoric, and wants to make us into lampshades before we do the same to him. Whatever his motives, "toting guns" is a wise practice, given the people running our government.

alcee_hastings.jpg
How's this for a culture of corruption?

On a tip from Dennis S.

Posted by Van Helsing at February 3, 2009 6:51 AM

Comments

Alright, time to pick up the old hunting rifle next time I visit Dad.

Posted by: forest at February 3, 2009 7:23 AM

I would recommend that everyone read the text of the proposed bill. Maybe I missed something, but it seems like a reasonable thing to do. That is, take over abandoned military installations and convert them into facilities that can be used for handling refuges displaced by natural disasters within the US. The bill's author has no business being in Congress (my opinion) but give the legislation fair consideration.

Posted by: John at February 3, 2009 7:44 AM

Another member of the demacrook party TIME TO CRUSIFI THE JACKASS

Posted by: Spurwing Plover at February 3, 2009 8:10 AM

How much does that cost to have people hanging around waiting for a storm to hit so you can put refuges there..

They put them in trailers. Hotels etc. Not camps.

It is more like turn your guns in or go here!!

Posted by: Bob at February 3, 2009 8:14 AM

all these bills are omens, precursors to the real agenda of the radical left and its purple lipped messiah/overlord/dicKtator. our apathy makes him & his plans all possible. for the first time in my life, I am scared to be an American.....

Posted by: Cylie at February 3, 2009 8:42 AM

John 7:44
As you say, it looks benign on the surface. However, there is nothing that the government has not prostituted to other more inimical uses.

In the first place the Constitution holds no fief for these butt biscuits in Washinton to do any such thing within a State's borders, none. This emergency thing has gotten completely out of hand. A State is solely responsible to its people for this sort of thing. The Feds can help the National Guard units of the affected State with supplies and such on request of the Governor. Otherwise the Feds are constrained to butt out.

Except... now there is precedent for increasing Federal interferrence a la Hurricane Katrina. This disaster was all Louisiana and New Orleans issue. Instead the Feds got the blame because the entire state is a ghetto of low expectations so they expected a gigantic hand-out (and got it) instead of getting off their collective ass and working like Mississippi did.

</rant>

Posted by: chuck in st paul at February 3, 2009 12:20 PM

cylie--- AMEN!

Posted by: gomergirl at February 3, 2009 12:51 PM

Vee have vays of making you talk.

Posted by: Farmer Ted at February 3, 2009 2:13 PM

Give this bill a chance! The would only be "re-location" camps.

If you simply obey the rules and work, you will have nothing to fear. Remember: Arbeit Macht Frei.

Families will be re-united after a short detention period. Inform the camp guards if you have any special skills such as tailor, shoe maker, jeweler or machinist.

Before admittance to the camp, you will be given a de-lousing shower.

We were only following orders.

Posted by: matt at February 3, 2009 3:30 PM

I wonder how the showers at these camps will be...

Posted by: Anonymous at February 3, 2009 3:47 PM

too late:
Civilian Inmate Labor Program
www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf


its time to give john, and hopefully others, a lesson in how stupid they are. (of course john wont listen either way, but what can i do by try?)

I would recommend that everyone read the text of the proposed bill. Maybe I missed something, but it seems like a reasonable thing to do.

john is a surface person, when struck with questions in which john has to determine if there is a conclusion and what that is are avoided and his skill abysmal.

the first is the premise he is acting out. lets look at this LOGICALLY, not emotionally (so john, take off your metrosexual in touch female side, and think dammit, think).

his statement implies that if this really was a bad idea and was of bad intentions the evil people would be compelled by some unseen force to be honest and say that the purpose is for bad intentions and evil purposes.

the other perspective that leads to the same end is "nobody lies", except those who are on the wrong side (and conveniently someone told john who cant think his own thoughts through to their implications, or else he might remain free and untethered to a state mill working for the few for free).

so the concept that one would just read bad legistlature with ulterior motives and purposes and be aware of such is absurd, if that person isnt even be aware of the condition that they are to check for!

john doesnt know wha to look for, and so john believes everything he reads as long as its put nicely... john would buy a burnt dead animal smothered in crushed plants, but only if you call it a hamburger. john would never commit infanticide, but abortion is ok... he would never support communism, but socialism is different.


