It's long, so grab some coffee, tea or whatever, hunker down and take it all in.

http://www.kitcomm.com/pub/discussion/Alert27.html

-- Bingo (discover@rof.net), August 13, 1998

Answers

Thanks for posting the address. I quickly read through it and it was well worth it. - Scary is right. Hard to believe something like this could happen.

-- Jolann Leifer (Jolann.Leifer@PSS.Boeing.com), August 14, 1998.

If you believe that, I've got some swamp-land in Florida I'd like to sell you.

-- Buddy (buddy@bellatlantic.net), August 14, 1998.

Well, I'm surprised it took this long. Noth has been getting more and more shrill in the past few months about the obvious end of civilization due to Y2K and how the Evil Empire (a.k.a. the U.S. government) is going to take advantage of it to enslave us all.

However, this is not really new material for him. This is an updated version of his spiel from the '70s with newer references thrown in for good measure and using Y2K as the triggering event for his scenario. Last time it was OPEC's pricing and supply policies.

I'm with Buddy on this one. Buy this line and I'll sell you two bridges of your choice. Yes, the price of freedom is eternal vigilence, and some paranoia is in fact justified. But this moves beyond paranioa into hysteria. This is WAYYYYY over the edge.

All IMHO, of course.

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), August 14, 1998.

Those of you who greet this warning with open skepticism owe it to yourselves - and others subject to your influence - to do your homework before you pass judgement on G.N.'s scholarship or sanity.

Are you disputing the existence of the Executive Orders themselves? Or do believe that the results of Y2k won't be severe enough to result in such emergency measures? Just what don't you understand?

Or is it just that you don't want to believe it could be possible? Well, neither do I, but ignorance is no longer an option for me. I've read these executive orders, and the historical precedents for their activation. I suggest you do the same while you still can. North is not making this up, people; would that he were.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beeswax.com), August 14, 1998.

All that is needed for freedom to fail is for good men to do nothing, but I don't see that happening here in America. Yes I know those laws are on the books, and as a freedom loving American I find them very disturbing. Power is as addictive as crack, those with it will fight hard to keep it.

Freedom is addictive as well, and although we are losing much of it every time congress meets or Clinton signs another Executive Order, I'll bet on the fact that there are too many of us freedom loving Americans willing to "Live free or die" for Gary's scenario to play out.

Remember that one third of the colonists wanted to be rid of the ties to England. One third wanted British rule to continue. One third didn't care too much one way or the other.

Even if our government was to make a power grab along these lines, it is my hope that at least one third of us would resist to the death such nazi tactics, I know I would. If I am wrong about that then go ahead and plant me six feet under, 'cause there would be no sense in living a slave's life.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), August 14, 1998.

Here is what scares me about Gary North. I could only skim and clip a few quotes because it makes me sick to even read North's babble. ---

"These nearly-secret laws are the results of a series of "Executive Orders," an ill-defined area of presidential power that enables the chief executive to set aside the Constitution of the United States of America and the other two branches of the government in a moment of crisis -- a crisis that he is free to define and a moment that the President is free to name."

--- North doesn't tell the whole story here. "Nearly-secret" ??? We've seen most of these Exec. Orders imposed before. We know what they are. Also, the President is not free to name the moment. There must be an emergency and it is subject to review by Congress and the Supreme Court. ---

"These awesome powers and their troubling uses are not theoretical. The President's willingness to use these powers to achieve his political, economic, or security ends is well demonstrated in recent American history."

--- That is true, the powers have been used. But there have been legitimate reasons for their use and the end result was not a Fascist state. ---

"Congress debates everything. Usually, it debates things to death. In a Year 2000 emergency, there will not be time for debate. So, emergency orders will become the means of government. It will be government by emergency."

--- Sarcastic speculation. He is jumping to conclusions and playing with people's emotions. ---

"Now we face y2k. The Millennium Bug will hit all of our critical infrastructures, all over the world, in a 24-hour period. Everything is at risk. Everything must be defended. But there is no technical defense. So, we should expect the Federal Government to begin imposing these emergency orders when it becomes clear to the leadership that y2k is inevitable and completely destabilizing."

--- "There is no technical defense." There may not be 1 single silver bullet, but there will be thousands of solutions. ---

"We should assume that we will see many of these orders imposed before January 1, 2000."

--- Trying to start a panic early Mr. North? I'm afraid panics *will* be a problem because of scare-mongers like this. ---

"The Key to Fascism"

--- Mr. North seems to have an underlying theory about American society that is guiding his analysis. He is desperately trying to make the facts fit the theory. ---

"The Millennium Bug is the trigger that every president since Woodrow Wilson has been waiting for."

---

Now that is the biggest crock of sh*t I've heard yet.

---

-- Buddy (buddy@bellatlantic.net), August 14, 1998.

