He did one better...he gave that speech in New Hampshire the Friday before Irene hit.....you just can't make this stuff up!

Postscript: Not that Galveston losing its economic clout is directly attributable to FEMA action or inaction, but I do wonder how he could make such comments without that context.

...and full disclosure: a very longtime ago (before getting into and eventually out of the restaurant business - hence the name) I worked for FEMA.

He's right about FEMA. I just watched a video the other day where they was writing down the license plates of everyone that used the post office. When someone with a camera asked them why they arrested him.

What good does that info do? Its just as bad as the DHS arresting people at court houses that hand out jury nullification notices to people that freely want them.

Stop the Police State.

1. Detaining someone and arresting them are not the same. Someone being put in handcuffs and moved is not the same as being arrested. Unless they were charged with a crime (so given a citation) and/or processed in jail, they were not arrested.

2. You are assuming you know why they (the FEMA workers) were writing down that information. It may have been they were investigating something and they temporarily detained the guy with the camera because he was interfering with an investigation . You have to remember that just because you don't know what's going on doesn't mean that there's no reason behind the action.

3. I don't know that anybody is advocating a police state. I certainly do not. But I do have many friends who work within the government and the behavior they engage in will seem obscure to anyone who doesn't know what their project is. And they are not always at liberty to disclose what it is they are doing. The majority of people who work for the government are hard working and loyal, good people. They just want to help and they do a damn good job most of the time. They have flaws (like we all do) and there certainly is more corruption and politics w/in the government than I (or most of the federal employees who have to put up with such nonsense) would prefer. But overall the job they do is incredible.

4. Do you have any evidence to support any of Paul's claims? He provided none in his statement so I am just wondering, since you're agreeing with him, if you can elaborate on how he has came to his conclusion (or how you've came to yours).

Your advocating for a police state by defending the unconstitutional search and seizure of your fellow Americans by the government. I call being handcuffed and put in a car and taken somewhere else to be questioned as being arrested even kidnapped. There is a reason they drop charges or don't press any its because the courts throw it out. They do it to harass people into being sheeps.

FEMA gets in the way they slow aid down, ban groups from helping and even put people in poisonous trailers and told them if they wanted to keep the trailer how they can trick the safety inspectors into thinking its safe.

The company I work for was given passes to skip check points by FEMA we shipped 15 trucks full of water, food and ice and they sat there for the first two weeks. During those 2 weeks FEMA workers used some of the ice and water for themselves. Two weeks of aid just sitting there before it was handed out. Not to mention all the stuff we don't know about that politicians like Ron Paul do. He has always been honest. Him and Dennis Kucinich are the most honest Politicians we have.

If you interfere with an official investigation you waive your right to privacy and they are allowed to search your personal property (what you have on you) as well as detain you and interrogate you as it pertains to your interference. If you're not charged with anything then you are not arrested, and no it is not kidnapping. This is the cameraperson's fault for interrupting an official investigation. If you are asked to leave and you don't you failed to comply and you waive your rights. The Supreme Court has upheld that rule now for almost 100 years. You're free to disagree with it (sure), but constitutionally there isn't really a substantial argument to say it doesn't support the constitution or a "free" state. Again you're assuming reason here when it comes to why charges are or aren't levied and again you do so without evidence. Most of the time when charges are dropped it's because the person investigating you doesn't want to pursue legal action. You must remember in order to pursue legal action takes dozens of hours of legal work and takes time out of what is otherwise important. Sometimes they will drop charges due to lack of evidence, but 9/10 that isn't the reason. In either case this does not equate to innocence of the person being detained.

Do you have any evidence? It seems you like to make accusations without a lot of substance...but perhaps you are right. If you are why levy the empty threat that's a serious story and should be shed light. Please do so. Otherwise I have to follow the facts and there aren't any that support you (that I am saying). What there are facts of is that civilians often times do not understand why they are not allowed to help in a situation. The government does this to protect you. You don't like it, however, because you don't know all the circumstances or what danger you're putting yourself in. And the government is aware of this and tries to negotiate between the two. Hey if someone is dying in a fire I want to rush in and help that person. But then guess what? Now the firefighters have to save both me and the victim. Now I've taken a bad situation and made it worse, even thought I thought I was doing the right thing and was helping. Again you cannot assume why someone is doing something. Now if there's an official investigation done that shows definitively that FEMA prevented people from acting w/o reason then yeah I will believe that (and provide such if you have). But otherwise, again, these are just baseless accusations and must be dismissed as such.

