Canadian Article: Huge troop deployment planned... : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

The following article was posted today on The Globe and Mail (Canada):
Selected quotes:
The Canadian Armed Forces have been ordered to spend the next 14 months preparing for what could be their biggest peacetime deployment tens of thousands of troops spread across the country and frigates standing by in major ports -- in case computer problems in 2000 bring civil chaos.

Rules for the use of force are being drafted should soldiers have to make arrests or back up police dealing with riots and looting. "There is a potential for disruption of major infrastructure systems . . . that may require Canadian Forces support to civil authorities," the order begins. The commanders have been given until mid-November to come up with first drafts of plans that will be refined right up to Jan. 1, 2000. Toronto's 5,000 police officers have been given no-go dates of Dec. 27, 1999, to Jan. 9, 2000, and Vancouver's 1,150 officers have been given Dec.29, 1999, to Jan. 14, 2000. Calgary police are considering the same dates as the RCMP, although no order has gone out.


-- Arnie Rimmer (, October 27, 1998


Now who doesn't think we're doing precisely the same thing right here in America, only more quietly? Anyone?


-- E. Coli (, October 27, 1998.

Not me, I fully suspect it, but (and this is ahuge but, and I know I am going to get raked over the coals for this one) I'm for it.

Now, hear me out on this. We had the discussion a while back about how many BTU's in in a telephone poll remember? Well the only hope we have of avoiding a situation like that is the quickest return to "law & order" that we can manage. If we have ANY hope of recovering from a situation where it might come down to chopping down the poles, it is going to have to be with the help of the military.

Am I happy with this concept? Not in the least, but it may also be our only chance at returning to any form of normallcy. (I will insert this qualifier though, remember I am speaking from the comfort of my house located in the woods just outside of a very rural town, where I have lived since 1979. So I do not speak with the same feelings of someone who may be in one of the cities where this would happen)


-- Rick Tansun (, October 27, 1998.

You give NO sources for these claims. This does not help us. Please document your sources, there are enough half baked roumers going around that keep people from the reality of the situation. Regards, Y2Dave

-- Y2Dave (, October 27, 1998.

Y2k Dave: the basis for Canadian Troops readying for martial law - M-A-R-T-I-A-L L-A-W - is the Globe and Mail, a very mainstream Canadian newspaper. The fact that Americans are shocked and suprised about the Canadian plan, or the very similar British plan, only shows how deeply in the pocket of the corporate state our so-called "free press" really is. Can you say "media blackout?" Now, if you're asking where is the proof that this is happening here, there is none, nor would I expect there to be if it's done properly. We don't have a *queen* on our dollar bill, and have a deeply rooted cultural bias against totalitarianism of any stripe, so you won't hear about the activation of Federal "contingency plans" from Dan Rather until all the elements are in place. There are elaborate, draconian plans on record - principally a series of "Executive Orders" that provide for "continuity of government" (military dictatorship) in the event of nuclear war or, more recently, "cyberterrorism". Y2k-related disruptions fall clearly within the boundaries of this term. Britain's doing it; Canada's doing it. Tell me that A) they are paranoid freaks, completely off the wall, B) They're right, but our military-industrial establishment is so asleep at the wheel or so dedicated to the cause of individual liberty that they wouldn't dream of rolling tanks into our cities, setting up checkpoints everywhere, hauling off political dissidents, rationing food, fuel and water, etc.- "Oh dear me, no. Let the system fall apart before we impose such a violation." or C) They're doing it and not talking to the press about it. I don't see any D) here, do you?

Rick, I agree that in some cases, a big green truck full of food or kerosene might be a welcome sight. But you fail to see the opportunity this represents to continue the apparent subversion of America's national sovereignty, democracy and guarantees of individual liberty. We're talking a united western hemisphere, like the E.U.(used to be just a trade block, remember?) That's the plan. And we won't be exporting freedom. We'll be importing totalitarianism (designed in the U.S. and made in S.A., remember). Picture the lifestyle of the average american. Now picture the lifestyle of the average mexican/south american. Now picture somewhere in between. That's where we're ALL going, because that's what the multinational "lobbied" (bribed and threatened) for, with GATT, NAFTA, and now MAI. Give the military the reigns, and say goodbye to the U.S. constitution - forever. We'll be one big banana republic when the smoke clears.