Buddy,

You've got yourself worked up in a lather here, and I don't see much rationality in your "response" to North. You seem to be saying that because we've only flirted with facism (concentration camps) there has been no American facist state and there never could be. Just doesn't follow. Huey Long (shortly before he was assassinated) said: "Sure we could have facism in the USA; only it would have to be called something else." Again, everyone, READ those Executive Orders. Do they describe anything but a totalitarian state? Do they contain ANY provision for an eventual return to constitutional government? What about the provisions for relocation of families, drafting civilian labor, confiscating property? READ. Buddy, you are getting angry at Gary North because he's telling you a truth that you don't want to hear - or don't want others to hear. Gary North is not a "scare-monger;" his huge personal investment of time and money (into his Y2k website) may be responsible for saving many lives and fortunes. You lay the blame for any future panic on people who are trying to alert the population - not on the CEOs and bureaucrats who have refused to deal with the problem and are now lying to us about having it all under control? They sold us out, and now you are blaming the victims, and those trying to aid the victims. Do you think FEMA won't knock on doors and order people away? They've done it before, locally, in hurricane disaster situations. And their multi-billion-dollar black budget has allowed them to prepare for similar operations on a national scale. Remember the Iran-Contra hearings, where Sen. Brooks, TX questioned Ollie North about his participation in REX 84, the FEMA plan for rounding up and "interning" hundreds of thousands of "dissident" US civilians concentration camps (particularly relevant to the matter then, as now, in question: circumventing congress and the constitution and creating a parallel, secret military government)? Remember when Sen. Inouye(sp?), HI butted in and warned Brooks that the question "touched on matters of national security" and had to be discussed in chambers? There's a hell of a lot more to this picture than meets the eye. Do your homework before you lash out. Republics have turned into Empires before, and from where I'm standing, it looks like ours will be next.

E.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beezwax.com), August 14, 1998.

< Or is it just that you don't want to believe it could be possible? Well, neither do I, but ignorance is no longer an option for me. I've read these executive orders, and the historical precedents for their activation. I suggest you do the same while you still can. North is not making this up, people; would that he were. >>

North is using one of the classic techniques of the charlitan scaremonger: Present easily verifiable facts presented in the most negative possible language, then present your conclusion. Notice that the conclusion doesn't have to have support from the facts. It's the literary version of a slight of hand trick. You make the mark focus on the spectacular presentation of ordinary things. Then, while they are busy focusing on the showmanship, you slip something in while they aren't looking and make them believe that something happened that really didn't. And, he is focusing on a narrow audiance: his schtick only works on those scared ka-ka-less over Y2K to begin with. Of course, he has been working fear quite some time to slowly instill that fear.

Do all of these executive orders exist? Of course. And despite North's scary langauge they are hardly secret. Heck, many of the ones he cited have appeared here at one time or another, and all are available online and through almost any public library. All one has to do is to look. Did this country inter Japaneese citizens in concentration camps during WWII? Yes, and it's a black mark that the U.S. will be living with for a very long time.

Could these EOs be used in ways not intended? Of course they can. Could they be used to impose the rather bizarre form of martial law put forth by North? You have a better chance of hitting the Powerball jackpot two weeks in a row.

I found most of this little diatribe to be rather sad, and expect that with it's publication North will now lose most of the credibility he has with regard to Y2K. At least I hope so, and I say this only two days after defending him in this forum. Sad, really. I don't question North's scholarship. Indeed, it is obviously of high caliber. What I question are his motives and objectivity, and when you compare his religious writings with his recent Y2K writings, it becomes clearer and clearer what his motiviations are. He has a religious agenda and he is using Y2K more and more to promote it. But, clever fellow he is, he avoids tying the two together directly.

I will admit, though, that I did find one part of his rant so funny I laughed for a couple of minutes. The thought of any senior military officer in the country identifying themselves as "Colonel Whatshisname from FEMA" is hysterical. I can't picture any senior officer managing to do that with a straight face. "Well gee, the Army didn't have the chutzpah to enslave the people, so I joined up with FEMA and now I'm a storm trooper just like I always wanted to be when I was a kid!" Give me a break, Gary.

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), August 14, 1998.

Oh, by the way, Huey Long was quite possibly the closest thing to a facist dictator this country has ever had when he was governor of Louisiana. People quite literally lived and died at his whim, and he had "memorial" bridges and statues dedicated to himself while he was still in office. When he left the governor's mansion for the U.S. Senate he saw to it a puppet was made governor to replace him, and he continued to run the affairs of the state by telephone from his office in Washington. Perhaps you might want to consider a different example when quoting politicians on facism.

When he was shot he was reported to say "But why would anyone want to shoot me?" Even his most ardent of supporters could name a long list of reasons, and only Huey actually seemed surprised that it had happened.

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), August 14, 1998.

I see we have the usual right vs left commentaries on this one. Folks, the one thing internet has given us is the EASY golden highway to information. We read, we digest, we mull and consider, we read some more, and we start to see a pattern emerging.

For those of you who think this is just a bunch of hooey, I submit to you that there is credible evidence that something is "amiss". Many folks are reading quite a bit of this type information and are starting to be concerned that there is indeed truth to it. The problem is you are not going to read it in the New York Times and you are not going to get confirmation from Dan Rather. Please give the majority of the readers who "feel" something is wrong a little credit.

For those of you who are getting paranoid over the submissions of Gary North type folks, I ask that you be guided by instinct and not fear. Fear begats fear and it renders us incapable of rational consideration of the issues. I personally believe there is something wrong happening around us. I also think there is a right and a wrong way to handle it. No matter the outcome, we all need to keep a level head when y2k begins to bear down on us. In the end, my hope is that the majority of us will not go into this being deceived, by anyone.

-- Bingo (discover@rof.net), August 14, 1998.

E,

The true threat to liberty comes from the death of a thousand cuts, none of which is fatal alone. Slowly whittle away at the Bill of rights and Constitution just a nick at a time, take a piece here, snip a little there. Nothing too painful all at once.