I like Ron Paul and I am not attacking him personally. I am saying his statement, like yours, assumes what is going on rather than bases it on factual evidence. Taking an example like Katrina- we have actual evidence showing where the emergency workers failed and where they did a good job. One of the areas where they did right was in keeping people out of certain areas and not allowing people to leave areas like the superdome. Yet if you had asked the reporters at Fox News not allowing people to leave the superdome was wrong. Yet if they had they would have wondered and no supplies would've gotten to them, they would've put themselves in danger, and many more people would have died. Do you see what I'm getting at? It isn't always so clear cut. A. FEMA workers in the area using supplies that are meant for emergency services and victims...ugh I am not seeing where the complaint is here? B. what was the reason for the delay? If you can provide that, that might point to evidence of FEMA negligence. But just saying well they didn't hand it out when I thought it should be isn't reason enough.

http://deadlinelive.info/2011/08/24/chris-geo-is-arrested-by-homeland-security/

I do not believe the arresting officer was acting nefariously but rather this was a result of being uneducated in the law or simply “hearing” that some kind of law exists where a person is prohibited from filming a federal building or must show ID on demand. The officer handling the arrest treated me with the same respect I showed him and may even be a future listener. This is an example of why we must 1. Understand our rights and the law 2. Never fear, for fear is the mind killer 3. Stay completely respectful and polite at all times and 4. Approach these people with love, kindness, understanding and respect.

He was not approached by, nor handcuffed by, FEMA officials. The DHS placed him in detention and no his rights were not violated.

Police have every right to detain people who they feel are non-compliant if they feel that this means the person may escalate the situation (i.e. commit a crime, and yes they may do so pre-emptive to an actual crime being committed). In this instance it appears that the police felt that Chris's behavior warranted detention because, I am assuming, his behavior made them believe he had ulterior motives. Specifically because Chris did not volunteer his ID up front they suspected he was not being honest to the police (which the police officer was trying to explain, although incoherently). Chris is correct that police do not have the right to ask for ID unless they suspect you of doing something illegal or suspect that you are a witness to a situation. However, as the guard was explaining, while Chris had the right to refuse he did not feel comfortable with the situation. Chris left without the police officer giving him "consent" to leave which immediately meant Chris was fleeing the scene and this was why he was detained. FTR Chris is wrong when he states that the female officer saying "comply or don't" was a request. What she meant was that he can either stop resisting or he will be charged with resisting arrest. See you have to be very, very careful when you watch events like this because the person who is being charged will always slant the situation to their benefactor. Chris is also somewhat wrong about the consent to search, although he is correct that they were trying to trick him into consenting search. He is wrong, however, that if they actually felt he had a weapon or drugs or anything else of weapons that he would have to consent search. He was already within the realm of probable cause, which he does not tell you in the video. The officer messes up when he states that he was going to arrest Chris (this was a lie) and you are right, in this instance, he was letting Chris go because he realizes he does not have enough evidence to prosecute. While probable cause is in effect (which is why he's searching Chris) unless the officer finds drugs or weapons Chris cannot be charged with a crime at this point. Technically speaking Chris has not "failed to comply with a federal officer" because he willingly "surrendered" when the female officer asked him to. But yeah overall this police officer behaved rather poorly. I am not quite sure what this has to do with FEMA, however.

Oh and thank you for that GR. I tried to search for it and while I got a bunch of YouTube vids i didn't find any that had FEMA arrests. Now I see why. =)

We are going to "detain and question" you because there is always a chance you might commit a crime.

Keep defending the Police State.

Yep like when I have wires in my pocket and I'm carrying a battery and I say @!$%# you mr. copper. And then it's found out I have fertilizer in my trunk, among other bomb components. Let's think about that again, ya?

This guy had none of those things. Just to be sure next time they should water board him, starve him and deprive him of sleep just to be sure.

