Emergency Homeless Response. Can This Be classified as FEMA Camps for the Homeless?

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
From the thread: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/la...rt-false-flag-theories.2603/page-7#post-74283

Indeed and even Jones apparently 'whackier' allegations of FEMA camps seem to be gaining more traction.

http://mcfriction.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/south-carolina-fema-camp-opens-for.html
That's BS. Just like his allegations that detention centers for illegal immigrants were "FEMA Camps". Nobody is saying it's anything other than a detention center.
Start a new thread if you really want to get into it.
So if 'a rose is still a rose by any other name'

Do these camps qualify as FEMA camps in specific terms or only in generic terms or 'not at all'?

http://www.columbiasc.net/depts/cit...mergency_Homeless_Response_13_August_2013.pdf

http://www.columbiasc.net/depts/city-council/docs/old_downloads/08_13_2013_Agenda_Items/Emergency_Homeless_Response_13_August_2013.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
It looks like an emergency homeless center with bus access only, but no fence. It's not even a detention center.

The bus access just means they don't take walk-ins. They have that rule in some of the centers here. People get picked up at designated spots, then taken to the shelter, then the next day the bus takes them back. Such shelters are usually a response to camps being set up in city streets. It's a very contentious issue here (Venice, CA, and Los Angeles in general).
 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
I once went to a music festival in Somerset and due to its location on a country lane there was no pedestrian access. They had a couple of pick up points from which free shuttle buses ran. I wonder if that would qualify as a FEMA camp ;-)
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
It looks like an emergency homeless center with bus access only, but no fence. It's not even a detention center.

The bus access just means they don't take walk-ins. They have that rule in some of the centers here. People get picked up at designated spots, then taken to the shelter, then the next day the bus takes them back. Such shelters are usually a response to camps being set up in city streets. It's a very contentious issue here (Venice, CA, and Los Angeles in general).
Yes understandably contentious. I can understand why business's do not want the homeless around and it is good that they have somewhere to sleep and to eat but the real contention is:

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/Blog/20...ile-its-homeless/4741377095339/#ixzz2jz19axDf

It seems like a detention centre if you can't get out because an officer is posted on the road leading downtown to ensure homeless people don't walk towards the area. To leave the shelter, visitors need to set an appointment and be shuttled by a van.
 
Last edited:

solrey

Senior Member.
The plan was never to forcibly confine anyone so the answer would be "not at all" like a so called "FEMA Camp". Calling the shelter a FEMA camp is quite the ironic hyperbole from a blog writer who claims to be "Keeping the sheeple up to date with reality". Reeeeallly?
Besides, the Columbia City Council voted to rescind the original decision.

http://www.free-times.com/blogs/council-tries-again-on-homeless-issue
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
I once went to a music festival in Somerset and due to its location on a country lane there was no pedestrian access. They had a couple of pick up points from which free shuttle buses ran. I wonder if that would qualify as a FEMA camp ;-)
I don't know Dave. Would you be arrested if you didn't want to go there?

What about 'Park and Rides'... do they qualify? :rolleyes:
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
The plan was never to forcibly confine anyone so the answer would be "not at all" like a so called "FEMA Camp". Ironic hyperbole from a blog writer who claims to be "Keeping the sheeple up to date with reality". Besides, the Columbia City Council voted to rescind the original decision.

http://www.free-times.com/blogs/council-tries-again-on-homeless-issue
So they have backed down in the face of opposition and ridicule?
 

solrey

Senior Member.
So they have backed down in the face of opposition and ridicule?

Not exactly. There was considerable confusion over a very lengthy meeting with the vote held in the wee hours of the morning so they basically stepped back and hit reset. It seems as though they would have taken another look at the issue with or without public backlash.