-- E. Coli (, October 27, 1998.

Canada has a far smaller population than the US. Even if every Reserve troop, NG etc is mobilized, I can't see how they can do anything other than locking down the 50 largest cities. Not patrolling the cities, just keeping people inside a perimeter. Very easy to imagine some serious urban firefights. Hope not.

-- R. D..Herring (, October 27, 1998.

Y2Dave: Sorry, but I did list my source for this: The Global and Mail. And I provided a link to the original article so that anyone could go read and decide for themselves. I do try to list my sources when and where possible.

Are you saying that the Globe and Mail article itself is not credible? If so, please let us know how and why it is 'off base'. If there is anything in this article that is highly inaccurate, most folks in this forum would really like to know. We're looking for all news on this issue, good, bad or inbetween.

Frankly, it's been my experience that, at least up to this point, the Canadians have been facing this much more openly Americans. (Which is not to say Canadians won't have there fair share of problems).

Is it not logical to conclude that if the article is, by and large, accurate, then then Canadian government is taking this issue VERY seriously? Is it logical to assume that our own government is taking things any LESS seriously? And if that's the case, shouldn't every man, woman and child in this country be doing what they can to help prepare this country for the very purpose of preventing widespread panic and destruction?


-- Arnie Rimmer (, October 27, 1998.

Ok, ok, ok! We have been over and over this fact. Yes the military will most likely deploy, like Canada.

I spent the time to reasearch the numbers on the current active duty, reserve, and national guard numbers. I am trying to relocate it to repost.


From memory,

1.2 million active duty(including overseas units).

1/3 or less of that are 'ground pounders' the rest push paper.

So lets give em the full 1.2 million. That's 12,000 troops for a select 100 cites. 12,000 troops in New York City, ya right. New York City has something like 4 million people. 12,000 in L.A. County, ya right, that place has that many gang members(x2).

You can talk 'martial law' all you want. The numbers do not leave me feeling all warm, fuzzy, and safe.


-- yada (, October 27, 1998.

Ok, found the old post. Yes these are 1996 numbers but if you think Klinton has increased the armed forces in the past 2 years your nuts.

Look at the numbers. My last post was incorrect. 20% combat out of 1.2 million. Thats about 250,000 real 'ground pounders'. One could try to argue that the paper pushers can be given guns. Ya but someone has to support the grunts and even "paper pushers" have their place in the military.

Even if you factor in the national guard, reserves, and the police the numbers are very thin. You cannot control ground with out men on it(no sexism ment). Ok, seal the cities off. Why? Most military bases are located near major population centers. I think they will be spending an enourmous amount of resouces, if things get real bad, in just protecting basecamp.


-- yada (, October 27, 1998.

I could see in some cases where temporary martial is some locations might save lives. It had better be just that temporary.

In my part of the country there is quite a heavy but unseen militia presence. Also there is a strong kinship with the militia among many groundpounders currently on duty. I suspect that unwise use of martial law would leave the military with many defections thus making the military much less effective in providing aid.

-- Ed (ed@no.mail), October 27, 1998.

The Klinton administration has told it's military commanders to shut up. It seems that many top brass, who would have been fired for doing what Klinton did, have been very vocal about their opinions of Bill. They have been told to stop or face punishment. It seems that lack of respect for Klinton is rampant in the armed forces.

I wonder??????


-- yada (, October 27, 1998.