Far too many people would revolt from an all encompassing power grab, I do not see it happening that way. I don't beleive that the entire military would happily follow orders in that case. Most of those fine folks joined up because they love what this country stands for. Do you honestly think they will all join in throwing away the Constitution they are sworn to defend?

Are there abuses of power by some governmental agencies? Absolutely. Do some people in government stand up to those abuses? Again yes.

Would you fight and possibly die to stop the scenario envisioned by Gary North? Again I'll swear that I could not sit by and see that happen, regardless of the consequence to my physical well being. How many of you out there would be willingly lead to the slaughter?

BUT, how many are willing to die because their magazine can now only hold 10 rounds or less? Who will put their life on the line over unfair zoning laws, or any of the thousands of other tiny snips here and there? People will not risk life and limb for the little losses of freedom, at least not any people that I'm aware of.

Our founding fathers risked their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor over issues that would warrant a collective yawn today.

It's the little things that will get us.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), August 14, 1998.

Seems to me that those who believe y2k will be a catastrphe also can easily see martial law and government control of infrastructure etc. Those who believe y2k will only be a speed bump like Neuhardt will laugh at the idea of martial law and implementation of existing executive orders.

I believe there will be a declared national emergency. What the gov. will do is anybody's guess. North is allowed his opinion. If he is right it seems to me there is nothing I can do about it...except to say...damn North was right.

BB

-- BB (time2b@concerned.com), August 15, 1998.

2 things. 1) I never heard of the exec orders till I got on to the net, which is where most people are today, so I consider that nearly secret info. 2)Think about how old the military technology that you know of is, and ask your self whats out there that we the public have no idea about, and what else might we might know nothing about.

-- Vic (Light_Servant@yahoo.com), August 15, 1998.

2 things. 1) I never heard of the exec orders till I got on to the net, which is where most people are today, so I consider that nearly secret info. 2)Think about how old the military technology that you know of is, and ask your self whats out there that we the public have no idea about, and what else might we might know nothing about.

-- Vic (Light_Servant@yahoo.com), August 15, 1998.

I haven't read the article mentioned here, but I do read Gary North's site on a regular basis, so I'm sure I'll get to it, eventually.

The issue that caught my attention here in this (and others) discussion, is the "denial" attitude that so many people seem to have. This weird "that could NEVER happen" attitude.

For some goofy reason, people here about some outrageous plan, or idea, and their first reaction is to dis-believe and claim it will never come to pass, it's just too ludicrous or outrageous.

Stop and think for a minute, however. If we could somehow bring back people who were living say.... just 50 years ago, and let them see our world today, they'd probably all die all over again from shock. I'd venture to guess there were ALOT of those people back then, with the same attitude about these kinds of things.

Just to name a few issues off the top of my head:

euthanasia (sp?) abortion (and a president who is pro-killing babies) homosexual liberty (is that an oxymoron?)

If we could somehow ask citizens of the USA, from 50 years ago (now no longer living) if these things would ever be possible, I'd bet they'd all say something like... "NO WAY, this is sick, this could NEVER happen in our wonderful U.S. of A.!"

But then - it has happened - and is by and large 100% accepted by society.

It's a totally different moral climate now, than it was just 50 years ago, and things going on now, are whitewashed, candy-coated, shoved in our faces and told to us "this is okay, this is legal now".

I really dont see why it's so hard for people to believe that some outrageous idea could come to pass, all anyone has to do is look back, to see what's ahead. The United States has taken a dive into a moral sewer, and all anyone has to do, is read a headline, or watch 30 seconds of the nightly news, to see it's NOT getting any better.

Of course my opinion stems from the fact that I happen to be a bible believing, fundamentalist (which is not a dirty word, it just means I believe in what the Lord Jesus taught, holy living, and that scripture is inspired by God, among other things) Christian. 50 years ago, even while there have always been people who have ignored the Lord, there WERE more people who still held fast to His word, and at least tried to live thier lives, and run this country (which was based on His words), the way He would have it done.

The USA is no longer focused on God (and hasn't been for a painfully long time), but focused on greed, power, lust, entertainment, fame, popularity...etc.,etc., etc.

If people keep sticking their head in the sand as to what might be around the next corner, then they're only fooling themselves. the direction this country is heading, NOTHING is off-limits anymore, isn't it obvious??

Okay, just my two-cents, if you feel compelled to attack my opinion, please see the Holy Scriptures, and argue with God, I dont intend to engage in debates or flaming-sessions.

In His Peace (and He still offers it to anyone who seeks Him)

Carla Rolfe

come and be blessed: Kev & Carla's Place http://members.tripod.com/~Carla_B/

-- Carla Rolfe (kncrolfe@msn.com), August 15, 1998.

Well here I go again rising to the bait, I cant resist, sorry gang.

A fundamentalist Christian is not the best spokesperson for the What happened to our liberty crowd. You imply you are a friend of liberty, yet you would deny me the opportunity to decide that I have had enough pain and suffering from my horrible fatal condition. If a man should be free to live his life as he sees fit, why can he not end it as he sees fit? Your stance: less liberty.