Anyhooo, isn't that what our elected officials are supposed to do, respond to the feedback of their constituents? Damned if they do, damned if they don't, eh?

http://www.free-times.com/blogs/did-columbia-criminalize-homelessness
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Anyhooo, isn't that what our elected officials are supposed to do, respond to the feedback of their constituents? Damned if they do, damned if they don't, eh?

http://www.free-times.com/blogs/did-columbia-criminalize-homelessness
Yep... still a bit worrying that they passed it beforehand and it wasn't a rushed decision, it was well researched, funded, planned and organised over months as can be seen from the link

http://www.columbiasc.net/depts/cit...mergency_Homeless_Response_13_August_2013.pdf

Which shows the timeline on the last page.

Basically, they turned a praiseworthy effort in helping the homeless, into a fiasco by confining them and threatening arrest for non compliance.

Also the numbers are well out as there are around 1500, homeless in the catchment area and only room for 420 in the center.
 

Alhazred The Sane

Senior Member.
From the thread: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/la...rt-false-flag-theories.2603/page-7#post-74283

So if 'a rose is still a rose by any other name'

Do these camps qualify as FEMA camps in specific terms or only in generic terms or 'not at all'?

http://www.columbiasc.net/depts/cit...mergency_Homeless_Response_13_August_2013.pdf
That made for very depressing reading. The problem of homelessness allowed to get to such a point that only when business leaders start complaining that it's bad for business does anything happen. The solution seems, at best, a temporary one, and not something that will look at why so many people are homeless. I wonder how many empty properties there are in that part of the world, and if they could be put to some better use.

Doesn't strike me as a FEMA camp thingy though. For a start, it appears to be the reaction of business owners in one city, with nothing federal about it. Also, it appears to be a shelter, and nothing more. Big capitals for the 'same laws apply to all citizens'. The fact that so many charitable agencies will be working on this plan would seem a fail-safe against the sort of Police State incarceration you seem to be implying.

Still, very sad. The actual homeless people are being treated as the problem.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

David Fraser

Senior Member.
t: 5, member: 1029"]Yep... still a bit worrying that they passed it beforehand and it wasn't a rushed decision, it was well researched, funded, planned and organised over months as can be seen from the link

http://www.columbiasc.net/depts/cit...mergency_Homeless_Response_13_August_2013.pdf

Which shows the timeline on the last page.

Basically, they turned a praiseworthy effort in helping the homeless, into a fiasco by confining them and threatening arrest for non compliance.

Also the numbers are well out as there are around 1500, homeless in the catchment area and only room for 420 in the center.[/quote]
There is always a distance between actual experience and political will when it comes to homeless policy. Why pick on the US when, frankly, the UK is worse. Forcibly moving people on or face arrest yet offer no alternative. To me it seems here a badly planned alternative was offered.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Considering they have nothing to do with "FEMA", reality would suggest "not at all"
'A rose is a rose no matter what you call it' I wasn't looking to get into whether FEMA stuck its name on it but whether it was a generic FEMA type camp. You could call it a holiday camp if you wanted but it would still be what it is.

'A detention center for the homeless'.
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
'A rose is a rose no matter what you call it' I wasn't looking to get into whether FEMA stuck its name on it but whether it was a generic FEMA type camp. You could call it a holiday camp if you wanted but it would still be what it is.

'A detention center for the homeless'.

But its not even that:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/04/columbia-criminalizing-homelessness_n_3866273.html

So the characterization or exaggeration of anything with the hyperbolic "FEMA camp" connotation is entirely inaccurate.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
But its not even that:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/04/columbia-criminalizing-homelessness_n_3866273.html

So the characterization or exaggeration of anything with the hyperbolic "FEMA camp" connotation is entirely inaccurate.
Ok, be pedantic if you wish... it was a detention center until they back tracked... and rightfully so that they back tracked.

I don't understand why they cannot have it as a voluntary shelter and help people get back on track... that would make more sense and be more ethical as well as charitable.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Ok, be pedantic if you wish... it was a detention center until they back tracked... and rightfully so that they back tracked.
Because it's just a small municipality, pushing for a solution, they veered towards the illegal, so had to back off.

And I don't think even under the original plan they would be "detained". There would just be rules about foot traffic. If they break the rules, they would be not allowed to stay. They would not, however, be allowed to stay on city streets.