So there are not sufficient troops to hold the major cities? Well, maybe not - but I don't think we know any more about this than they want us to. Even if there are too few to do the job right, do you think they won't try to do it at all? If you've ever spent time in a kitchen, you know that a dull blade is more dangerous than a sharp one. Perhaps this isn't meant to happen easily; but it will happen. Do you think there won't be -literally- all the money in the world to fund a police state, made available in a heartbeat, if the degree of chaos you're prediciting breaks loose? The executive orders on file authorize the drafting of citizens -separation of families if necessary- to accomplish any material goal the appointed authorities will require. It has all been planned for. Desertions? I think not, especially if the government has cash or food to pay it's troops, and as long as it has troops it can aquire either. They will want to stay in, for the sake of their families, not go home to an empty rice bowl.

Big change coming, people. Get ready.


-- E. Coli (, October 27, 1998.

E, you are a smart fella.

China, with the largest land masses and population was able to control its people with neighborhood wardens. Snitches and informants are the way to do it. They even have wardens who keep track of fertile women's menstrual cycles to see if they are having more children than they are supposed to. All for some extra perks or extra rice. These are neighbors and friends mind you. Does anyone think for a moment that folks in our society would not snitch out their friends for a "little extra" from the government? Troops may not be needed at all.

-- Bill Solorzano (, October 27, 1998.

Alas, Babylon...


-- E. Coli (, October 27, 1998.

And everyone just meekly goes along? I don't buy it, I don't like it, I think it is an awful idea. That means, I'm afraid, it'll happen. I see freedom disappear each time I read the paper, and the brain dead masses just go along, "it is for our own good".

Forgive me now while I leave for a bit, to cry and mourn the passing of America.

-- Uncle Deedah (, October 27, 1998.

Y2Dave, I'm sure the military "exercises" that are going on in our largest 120 cities are part of the plan. Have you seen the newspaper articles about them?

-- Gayla Dunbar (, October 27, 1998.

I don't buy what E. says. I'm not denying that martial law could happen, if things get real bad, but E. talks as if the whole thing is planned. I'm surprised you haven't included the Y2K problem itself in your conspiracy theories E. Yes, there are conspiracies in the world, but there aren't as many as you think. You're afraid aren't you E.? Just like Paul Milne. Fear is what drives his arguments too.

-- Buddy Y. (DC) (, October 27, 1998.

Is the U.S. going to deal with Y2K like Canada? The answer is at:

-- The D.J. (, October 28, 1998.


How was it done in Russia and China earlier this century? There were not even paved roads.

-- x (x@x.x), October 28, 1998.

I have mixed feelings about the military placed within major cities. I know it was great to see them posted within neighborhoods and local grocery stores, etc. in L.A. They were absolutely responsible for the quieting of tensions, especially after being fired upon and then taking out a thug.

But, I'm worried about spreading the military thin at the rollover. We would be dividing our forces at a time when certain assets might not be available including communications. We would be placing them in large metro areas where terrorists are more likely to strike during the chaos. There may be no television and radio so things will be very confusing. If there is deployment, it better happen long before the rollover itself, not after.

Eventually, if martial law must be established, I think we'll see a push for increased citizen involvement such as what happened during WWII. My mom has told me stories of block captains and curfews, etc. Also, the government has the ability to simply call or draft young men and women into service, especially if a national emergency is called.

Yada, regarding L.A. County and gangs, you are underestimating this number substantially. I believe the number is might be closer to 48,000 +. Sad, but most of these kids just get pressured into it because of peer pressure and a lack of parental interest. And, one thing that was "learned" after the L.A. riots was that you don't burn down YOUR neighborhood. So, I think we might see gang warfare as certain clicks defend their own neighborhoods from rival gangs, etc. During the riots I believe the city I live in suffered only about $1,500 in damage. This was primarily due to the fact that we have a contingent of L.A. County Sherrifs and a Sherrifs station. They do an excellent job.

One of the biggest areas we aren't focusing on is the possibility of terrorism by groups within the U.S. or outside it's borders. I am sure that Uncle Sam is thinking about these possibilities and that is why there is a blackout on the bad news. The Gartner report, which was fairly positive (although I think it was a happy face report) gave the Government the highest rating for possible disruptions. If there is a deployment within the U.S., perhaps the most critical assets in the country will be deployed to those areas and not necessarily to large cities.