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes, abortion is an awful thing that could be avoided in most of the cases where it is performed (too bad the Catholic church is against birth control). But who should decide whether or not a rapists baby is brought forth, you, me, a guy behind a desk halfway across the country? How about admitting that this is an issue that caring people on both sides will never agree on, and leave the freedom to decide with the parties involved, the family and the doctor? This is an issue that we can argue over till hell freezes over. Your stance: less liberty.

Why do you care what two guys (or gals for that matter) do in their bedroom? Oh yeah, its not you, God hates it, you love the sinner but hate the sin. What horse s**t. Again your stance: less liberty

Have you ever heard of a little experiment called Prohibition? That was a product of people who called themselves Christians, meddling in the affairs of others. This little experiment caused one hell of a lot more misery than it cured. Thank you for giving organized crime a head start in this country. Thanks for the gang wars, and the corruption that we are still fighting against in this country.

I could go on and on but you get my point, in fact you may not realize that I am a spiritual person. However, like Jesus, I cant stand hypocrites who pontificate nonsense.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), August 15, 1998.

Let's talk about "doing your homework." The fourth sentence of Gary North's Y2K web-site reads:

"At 12 midnight on January 1, 2000(a Saturday morning), most of the world's mainframe computers will either shut down or begin spewing out bad data."

This statement is false. Not to mention that it leaves out an important point: "...if nothing is done about it." Gary North's web-site is full of misinformation. He begins with a premise, and fills the site trying to make the facts fit his theory.

If North's message is a warning, then here is my warning: Beware, because Gary North is not an expert in Y2K matters.

I am too busy doing my homework to refute all of North's misinformation and shed light on his hidden agenda. I think my post above exposed some of it. I say get your own facts straight about Y2K before jumping to conclusions.

Be careful what you read on the Internet. Like any other medium it is full of misinformation. Do your own homework. And as for "others subject to your influence," one man's opinion is just that. I have a right to mine and so does North. Everyone else must decide for themselves. Some are falling into the trap that I am accused of here--letting someone else (North) do the homework for them.

-- Buddy (buddy@bellatltantic.net), August 15, 1998.

For those of you with great faith in the our government, I suggest you do some study of recent history.

We have one of most powerful men in our country, a member of the President's inner circle, who dies (along with 34 other people) in a plane crash in Croatia. What a senseless tragedy it appears to be... until the body is examined and a .45 caliber bullet hole (according to four military experts) is found in the top of his head (http://www.ruddynews.com).

We have a terrible tragedy of a jetliner exploding just after takeoff from NY, with the loss of 230 lives. However, all the physical evidence points not to a unexplainable detonation of a nearly empty fuel tank, but rather to a missile fired by terrorists (http://www.njpeople.com).

For those pollyannas out there who think everything is going to be alright because our government has our best interests in mind, I strongly suggest you review the two cases I've cited above. Our government (along with the media) is corrupt to the core. There is nothing I would put past those currently in power. The instances I cited above are proof that they cannot be trusted.

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), August 15, 1998.

Nabi,

<< However, all the physical evidence points not to a unexplainable detonation of a nearly empty fuel tank, but rather to a missile fired by terrorists (http://www.njpeople.com). >>

Excuse me? A nearly empty fuel tank? On a plane only a few minutes from takeoff on a trans-oceanic flight? Think about that one for just a minute before believing the info you have been presented.

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), August 15, 1998.

Vic,

<< 2 things. 1) I never heard of the exec orders till I got on to the net, which is where most people are today, so I consider that nearly secret info. 2)Think about how old the military technology that you know of is, and ask your self whats out there that we the public have no idea about, and what else might we might know nothing about. >>

To this day, less than half of all homes in this country have computers, and man yof those with computers still do not have Net access. And less than 30% of the workforce has direct net access from their workplace, so I am having a hard time with the Net being "where most people are." Even if that were true, the libraries are still there and were for a very long time before the net. All anyone has to do is ask, and just because you never asked doesn't make these things a secret.

Furthermore, by the definition you are using, over 99% of all the knowledge ever gained by humans is "secret" simply because there is far, far too much for any one person to have ever come into contact with. In fact, byt hat definition, I dare say the vast majority of the laws in theis country and your state would be "secret" even though they are available for reading at any library or attorney's office.

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), August 15, 1998.

Pual, What i said didnt come out right. I meant most people are where i was atbefore i got on the net and heard about the exec orders. Another words unless you do serious study, youll never here about the exec orders, not that the net isnt laden with misinformation, but at least you have access to info you would never here in the mainstream press.

Uncle deedaa, I think it was you that said a large portion of the military would part company with the rest of the military if ordered to strike civilians. I disagree, there would be a small number of people with a conscience that would, but the rest would rationalize that im doing this for food for my family, my friends are all doing this, this is for the good of our country, and so on. I dont the military would have any trouble hiring civilians to pull gaurd duty for food, in a worst case y2k scenerio.

-- Vic (Light_Servant@yahoo.com), August 15, 1998.

Paul, I agree about Flight 800 and the fuel tanks. I still think there was something being convered up though. And someone mentioned Ron Brown with a bullet in his head. I belive that too. I would not put anything past Clintdong. How about Vince Foster?? I doubt if that was suicide. BUT troops rounding up civilians and throwing them in holding tanks!! That scenario could not happen. Not enough troops! I think the cheese has slipped of Gary North's cracker!

-- Dave (dave22@concentric.net), August 15, 1998.