Town's and cities have always tried to deal with their homeless populations in a variety of ways, from helpful to heavy handed.

Round here in the winter the homeless get a shuttle from the shelter to the beach, where they get free food, and endless panhandling opportunities, and then they get a shuttle back to the shelter for the night. In the summer they just sleep on the beach. There's no walk ups. But nobody is detained.

http://pacificpalisades.patch.com/g.../p/westside-winter-shelter-opens-this-weekend
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
Pedantic nothing...it even as it was initially proposed...they had options- they could leave Columbia altogether or get arrested and go to jail or go to the shelter. Once at the shelter, they could leave- just not on foot.

The "FEMA camp" connotation was purely designed to twist the facts to purvey an agenda.

This was a community based shelter run by civic and charitable groups WITHOUT support of local law enforcement.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...essnes-columbia-south-carolina_n_3825052.html


No FEDs, no concentration camp, no agenda other than removing a perceived threat to downtown economic development.

...and only 240 beds at that.

Misguided- sure...First step in the roll out of mass FEMA camp deportations...no.
 
Last edited:

solrey

Senior Member.
Ok, be pedantic if you wish... it was a detention center until they back tracked... and rightfully so that they back tracked.

I don't understand why they cannot have it as a voluntary shelter and help people get back on track... that would make more sense and be more ethical as well as charitable.
It was NEVER a detention center because it was and still IS a voluntary shelter, specifically a winter shelter operated by Christ Central Ministries and one of the primary issues was whether or not to open their winter shelter early. They didn't back track either, they never approved Runyan's proposal in the first place, despite Runyan's initial personal opinion.

Police Chief Ruben Santiago said...

But I don't suppose you'll let a few facts get in the way of your spin, will ya Oxy?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
And isn't the rejection and condemnation of this proposal a sign that we are NOT moving towards the Gulags?
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
That made for very depressing reading. The problem of homelessness allowed to get to such a point that only when business leaders start complaining that it's bad for business does anything happen. The solution seems, at best, a temporary one, and not something that will look at why so many people are homeless. I wonder how many empty properties there are in that part of the world, and if they could be put to some better use.

Doesn't strike me as a FEMA camp thingy though. For a start, it appears to be the reaction of business owners in one city, with nothing federal about it. Also, it appears to be a shelter, and nothing more. Big capitals for the 'same laws apply to all citizens'. The fact that so many charitable agencies will be working on this plan would seem a fail-safe against the sort of Police State incarceration you seem to be implying.

Still, very sad. The actual homeless people are being treated as the problem.
Yes it is very sad and depressing and I find it worrying that it got as far as it did on the basis set out.

Authority acting on behalf of business doesn't make it a FEMA camp thingy? I would have to disagree with that. Corporation U.S.A, wants people out of the way and out of sight seems pretty much like a thin end of the wedge to me.

They are hardly going to have cattle trucks, chains and death camps overnight, (unless there is a calamitous event to trigger it).

'Same laws apply to all' are a deflection and legal loophole. It is a fallacy and deliberate deception, which makes the whole thing even more devious and even opens it up to escalation at a later date if they wished.

I wouldn't put too much store in the 'charitable agencies' being a fail safe either.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/05/magdalene-laundries-ireland-state-guilt
 

Trigger Hippie

Senior Member.
"emergency homeless response" is to "FEMA camp" what "9/11 dust cloud" is to "pyroclastic flow"

Do we really have to go through this again?
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
Pedantic nothing...it even as it was initially proposed...they had options- they could leave Columbia altogether or get arrested and go to jail or go to the shelter. Once at the shelter, they could leave- just not on foot.

The "FEMA camp" connotation was purely designed to twist the facts to purvey an agenda.

This was a community based shelter run by civic and charitable groups WITHOUT support of local law enforcement.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...essnes-columbia-south-carolina_n_3825052.html


No FEDs, no concentration camp, no agenda other than removing a perceived threat to downtown economic development.

...and only 240 beds at that.