What ever the situation, I think our civil liberties began to disappear long before Mr. Clinton. I think there is a power struggle within our capital, behind the scenes, where negotiations are being made and scenarios are being looked at and hand shake deals are done and none of it is because our best interests are in mind. Personally, I think the deal is already done. Clinton will go before congress, and be humiliated, as a way to preserve the illusion and allow him his place in history. He will resign by the middle of next year, due to some reason other than a scandal. He will face charges for the crime of perjury after leaving office and then pardoned having never gone to trial. Deals done, t's are crossed, i's are dotted. Mike ___________________________

-- Michael Taylor (, October 28, 1998.

A friend told me that this story was the headline news story on CBC am radio at 6 and 6:30 yesterday morning, but was not even mentioned in subsequent newscasts. Hmm, a little censorship, maybe. Trust me, Canada and the US are not that different, if it can happen here, it can happen there. Just some judicious leaning on the right people and a major story is suddenly not a ratings draw. Call me a paranoid cynic.

-- Tricia the Canuck (, October 28, 1998.

No govt. will ever be able to impose its will on so many with so small a military without the consent of the many. Unfortunatly, the many seem willing to consent to anything the media tells them they should consent to.

-- Paul Davis (, October 28, 1998.

To respond to your provocation, Buddy:

Yes, I fear for the future, for two reasons: A)this is 20th century, planet Earth; and B)my eyes are open. Does fear "drive (my) arguments?" Go to the post DJ put up there for us (thanks, DJ!). Facts drive my arguments; facts and all-too-ample historical precedent. Others have mentioned China, Germany, South America. We ought to at least take the step of admitting what is at stake here.

Evil exists; fear makes it worse. I think fear, like anything, should be accepted in moderation. Sometimes fear can wake you up, or teach you something you need to know. It's when we don't acknowledge our fear, when we hide it from ourselves, that it becomes debilitating.

I am not afraid for myself, personally. If I were really afraid, I wouldn't be sticking my head in the lion's mouth like this. (The psuedonym is not an attempt to hide from the superthugs, it's only to avoid unsolicited mail). I'm simply not going to be around when this nightmare occurs. And if I get taken out or locked down before then, what of it? There are more of me where I came from. And I could die at any moment from entirely natural causes. Life is short, and "a philosopher should have one foot in the grave."

I don't mean to sound arrogant, but most adult humans, especially Americans, seem like little children to me. They will do anything to avoid the horrible truth, to avoid simply opening their eyes and looking at how they and their most cherished institutions are really being manipulated by plutocratic elites. A good analogy is walking up to a neighbor woman who you know is being beaten by her husband, and saying "You are being abused. Why do you let him do that to you?" Most likely, she'll tell you in no uncertain terms that it's none of your business, or even make denials or justifications for the abuse, because she's still in the enabling stage. People who work with these cases know that pretty soon she'll be in either the "recovery" stage - i.e., the hell out of there, or in the "dead" stage. The analogy holds. Planet Earth is being beaten like a housewife, and her affections are misplaced.

Just start taking a serious look at who owns what, how assets are concealed, how money controls politics and media, etc.. Understand how foundations are used to hold assets and influence the masses. Understand how "intelligence" agencies work and their relationships with, and similarities to, organized crime. Acknowledge your dark side, and use it -carefully, with awareness- as an instrument in thought-experiments to learn how your controllers think and operate. Just look - it's all happening right in front of us; you have only to look, think and learn independently of the hive. You have the internet for another 400 days; it will not be back soon, if ever.

I'm past any real fear now. When death comes it will be a sweet release, because this world is not a playpen for me; it's an emergency room in a psychiatric hospital. I'm not eager to die, but until I die I have work to do.


-- E. Coli (, October 28, 1998.


I must have suffered from a life-changing event in my sleep last night. I agree with more than 50% of what you put into this thread. I was thinking just the other day of what the US is planning. If Canada and Britian are planning preventative maintenance, then it seems very safe to assume that the US is planning something. I am unsurprised that we have not heard anything about this. The "urban warfare" that has been practiced over the last few years seems like a reasonable explanation.