Those who would give up Essential Liberty
to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

~ Benjamin Franklin

46 Americans on average per year die from terrorism and most of them are outside of the U.S. Even if it was 2 million I would not want to give up my freedom.

You have to understand I don't live my life in fear. I don't look at everyone as a possible terrorist, I Prefer to be free and not have the government snatch me up whenever they feel like it. People like you are why we have the Patriot Act. Stand up for yourself and fellow Americans.

Oh I live my life in fear and all this? hahahahaha OK now you're just being insulting. Rather than actually answer to the accusations you've presented, you'd rather make an appeal to pathos. Sorry, but I am not silly enough to engage an appeal to pathos argument. Reframe your argument, try to stick with the facts, and then we might discuss such important issues, hmm?

Rhazes, I think you are confusing "liberty" with "convenience." A person who inserts him/herself into a scene where officials are trying to work gives up their right to "convenience," defined here as walking away without being suspected of involvement. The person HAD the liberty to walk away from the scene, but gave it up voluntarily. Ignorance of the matter is unfortunate, but doesn't erase the responsibility of the participating officials to clear the person from involvement.

The company I work for was given passes to skip check points by FEMA we shipped 15 trucks full of water, food and ice and they sat there for the first two weeks. During those 2 weeks FEMA workers used some of the ice and water for themselves. Two weeks of aid just sitting there before it was handed out.

FEMA is not perfect, and it's a sign that it most certainly needs new leadership and protocols if it's doing that - but it certainly doesn't mean that FEMA should be thrown to the side.

having a federal emergency organization in place is smart...not dumb.

The guy in that YouTube video "confronting" a security guard... is a butthat. He rolls up in his hooptie revealing nothing but how little information he has to go on, no idea who he should talk to, no idea what's inside, expecting access, talking 1st amendment trash with a mall cop, throwing out insults like "NWO lapdog" at a guy who is not likely to know anything about what's going on at the post office. He says he's media, but he gets upset about being asked for credentials. Yeah, dude... totally showing us what a police state is all about!

*Solidarity fist bump*

No Fran, don't you get it? Apparently because there's a 2nd Amendment you and I should be out purchasing thousands of guns in order to "exercise our rights." Apparently there's not supposed to be a difference between being a jackass and defending one's rights. Oy vey.

Mouzer, it took me 2 days to back away from that Chris Geo mess. He's apparently some kind of DJ with anarchy cred... Don't get me started though because the number of ways in which he is an idiot would take me into a long rant which nobody should have to read.

A DJ with anarchy cred...

If I had to guess this translates into middle-aged man who lives at home with his mom? ;-) not that there's anything wrong with that, of course ;-)

They are having a drought right now while their governor is out campaigning as is Mr. Paul.

You are correct. Obama should make it a point to go into these red states and personally hand out emergency aid checks with a lot of media coverage. That would really annoy the Republicans and Tea Party.

Oh, but then he'd be "wasting time" instead of "running the country", which is something he does that they also hate, by the way. Sigh. 'Taint fair. Can't win when you're damned if you do or don't, even before you do or don't.

Don't really joke about that :/ I live in Ron Paul's district, and the man actually flat out refused federal aid when Ike hit our district awhile back. I think he's voted in congress against aid for Mississippi flood relief (the reason: they live in coastal area. The irony: Paul's district is a coastal area).... I can't remember. I don't really want to imagine what he'd do in the event we have a Katrina sized monster hit us.

Tell me WHY people keep re-electing this fool?

Unfortunately people get taken in by Republicans and Tea Party Candidates because they use God in their campaigns and most people believe they wouldnt take Gods name in vane because of the offense but these Republicans dont really believe or live to the standards they portray look at Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann

not to sound to off the wall.

but just who was in charge of FEMA then? oh that right good job brownie. so you are right there was no one in charge of FEMA who could lead their way out of a open sided room.

instead of looking at the small picture (of course that`s hard to do if you are part of the small picture), and see just how far FEMA has come with good leadership at its helm.

While I woud totally agree that there probably is way too much paperwork during a disaster. I would also say that when an audit is done after a you remove the paperwork burden you will be complaining about all the fraud and waste. So which is it? Some paperwork or the potential for fraud and waste.