Misguided- sure...First step in the roll out of mass FEMA camp deportations...no.
Yeah, they call that 'Hobson's Choice' in the U.K... No choice at all.
'Get outa town or else'

Smoking gun.

Hope you never find yourself homeless and resource less SR. Charity can be very cold.... but hey never mind just keep militarizing the police and all will end well. :rolleyes:
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
Authority acting on behalf of business doesn't make it a FEMA camp thingy? I would have to disagree with that. Corporation U.S.A, wants people out of the way and out of sight seems pretty much like a thin end of the wedge to me.
What? How does a city council responding to concerns of its constituents make it a "FEMA camp thingy"

This came from small business owners on mainstreet- not big bad "Corporation USA"- more hyperbole.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Laws that effectively criminalize homelessness are nothing new.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-homelessness_legislation
Where it has come to the courts, the higher courts have seemed to favor the homeless. Most famously with Jones vs. City of Los Angeles:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...&as_sdt=2003&case=4259488333208893136&scilh=0
 

solrey

Senior Member.
It was just a proposal introduced by one council member attempting to address the concerns of small business owners and the council by their own admission did not approve the plan in the first place, plus the chief of police has stated that they can't and won't detain people who are doing nothing illegal. Spin, Oxy, spin... twist and shout, comeon comeon comeon comeon Oxy now, come on hyperbole it out.
 

Oxymoron

Banned
Banned
It was just a proposal introduced by one council member attempting to address the concerns of small business owners and the council by their own admission did not approve the plan in the first place, plus the chief of police has stated that they can't and won't detain people who are doing nothing illegal. Spin, Oxy, spin... twist and shout, comeon comeon comeon comeon Oxy now, come on hyperbole it out.
It hyperboles itself.

We have too many unfortunate people who have been dispossessed by corporate greed, conned by sophisticated ponzi scheme... what shall we do with them? I know, round them up, drive them out of town or force them into a 'detention center'.... Yeah, yeah, yeah, going good... Oh, those pesky civil rights people have foiled our despicable plot.... let's backpedal. Metabunk Meta Members will back us up and say 'it's all a storm in a teacup and misunderstanding'.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
You've got to be kidding. You really think this don't you?
Pointing out the reality of the proposal equals advocating for the forced roundup of the homeless to you.
You need your own radio show.
Then you can call us all traitors to humanity or something.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
It hyperboles itself.

We have too many unfortunate people who have been dispossessed by corporate greed, conned by sophisticated ponzi scheme... what shall we do with them? I know, round them up, drive them out of town or force them into a 'detention center'.... Yeah, yeah, yeah, going good... Oh, those pesky civil rights people have foiled our despicable plot.... let's backpedal. Metabunk Meta Members will back us up and say 'it's all a storm in a teacup and misunderstanding'.
Oxy, please don't ascribe things to people that they did not actually say. Let's stick to the facts.

I think you need to take some time off. You constant misrepresenting of other people here is becoming disruptive. Take a couple of days to think it over.
 

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
Let's break this painstakingly down. A FEMA camp as has been presented by others, is basically a Nazi death camp/concentration camp on American soil in the 21st Century. That would at least imply forced groupings of people for political or racial crimes. They would then go there for hard labor, horrid food/medical attention, and no probable option of release. Disease and starvation were rampant in Nazi concentration camps as well as Soviet gulags.

Now compare this to a homeless camp to feed, shelter, and take care of the homeless population in a humane way (note that isn't a smile and wink to Sonderbehandlung of the homeless). They are fed, given a warm, safe place to sleep. This sounds advantageous. And sorry but cities have rights to do this. Most people/businesses aren't a fan of large amounts of idle homeless people panhandling everywhere. How those people got there is immaterial. For each homeless person there is probably a different story. Some might be homeless for no reason, some might have succumbed to drugs, some might be there by accident. The fact is some cities try to "solve" the problem. Some of those solutions are good spirited, some are mean spirited. This one looks to be kind and well intentioned, but looks bad.

However there is no similarity to this and an actual concentration camp. Please don't cheapen the memory of the Holocaust. We've had this conversation before.
 
Top