-- Slick (, October 28, 1998.

Slick, you go with it. For the ultimate in "urban warfare exercises," Here's some news about the American version of the Reichstag Fire (the main govt building in Nazi Germany, the burning of which justified, in the public mind, giving Hitler the same dictatorial powers that our presidency would have under current executive orders): Please keep an open mind as you examine the different opinions on this issue. Please. There is a Grand Jury Investigation going on in Oklahoma about the bombing, jurors have complained of intimidation - but not a peep from the mainstream news. Everything is falling into place, and there is very little awareness or resistance. All I have to say to people is: use the internet now, download hardcopies of information like this. You can see in black and white what they've planned for the media in the executive orders: radio and t.v. stations will be seized by the government to prevent "dissidents" or "foreign powers" from "opportunism" (and will also prevent citizens from expressing their opinions). The free press will be dead, and there is no program for returning contitutional government after the danger has passed. Think about that. My guess is that there is no intention of any such return. Actively seek out alternative news sources and make hardcopies of your documentation while you are still allowed.


-- E. Coli (, October 28, 1998.


I always read your rantings with eager anticipation, more sense than nonsense, but let me ask you...

What is your solution? Do you even see one? Is there any hope? If everything is really that bad, and forces way beyond the control of mortal men rule all, wouldn't it make sense to just kill ourselves now, and be done with it?

-- Uncle Deedah (, October 28, 1998.

I am perplexed by the the expression of disbelief or surprise by so many of your contributers that the government would be preparing the military to respond to a potential global crisis.I apologize for my stereotyping of urban Americans, but I thought you were all so much more cynical than Canadians!The Canadian government has already imposed martial law in this country once in my life time, in the 1970's during the Quebec crisis. The troops were called in again in the early nineties to OKA, Quebec during a conflict between Aboriginal residents fighting to protect a burial ground from a gulf course development.The military has also recently been deployed to assist during the Red River Flood in Manitoba, as well as the Ice Storm in Quebec. It goes without saying that the troops will be used. Whether they will be welcome or not depends on their perception of civilians: allies or enemies?: One last comment: here on the prairies, most of my information about Y2k has come from American sources on the internet because of the virtual nonexistance of up to date Canadian content. The Globe and Mail story was one of the first front page stories to be published for the public in this province to my knowledge. The Globe And Mail is a business centered National newspaper and could in no way be considered a fringe newspaper.

-- Lisa Hagen (, October 28, 1998.

My favorite Uncle, Deedah,

You are the hope. You are the solution. Dismay at the current situation is evidence that your heart is in the right place. So you and everyone who feels this way must stay alive, help, and be an example. I don't care if larger forces influence the destiny of the world. There are many worlds, and I have a little influencing to do myself, while I'm here.

I don't believe that we are powerless, even in periods where corruption and oppression are at their worst. At such times things tend toward their opposites, and "those also serve who only stand and wait." There is a lot of work to be done by people who feel called to collect and squirrel away hard copies of information that now depends on computer networks for dissemination. These people know who they are, and I say: get to it!

The big question in my mind is whether the militia movement has been so infiltrated that it will be provoked to futile violence and used as a scapegoat, to justify a permanent state of emergency. This -working of both sides of a conflict by intelligence operatives, sometimes even creating the "internal enemy" - is not without historical precedent. Check this out, particularly the section on COINTELPRO operations. So the question: "what then must we do?" is tricky. If the answer is any kind of violence, you have to be extremely careful. You could be scaring more sheep into the fold of your oppressor. The problem - preserving or restoring constitutinal government in the event of a "permanent state of emergency" - is difficult, but not impossible.

And if it ever seems like we're doomed, remember what the wise men of the east came up with when the King asked them to distill the wisdom of the ages into a single sentence. That sentence was:

"This, too, shall pass."


-- E. Coli (, October 28, 1998.

Does anyone know how many standing troops are in the national guard. I heard Bennett talk with the Major General of the National Guard. He asked what plan the Guard had "in case the welfare checks dont go out"?