There is plenty of interesting reading out there...this one is on the Oklahoma City bombing:

http://www.sightings.com/political/growingokc.htm

This also is of concern, a required read for those of us who don't totally trust the fed...

http://www.accessone.com/~rivero/POLITICS/ECHELON/echelon.html

-- Bingo (discover@rof.net), August 15, 1998.

Vic

I didn't say a large portion of the military would resist, I just stated that I didn't beleive all of them would go along with such a scenario. I still have faith in America, and Americans.

Hopefuly enough of those in the military would have a conscience, and they would refuse to follow orders that would lead to the enslavement of the American people.

Having said that, you are right, people have a remarkable capacity to rationalize bad behavior, "I vas only following za orders, mien herr". History has shown us that time and time again.

On the other hand Americans love freedom, it sets us apart from many peoples around the world who do as they are told, no questions asked.

To some of the other posters, I agree that we are not always told the entire truth, and as I mentioned, those with power will do much to retain it. Lying to the people is not a new tactic to those in power.

But a free people do not easily take to the yolk of slavery, which is what Gary North implies. Am I the only one who would fight? Would I die alone with you looking on, wondering what is in store for you and your family? Bear in mind that we outnumber them, the dark side would be in for a hell of a fight.

Remember the words of Ben Franklin shortly after the signing of the Declaration of Independance: "Now we must hang together, for we will surely hang separately".

Whew, what a rant, but I bow to no man against my will.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), August 15, 1998.

How many 18 and 19 year old soldiers do you really think will stand up for putting their parents in a concentration camp? Also, how is the military, whici is at one of the lowest manpowers levels ever, control 250 million people? If only 10% of the population decides they don't want to be in a camp somewhere, that's 25 million people. Martial law was never meant to be enforced on a national scale. It just won't work.

-- Peter Yingling (splinky1@bellatlantic.net), August 15, 1998.

Ok, found some numbers for everyone. 20% of the 1.44 mil. are combat troops. Everyone ready, that's 288,000 grunts. For the sake of this conversation we will leave in tankers and artillary units. I really do not see our troops shelling any American cities or using main battle tanks, I could be very wrong. I also did not factor in the troops overseas. I have not been able to find any #'s on those people.

If those forces are distributed over

100 cities = 2880 troops per city. No way. My third grade class could take that many troops.

75 cities = 3840 troops per city. Ha! We had more poeple show at my wife's x-mas party for the company she works for.

50 cities = 5760 troops per city. For a city of 100,000 that's .058 troops per person. Really poor odds in a combat zone.

25 cities = 11520 troops per city. Getting close. I hope the troops assinged to New York City get double combat pay.

10 cities = 28800 troops per city.

The numbers indicate to me that 10 major population centers(cities) are more than a match for the 1996 US armed forces.

DOD by the numbers

Active-duty military in 1996 1.44 mil.

Reduction since 1990 29%

Reduction in the number of admirals and generals since 1990 20%

Reduction in the number of DOD senior civilians 10%

Size of DOD headquarters staff More than 30,000

Average size of an assistant secretary's staff 600

Portion of active-duty force whose primary job is combat 20%

Whose primary job is maintenance or repair 27%

Number of DOD employees who do finance and accounting 26,000

Who do building maintenance 35,000

Sources: U.S. Department of Defense; Defense Science Board; William Brehm

Above stats found at: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/970317/17dod.htm

j

-- j (yada@yada.com), August 15, 1998.

Sorry Yada, but you have not taken into account the might of the U.N. soldiers, currently sanctioned by our own gubmint and implementing military exercises here, on our very own turf. This changes everything. The local and national men at arms will not necessarily be the "army" of control when the SHTF.

http://www.techmgmt.com/restore/fema4.htm

And if you think it is a crock of @#%*, I would suggest you do some in depth research on this one, because, sad to say, the confirmation is out there.

-- Bingo (discover@rof.net), August 16, 1998.

Sorry Yada and Splinky, but you have not taken into account the might of the U.N. soldiers, currently sanctioned by our own gubmint and implementing military exercises here, on our very own turf. This changes everything. The local and national men at arms will not necessarily be the "army" of control when the SHTF.

http://www.techmgmt.com/restore/fema4.htm

And if you think it is a crock of @#%*, I would suggest you do some in depth research on this one, because, sad to say, the confirmation is out there.

-- Bingo (discover@rof.net), August 16, 1998.

Once again, U.N. troops will amount to a drop in the bucket. Too many cities, too much space, too many people.

If martial law happens, it will only be enforcable in perhaps 10 major population centers.

j

-- j (yada@yada.com), August 16, 1998.

Sorry, there discover, but your hyperlink just leads to another person's opinion.

-- Buddy (buddy@bellatlantic.net), August 16, 1998.

Plenty of facts, plenty of opinion, plenty of speculation. Take it any way you want:

http://www.sightings.com/political/gurudas.htm

-- Bingo (discover@rof.net), August 16, 1998.

NATO? Get real. Most NATO countries are just as computer dependant as we are. Don't you think those countries would want to use troops at home before shipping them over here? People seem to think that if Y2K is a big disaster that we will be the only country affected. You will never see NATO troops in the United States. Period. End of story.

-- Peter Yingling (Splinky1@bellatlantic.net), August 16, 1998.

Substitute U.N. for NATO. All else still applies.

-- Peter Yingling (Splinky1@bellatlantic.net), August 17, 1998.