lets make it simple john.

the despot we know, doesnt enter office as the despot we know, or else we wouldnt give them the job

this means that johns next question, if he actually cared about knowing vs being percieved as right, would be how would i know that a despot is who i am looking at.

well, the people here and other places have been trying to tell you idiots, but idiots outnumber the smart...

he or she will have to lie, that way they can appeal to an abnormal number of interests and get them to appear to want to be on the same page (even though many of their desires are mutually exclusive).

they will make lies that are better than the limited reality the truthful have to work with.

they will come from nowhere, because the less they are known, the less can be objected to by people. also they are put up by others who intend to pull the strings and someone who is connected can be independent, someone who rockets up owes everything to the system and people that manipulated them there.

they will be far left.. like hitler, stalin, mao, etc... there are really no other examples of despotism in the last century. any 'other' form you may find was always a proxy of another silent game from behind that we pretend doesnt happen.

[yes, hitler was far left. the difference really was that hitler wanted europe, while stalin wanted the world. national vs international socialism]

they will implement theft as a social good... they will invert things, like pelosi espousing OTHER families to conveniently off themselves, while she has 5 kids...

they will give LOTS of hints of what they stand for in a kind of open code, that everyone will ignore or discount, etc.

and here is a line...

obamas daughters names... sasha and malia
they claim they are russian and hawaiian

are they related? what would a relationship between the two names be? would history poke a peek? (and a relationship does not mean that it was the reason).


the names for those in the know reinforce the fellow traveler thing.

Aleksandr (Александр) = Sasha
the sha ending is not feminine other than in america where women are men, and there are no women... Saskia would be what he would use if he was choosing a feminine form...

he is the most left... his freidns were deep communists of one type or another... not people who didntk now the truth, but people who did know the truth, looked down on the average people, and welcomed the things we think are abberant (but to any one who actually reads a lot of it, would know that they are the point and the reason, not an accident)

there is ALSO a famous communist historian who predicted the fall of the soviet union (Z letter), was martin malia. he was very influential and his most famous work was on a very famous russian populist.

www.universityofcalifornia.edu/senate/inmemoriam/martinemalia.htm

during the times of ayers and others he wrote this, which would be a must read that we forgot. he was at harvard, but ended up at berkely, and this was the books title.

Alexander Herzen and the Birth of Russian Socialism, 1812-1855 (1961)

[reading this would go hand in hand with mein kampf, and other histories of rises to power and such... after all, each new despot copies the old ones as much as they can get away with. some copy so much we ignore it]

the authors last name malia, the most famous book of the author was about alexander herzen, home referred to as sasha herzen...

and it was all about populism...

Posted by: artfldgr at February 3, 2009 5:11 PM

Rex 84

Posted by: artfldgr at February 3, 2009 5:17 PM

Don't worry, artfldgr, if it were a Republican pushing the law through, people like John would suddenly think like we do about it. We respond to the intent as opposed to the party... the Left's pawns tend to stick to the party and ignore the intentions. It's how the Left has grown so strong here. It's how they'll win and how we'll lose everything if we let them.

Posted by: Anonymous at February 3, 2009 6:56 PM

Even if the purpose of the "relocation centers" or whatever is benign, I personally don't want to spend a single minute in one. Would you have wanted to hang out at the Super Dome in the aftermath of Katrina? Do you want to live in a FEMA trailer with formaldehyde fumes? Hell, I'd rather lace up my boots, grab the bug-out bag and rifle, and walk a few hundred miles to leave a disaster zone than rely on the gub'mint to help me.

Posted by: PabloD at February 3, 2009 7:25 PM

i would to see concentration camps for politicans.

Posted by: bill fry at February 3, 2009 8:32 PM

Bill... you might be on to something there...

Posted by: Anonymous at February 4, 2009 12:08 AM

Pablo, you said it.

Here is the bottom line: I DO NOT WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO DO THINGS FOR ME.

I too would rather walk and fend for myself than be in "The Superdome".

I understand that government assistance can be a good thing and help people in need. But (a) it's being abused to the point of absurdity by those that want a hand-out and (b) THESE CAMPS AIN'T GOING TO BE FOR "ASSISTANCE" any more than Treblinka or Sobibor were.

Posted by: matt at February 4, 2009 1:04 AM