Sounded to me like martial law must be already be understood as an answer to civil strife.

If I lived in a large city which was being looted I would welcome the troops, I doubt that there is some larger than life motive in deployment in a time of civil unrest.

-- wayne (, October 28, 1998.

Not "larger than life." Unfortunately, "business as usual."

Trust, Wayne, but verify.


-- E. Coli (, October 28, 1998.

To: E.,

Bravo for your speculation! It's only my second (and last) day on this forum. Alas I find most of the posters as dissarrayed and confused as the folks out there that don't know about Y2K and it's implications. I find myself under seige for simply stating I plan for the worst and therefore am armed.

But you hit the nail on the head! It's great to hear some common sense about the state we are in and what our "government" is planning for us. I've speculated about these secular things with my bro and have come to the same conclusions you have E., only a few months ago.

I've said for 2 years now that Clinton's not leaving in 2000. Martial Law will see to that, plus they've known about this for awhile. (Y2K Czar-Hmmphhf!) He's been looking for a crisis to divert attention from his personal troubles since last March. My guess is his trump card will be the Y2K crisis. And of course he is a master of crisis- mongering. I suppose the populace will gladly crown him king to allow him to "save us all". Silly fools don't realize that historically, in any nation, once Martial law is in place, it never really comes down, except by revolution.

Keep up the doses of reality E. Whether they want to hear it or not, the truth must be told. Wake Up America!!!

-- Mike Deering (, October 28, 1998.

Many problems I have believing this particular conspiracy theory E. Here's a few:

The Y2K problem itself is a sign that nobody has as much control over things as your theory contends.

I think the inaction and silence of the government(s) is more a case of cluelessness and/or denial (I never thought I would say that) about Y2K.

Of course the National Guard and military will be mobilized if necessary. The govt. hasn't announced it like the Canadians have, but it's not exactly a secret. I watched a Senate Y2K committee hearing on C-Span where the head of the Nat. Guard Assoc. testified that all Nat. Guard organizations were working on contingency plans.

I believe that soon the media and the public are going to be clued in to this situation. I think that once that happens the amount of information available will increase and solutions and contingency plans will be developed quickly.

The implications of this problem will not be an internet secret for much longer.

-- Buddy Y. (DC) (, October 28, 1998.

Buddy, You say that once the public is clued in then contingency plans will be made. Here in Canada it is public knowledge that the troops are being called in and still every ostrich I talk to refuses to lift his/her head out of the sand long enough to see the wave of destruction coming our way. "There are none so blind as those who will not see."

-- Lois Knorr (, October 29, 1998.

[Mike Deering writes:]"Alas I find most of the posters as dissarrayed and confused as the folks out there that don't know about Y2K and it's implications."

This apparent disarrayment and confusion reveals a level of understanding about this problem which is deeper and quite a bit more honest and compelling than most of the activity on North's forum and much of the dicussion on csy2k and other fora. If you're looking for people that really, truly understand this stuff, you're doomed to disappointment. "If you can keep your head, while all about you are loosing theirs', you don't understand the situation." Understand?


"Perplexity is the beginning of understanding." - Kahlil Gibran

-- Hallyx (, October 29, 1998.

-"The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom"-Proverbs

-- Mike Deering (, October 29, 1998.

Mike, thanks for your vote of confidence.

Buddy, you have some problems with my view:

>>The Y2K problem itself is a sign that nobody has as much control over things as your theory contends.

I didn't say these people are gods. They're "only" bankers. But they do fund and direct nations. They are attempting to create a global superstate, by creating regional ones first. They have been very successful, and have been met with very little resistance so far (EEC, EU; GATT, NAFTA, MAI). We will soon be one hemisphere; first a trade block, then a political body, as in Europe. Not many people deny this is happening, but few seem to realize the implications for the U.S. Constitution, and for our liberty. The U.S. constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights, really stands in the way of the whole program, and will have to go. I have no reason to believe Y2k was created deliberately, to cause chaos; but it certainly was studiously ignored for two decades, even after technicians noted it as a problem. Upper level management in the bigger companies set the tone for this, and the rest of their organization, and the rest of industry, followed. The media played their part. I believe that this network is capitalizing on the disruption of Y2k. If it hadn't have happened on it's own, they would have had to invent it.