Some people have to have it both ways. Gary North's article (cited at the beginning of this thread) wants to assume that EVERYTHING goes down -- but the military (and FEMA) will somehow still be able to function & cover the entire country. If everything is gone, then everything is gone. It can't be both ways.

Another example: Clinton's critics accuse him of flip-flopping all the time -- the "Doonesbury" strip portrays him as a waffle. But somehow, this same spineless president is going to unilaterally impose a dictatorship & make it stick. There's a serious mental disconnect here, folks. Which is it, spineless waffle or megalomanic? It can't be both ways.

Here's a message to anyone with half a brain or more: the UN is not a threat. The good ol' USA provides a large majority of what little force the UN somehow manages to project. This country is just too large & thinly populated (outside the major metro areas) for an occupation force. If the UN could stop wringing its hands and threatening to scold, it might be able to hold Europe together... assuming Y2K doesn't take it down too.

-- Larry Kollar (lekollar@nyx.net), August 18, 1998.

Larry

Besides too large and thinly populated, the American people are too well armed for a force of occupation.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), August 18, 1998.

We have no way of knowing the troop strength or the technological sophistication of the secret government. If you doubt it, read this book: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0446514527/o/qid=903459642/sr=2-1/002-4152774-6894830 The "secret government" idea, as well as the concept of parallel technological development, is not a "conspiracy theory." It is explicitly contained in our secrecy laws (specifically the intelligence doctrine of "compartmentalization"), in decades of contingency planning for the continuity of government in the event of nuclear warfare, and in the historical record. This book is a good place to start: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1888363681/qid=903460679/sr=1-1/002-4152774-6894830. Sorry Deedah, but the younger generation (mine) is not a generation of Private Ryans. The U.S. is already a de facto empire. As long as we have our cable t.v., we don't care if the military industrial complex is setting up bloody facist regimes in SA, torturing and slaughtering thousands of students and intellectuals; dealing drugs and using the profits to fund covert ops; assassinating presidents and other cultural icons who won't play ball, ad nauseum. The "military industrial complex" that Ike warned us about has been running this boat since at least 63, so I agree totally with the "death of 1000 cuts" analogy. But to those of you who are willing to shoot it out when they come for your gun, or when the school principal wants to inject your kids with biotelemetry or whatever, I suggest you read up on the tactics of COINTELPRO, the FBI operations dealing with the infiltration of politically threatening groups (at one time Black Panthers, Weatherment, etc. - soon to be gun-owners, militia members). The basic idea is to promote armed resistance within dissident groups, which gives the authority in question a pretext for crushing them, and for system-wide oppression: the good ol' "enemy within." Without, in terms of foreign policy, this is how Polk got us into the Mexican-American War, and how we fabricated the Gulf of Tonkin incident to jump-start Vietnam. Domestically, as in COINTELPRO-type operations, think Reichstag Fire, or Oklahoma City FUEL bomb (though the official version is, as with most things, fertilizer). Same principle. In school, we called it "picking a fight." If you can pick all your fights, you're more likely to win consistently. The trouble is, even if you don't resist, resistance will be fabricated to suit - the beast needs something to push against, an enemy to scare the public into obedience. It will grow a new tentacle just to gather malcontents with it - and then cut it off. So watch who you work for. Look into the "drug war." Read "DarkAlliance." http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1888363681/qid=903463145/sr=1-1/002-4152774-6894830 It can't happen here? It already did - crack a book, for god's sake. Here's some news you're not getting (see story #8, and follow up on it): http://www.sonoma.edu/projectcensored/Stories1997.html A national ID card? X-ray specs for every cop? A backdoor to private encryption? Phone-tapping for every line, at the flip of an FBI switch (and at public expense)? Civil seizure of assets that you have to sue for, even if you're found innocent in criminal court? We're in a police state that's wiping it's ass on the constitution; THERE WILL BE NOTHING LEFT OF THAT DOCUMENT BY THE END OF THE NEXT CENTURY. I'll be suprised if it lasts that long. There is no more free press to monitor our slide into the totalitarian toilet: http://www.cep.org/megamergers.html Soon "secrecy" will be obsolete, and all news (not just the media cartel's) will be on a need-to-know basis. The "emergency powers" unleashed by Y2k are just one giant step down the road we've been on for over three decades: concentration of wealth, concentration and globalization of power. If Y2k doesn't do it, they'll cook up something else. Yes, it's apparently gradual, but eventually there will be a coup de gras. Ignore it if you will, but if you malign the people who are trying to warn us about it, countering their facts with namecalling, you're worse than the perps - and I mean that. Buddy, Paul, et al, you're like my girlfriend when she's overslept the alarm and I try to wake her up for work in the morning. She blames me for disturbing her, but WHEN SHE FINDS OUT WHAT TIME IT IS she's rushing around blaming me for not getting her up sooner! She can get away with it, but you can't. Here's another clue for those who haven't thrust their fists in their ears by this point: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312055102/qid=903463631/sr=1-5/002-4152774-6894830 This book by an ex-Newsweek reporter, BTW. Remember: they can make an armed patriot look like a terrorist (chiefly by planting terrorists in his organization, or creating flypaper organizations to attract patriots). But they can't deal with a critical mass of public awareness of their activities. They need self-censoring sheep, who will "go along to get along." Put your guns down (for the time being), pick up a book, get a backbone, and shine a little light. We might not stop global totalitarianism, but at least when it comes, we won't have acted in such a cowardly way as to deserve it.