You can't have it both ways!

Republicans are unable to connect the dots between government incompetence and their own lack of competence. You need only look at the current House of Representatives.

Katrina was a terrible disaster in so many ways and it was not handled terribly well. There was a lot of corruption at the top of the many government organizations sent in to help. What you're confusing here is that the workers who followed orders are bad people or that the organization can/does not serve any purpose. Filling out paperwork, while obnoxious, has to do with keeping records of what's happening (as Frank pointed out). If you don't keep records then you don't have help. There also, sometimes, are reasons (even if they seem obscure) as to why they prevent private organizations from helping. Perhaps because there were health reasons related that may have caused long term problems? Perhaps because they didn't want volunteers being hurt? The list goes on and on. The problem I see here is that you are presuming things about an agency w/o bothering to find any supporting facts. Often times government work serves it's full purpose, but does so in ways that to 1 individual observer seem strange. Now perhaps FEMA was wrong- this is also entirely plausible. The problem I can't make that judgement call w/o having thoroughly investigated the situation. Now if you'd like to provide your evidence to explain why FEMA was wrong please do so. But just saying "they wouldn't let me help" doesn't really explain the situation.

And a Texan was in the white house with many cabinet members also from Texas. I really think we should let them secede.

The Republicans have historically tried to gut FEMA... at it's strongest which was during the Clinton Administration and run by James Witt, FEMA was well-funded and able to respond quickly and effectively. Under Bush, FEMA was once again gutted, put under Homeland Security, and run by a Bush crony who had zero experience in emergency management. Don't blame this very important and necessary program for its faults, blame those who don't help it do its job effectively and hinder its ability.

FEMA does not act until told to do so, like the military, orders are needed. FEMA did not get the orders until it was to late when Katrina struck the gulf coast. No on was in charge or cared. The administration and Brownie were the joke and the people suffered.

The purported choice of paperwork versus fraud is untrue. There has been a number of disasters before and after Katrina and the people who were affected did not complain about the paperwork. Katrina was a man made disaster compounded by incompetence. But that is what happens when you have cronyism and incompetence by the same people who complain about the government being unable to do anything right at the same time they are running the government. It was a self fulfilling prophecy.

The FEMA that existed during Katrina, was, truthfully speaking, the FEMA of the BUSH Administration. FEMA does not work when Republicans are in power. Of course, with Obama, it was turned around and is the best agency of first-responders on the scene (aside from local law enforcement/rescue).

It was the BUSH FEMA that was putting people in poisonous trailers. When are people going to realize that Republicans do anything they can to destroy things that are good for the country as a whole by only reamining true to their own wealthy constituents (and not so wealthy ones that are just completely ignorant of how their own party is now trying to raise taxes on the middle and poor class instead of raising taxes on the rich).

Katrina was a man made disaster yes, but unfortunately the Bush Administration did not make Katrina the disaster it was. When Katrina hit the response was slow and terrible (which can be tied to lack of leadership on behalf of the administration). However the reason why Katrina was as devastating as it was lies solely on the US Army Corps of Engineers. They set up the levees looooooong long before Katrina ever hit. So it was a failure on both parts, just making sure we get blame correctly pinned.

Don't forget to add how under funded our road, bridges, levee's, electric grid etc etc projects are under funded. We also have a dire need for engineers to come up with better ways to improve our infrastructure in general. Repulicans and tea party people don't want to pass on debt to kids and grandkids but they don't mind passing on a crippled infrastructure.

but the area knew about the levees and it's needing of change over a year before katrina hit. the area knew the infrastructure of that area was not strong enough - they also knew the seasons was changing and stronger storms a few years down the road were coming and the leadership of that area did nothing.

I was not excusing the Bush Administration or local officials. I was just making sure we included USACE in the blame because often times, since people hear/see the word "Army" in their name, people forget/neglect to hold them accountable. USACE had a huge role to play in the disaster that was Katrina and they should not be given forgiveness for it. Not that people who work for USACE are bad- like I said this had to do with the people who direct all these different departments. The leadership failed and then it became a domino effect where everyone else failed to respond by proxy.

Second

yes and its a big white bear.

LOL