>>I think the inaction and silence of the government(s) is more a case of cluelessness and/or denial (I never thought I would say that) about Y2K.

"The government" ultimately does what it's told. Or it's plane crashes.


-- E. Coli (, October 29, 1998.

This is an article published in June 98 in the Boston Globe on US Military Y2K preparations. It had been discussed in earlier threads but probably should be read by anyone not already familiar with it: _on_Year_2000_alert.htm/


-- Arnie Rimmer (, October 29, 1998.

it looks like i'm the only canadian other than lisa hagen, to respond here so far. i generally like GN's site, except for the fact that he keeps putting canada's military preparations under "martial law" category instead of "military" category, where they belong. there's a HUGE difference, folks. if you read the news articles, you will find that the military is NOT openly preparing for martial law (although i'm sure there are secret contingency plans) but for military assistance to civilian authorities, which requires a completely DIFFERENT set of laws.

the current canadian government under jean chretien would not openly prepare for martial law, because chretien was part of the inner Cabinet in 1970 when martial law was imposed during the FLQ terrorism crisis in quebec. journalists and quebecers (and i) haven't forgiven him yet, especially after it was proven that the whole move was purely political, caused a huge scandal which broke up the RCMP, etc.

if the canadian authorities openly speculated about the use of martial law right now, they would be eaten alive during Question Period. the Opposition, Quebecers, journalists, lovers of civil liberties, AND even their own backbenchers would scream bloody murder. newspapers and gary north might mistakenly think that military assistance and martial law are the same thing, but canadians KNOW there is a big difference.

BTW, most of my closest relatives live in winnipeg. you may not know it, but when the red river destroyed grand forks, the canadian military moved heaven and earth and saved winnipeg (a city of over half a million souls) from the same fate. the military are heroes in winnipeg. the population there will work WITH them on the y2k preparations, not against them, because they have a recent history of successfully working together. ditto for the quebec ice storms of last winter.

-- Jocelyne Slough (, October 29, 1998.

looks like lois knorr got her post in just ahead of mine, so there's three of us so far. BTW, on the 1970 FLQ October crisis--a member of the canadian cabinet at that time kept a diary, in which he admitted that the imposition of martial law in quebec was a politiacal move and NOT needed from a national security point of view. this was no surprise to those of us who already knew that the government had lied. they won't be anxious to mention the words "martial law" for awhile.

-- Jocelyne Slough (, October 29, 1998.

If it looks like a goose, walks like a goose, quacks like a goose, it's probably a goose. Unless you can't call it a goose; then it's a duck.

We'll see if it's a goose or a duck on 1/1/00. Given the global economic collapse, and the projected impact of Y2k on the economy added to that, I think it's going to be a pitbull. But they'll be sure to put feathers on it and call it a duck.


-- E. Coli (, October 29, 1998.


If on 1/1/00, it looks like a goose, walks like a goose, quacks like a goose, it's probably just dinner calling.


-- Arnie Rimmer (, October 30, 1998.



It's funny - because it's true.


-- E. Coli (, October 30, 1998.

Guess Ill just go on record as saying when the L.A. riots were dicey, the military rolling in from San Diego was a welcome sight. After the 94 Northridge Quake hit, folks guarding broken buildings were another comfort.

They helped. When things got back to normal, they left. We were grateful.

I try to remember that all our government special forces have children and families too. I would even go so far as to say that if a state of martial law is declared and if it continues, a good number of those people might decide to change that scenario. From within.


-- Diane J. Squire (, October 31, 1998.

Unlike almost any other country, the oath of service in the US does not give loyalty to a specific person or organization in the govt., but to the Constiution and the govt. that represents it.

-- Paul Davis (, November 02, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