E.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beeswax.com), August 18, 1998.

Just a couple of things. I don't recall any name-calling here, at least not by me. I did say that North's statement about Y2K being the trigger that every Pres. since Wilson has been waiting for was a crock of sh*t. This refers to his statement, not him.

Also, facts are facts. It's the conclusions based on the facts that I take issue with. All of North's "alerts" are based on his statement that there is only one possible result of Y2K, chaos, and then the rest of his messages go on from there. He never mentions any ways that people can help solve the problem.

I believe that chaos from Y2k is not inevitable and that it is the cooperation among people that will keep it from happening the way North envisions it. North's message is that there is no preventing it , so...Every man for himself! Head for the hills! Get your guns! The great conspiracy is coming!

I think we have an appropriate saying for this:

"If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."

Gary North is part of the problem.

-- Buddy Y. (buddy@bellatlantic.net), August 18, 1998.

E

When I said a still had faith in America and Americans I did NOT include our current government. I have little faith that they will ever do the right thing unless, of course, the polls indicated that it would be politicaly expedient to do the right thing. Holding up a moistened finger to test the wind is an art which was refined and perfected in DC.

I agree wholeheartedly will several of your points, the civil forfeiture laws, secret dealings, double jeopardy, all this and more are an absolute disgrace. I could do 20 pages of ranting to describe my dissatisfaction with the way in which we are governed.

There is an excellent term that I have come across in my wanderings to describe the apathy of many Americans, "the sheeple". As long as the sheeple have "Friends" and "Monday Night Football", a few bucks in the hip pocket, a six of Bud, all is well. There was a time when I was unaware also. As we age we wise up (hopefully)

It was Jefferson who observed that "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants". Are we there, is it time? I don't profess to know, but what I believe is that there are few of us who would walk willingly to the "work camps" without a fight. But I could be wrong about that, I've been wrong once or twice in my life ;)

I do not preach violent resistance in reaction to the system, it is within our power to change it in a peaceful manner, but we must join together to do that. See my first post, it only takes one third of us to do great things. It is obvious to me you care for liberty as much as I do, so while I'm on the subject why not stop by and join a few of us freedom loving Americans trying to turn this country back into the Constitutionally sound, Bill of Rights respecting country that we deserve, it is there for the taking, so lets take it.

http://www.lp.org/

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), August 18, 1998.

Okay, "Buddy" - if that IS your real name... ;)

Let's pretend that the threat of global totalitarian dominance died with Hitler, that WWII and the cold war wasn't funded on both sides by the same international banking establishments. Let's pretend the eugenics movement -killing off the weak and breeding a super-race - didn't start here in America, funded by the Rockefellers, among others. And the DoE/DoD never fed radioactive lemonade to American children in experiments worthy of Mengele. Let's pretend that the CIA didn't hire hundreds of unrepentant Nazi war-criminals post WWII, integrating them into it's anticommunist intelligence apparatus, and that the same Nazi's aren't practically running SA for us. No, that would be "conspiracy theory" (or "history" for those of you that continue, stubbornly, to read books not recommended by Oprah). In fact, let's not bother with historical context at all. Let's just address your main point, the logic you are using to banish the threat of Y2k from our minds.

You are, in effect, charging G.N. with shouting "FIRE!" in a burning building: causing panic by warning people that they may well get burned if they don't leave the theater. He's "part of the problem," not part of the solution, you say. Okay, let's say he is. But you've admitted that the theater is on fire, Buddy. You claim that it really isn't a big fire, management has been alerted, and the ushers should have it out in a jiffy. Cooperation will solve the problem. No need to panic; everyone just sit down and watch the film. Especially don't go out and sit on a curb drinking a 30 cent soda, waiting to see if the fire dept. arrives before the place burns down - that's so uncomfortable and backward it's ridiculous. Modern, dignified, technologically sophisticated people insist on all the comforts and entertainments we have to offer (never mind that sticky floor...). You won't get trampled; pay no attention to those ushers running for the door - they're problem-oriented solution-stoppers, is what they are (hey - you guys are fired!). The fire isn't as big as it looks... Okay, it's huge. And we admit we knew it was burning but waited to put it out until we finished taking your admission. And now we all have to put on gas masks (just 159.95 in the lobby). But we'll get through it if we keep a positive attitude. Just don't leave - there's nothing out there. You won't be one of "US" if you do that - you'll be making our fire worse by leaving! And there might even be free popcorn if you stay and help dispose of the "acceptable losses"...hey? Where is everybody going? TRAITORS!

Elastic analogy, ain't it?

E.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beeswax.com), August 18, 1998.

More delightful reading which will in effect, set the stage for the UN's presence here in the U.S....believe it or not. (period, end of sentence?)

http://www.ptialaska.net/~swampy/illuminati/cfr_0.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a461293.htm

E. Coli is an astute observer. Many of you will think he is off the scope in his assertions. I don't think he is. The more I read, the more I no longer believe this wonderful country belongs to the people, nor is our "implied freedom" per our sacred constitution.

I will site UNESCO and U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program (United Nations) "In the 1970's, the United States (Carter) joined into limited agreements with UNESCO. Part of that was to form a few small biosphere reserves in the center of national parks. Thirteen federal regulatory agencies and the State Department formed the U.S. and UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Committee for that purpose. By 1984, the Reagan administration noticed that UNESCO was ripping American taxpayers off for hundreds of millions of dollars annually, and we were getting nothing in return. So, we backed out of everything. All agreements were off. All programs were canceled. It was all over. However, that U.S. and UNESCO Man in the Biosphere (MAB) Committee didn't see it that way. They just kept right on with the UNESCO plan, making biospheres wherever they could get away with it. Today, we have 94 biosphere reserves in the U.S., which have a total combined land area (at least) the size of the State of Colorado. That is land which is no longer able to be used by American citizens -- for any purpose. Not only that, but they created buffer and cooperation zones around the biospheres and placed strict land-use regulations on the people living there. All this with no authority. Remember, the MAB Committee should not have even existed after 1984, let alone bothered American citizens with all those land-use regulations. Of course, the MAB Committee never bothered to ask Congress if they could use federal land as biosphere reserves. Nor did they ever have authorization to spend taxpayer funds on the project. The fact is, the MAB Committee misappropriated both the land and the money. They had no authority. And, as anyone who has ever been in the military or worked for government knows, they broke the law. Kentucky State Senator Dick Roeding (whose district is not affected by any existing or proposed biospheres) noticed that misappropriation point even before we presented all of the information to him. He volunteered to tell his colleagues at this week's annual American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) Convention. And, since there will be about 2,500 state legislators from around the country there, we expect there might be a little action forthcoming." origin of quote: http://militia.gen.mi.us/headsup/hu-48.htm

About 6 months ago, there was a detail map to be found on the internet showing the plans for UNESCO appropriated land in at least 3 states; Colorado, California & Nevada. It was astounding, obviously too astounding, because it looks like it has been removed. However, the detail maps can be purchased from the following website: http://www.libertymatters.org/mapmabwh.htm --- these folks see it like it is - a land grab. For those that can connect the dots, you may start to see a pattern emerging.

It is not pretty, in fact it is down right scary. Do yourself a favor; read, digest, mull it over, and come to your own conclusions.

-- Bingo (discover@rof.net), August 18, 1998.

Yes it is all scary stuff, but my query remains unanswered, are you going to go to the "work camp" quietly, or not.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), August 18, 1998.

Uncle Deedah, I will say that if enough of our population answers the same question with your response, I will then feel much more secure in our freedom and our joint ownership of this wonderful country.

Until then, our collective future is up for grabs.

-- Bingo (discover@rof.net), August 18, 1998.

E.,

(By the way, why would you pick a name like that?)

Your posts are often written with a condascending tone that does not help get your points across. You will never convince anyone if you insult their intelligence every time you state your position.

For the record, I have a fine backbone, thank you, and I don't pay attention to Oprah.

-- Buddy (buddy@bellatlantic.net), August 19, 1998.

Buddy,

Please accept my genuine apology if I seem a little snotty in my posts. As with the denial about Y2k, I just have to conclude that Americans are willfully ignorant about the emerging global megacorporate facist state. We fought WWII to stop this, but we didn't smoke out the real financial brains behind it - we hung their errand boys and cut the financial and technological ubermenchen in on the cold war boom. It wasn't about stopping cruel men with bad haircuts and a fetish for leather (they are more or less a historical constant). It was about stopping state socialism (slavery) by huge corporations, and preserving liberty and democracy. All this work has been undone, and the media cartel isn't telling you, because they're integral to the plan. Read the constitution. Read up on GATT, and the MAI effort. Go see "Saving Private Ryan" to get a sense of the price that was paid to PREVENT WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW, RIGHT UNDER OUR SLEEPY LITTLE NOSES. I'm fed up. I know people aren't stupid, and that's why I'm angry. They're lazy. Look at the intellectual energy devoted to keeping football stats, reading newspapers and romance novels, building elaborate model train systems in basements, etc., etc. - everything people do with their time, money and energy EXCEPT basic citizenship. We're capable of safeguarding our freedoms, but we're not vigilant. We don't educate ourselves. We lack will. We're trusting little sheep, when we should be proudly and boldly carrying on the American tradition of deep distrust of authority, especially government. If we would only take a good long look, we'd see what is happening, and we'd do something about it. But like children, we don't want to look, because we know then we'd be responsible for acting. That's why I'm at the end of my rope with our American sheeple. And that's why I jab them sometimes, instead of patting them on their fuzzy little heads. Don't take it personally. Do everything you possibly can NOT TO HAVE TO take it personally - except forget.

BTW: I use the name E. Coli because I'm down here in the sh*t, I'm deadly, and the more they try to wipe me out, the stronger and more numerous I become. After Y2k hits, I'll be running in the streets. But don't be afraid; biologists say there's a little e. coli in all of us. ;) Resist eradication, Buddy. You'll be glad you did.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beeswax.com), August 19, 1998.

I had a scary nightmare last night, which left me feeling unsure of my stated opinion that Americans would resist enslavement. FEMA was knocking on the door, and when I looked out, everyone was going to the 'work camps' of their own free will. I yelled "Don't go, don't go, they will turn you into slaves" but nobody listened to me. I ran into the street, grabbed my neighbor by the sleeve and turned him around. "What are you doing, don't you see what you are in for?" As I looked into his glazed eyes he answered me "It's OK, we are doing it to protect the children, we must always do what the goverment tells us, if it is to protect the children".

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), August 20, 1998.