With the impeachment process going forward, and with new information on campaign finance fraud, all Clinton has to do is create a premature Y2K disaster. All impeachment inquiries stop, Clinton stays in charge and he puts his Executive Orders to work. He's played the Saddam card too many times so that won't work any more. He needs something concrete, something that will stick. What better way to stay in power? Any comments on my scenario? Too far fetched?

-- Bardou (bardou@baloney.com), December 01, 1998

Answers

I've been hearing that from the beginning. That he would either wait until the Nov 99 elections and anounce it and call of the elections, or, if things got too stickey with the impeachment deal, that he would blow the whistle- wichever suits him better-of course. In light of the recent mainstream news stories on Y2k, I can't see the John Q. Publics that are higher up the food chain not demanding answers-real answers, not, "Well, it depends what you mean by the word "catastrophe".

-- madeline (runner@bcpl.net), December 01, 1998.

Bardou. So very true. The media, as of late, waking up the sheeple, could be playing this cruel gambit as Clinton desires. No? A penny for your... Charon.

-- Charon (Thatplce@below.com), December 02, 1998.

We have a local talk show host that does the NON main stream news and exposes what is really going on in our world. His name is Alex Jones. He has gained tremendous popularity and can now be heard nation wide on Republic Radio. DO try to find it and listen in. He recently had a retired Major Tillman(?) on his show. His contribution was in the computer programing division. Based on part of what he wanted to warn the American people about was the fact that our government has the capability to create a y2k if it is not severe enough for their own purposes. He claimed the technology is already being used (we just aren't aware of it). Through satalite communications they can literally "turn off" the lights. He said it can be used to controll the movement of the populations by disabeling the startup of automobiles. It will be a tool they use to help them impliment martial law.

He had alot more to share that is too depressing to mention. He got out of the service because the wonderful technology man has created is being used for an evil agenda.

-- Texas Terri (TYSYM@AOL.com), December 02, 1998.

The fallacy in all this is that Y2K is like a wild horse that nobody can control. Bad computer code does not play favorites, it does not bow to anyone's desires, it does not hear your prayers, it does not care who is in office. It is a problem directed by time, and time can not be shortened or lengthened.

Is Clinton et al aware of the full implications of Y2K? Probably. Does he see Zippergate as a nice distraction from Y2K and his upcoming executive orders? Probably, in the sense of the "silver lining in the cloud". But anyone who sees Y2K as an opportunity to gain anything is fooling themselves, because Y2K cannot be tamed (anymore than it can be fixed).

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), December 02, 1998.

Perhaps it can't be tamed, Jack, but it can certainly be aimed. Malefactors throughout history have used happenstance to their advantage, and if there's one thing Clinton can do (well, maybe two things) it's manipulate circumstances to his benefit. Don't think for a minute that Slick Willie isn't capable of turning human misery to his advantage.

-- Vic Parker (rdrunner@internetwork.net), December 02, 1998.

The Pres. elections are Nov 2000 - to be inargurated Jan 2001. Not Nov 1999 - so that would indicate martial law (if martial law were to cancel elections - extremely doubtful under any circumstance) would have to be extended from Jan 2000 until Nov 2000.

That's not going to happen. IMHO.

Also = Clinton has displayed no regard for anyone outside himself = including Al Gore, and since aborting the election doesn't materially help Clinton get re-elected, he won't do it.

Now, if it would help him get elected UN president - which he wants - then all bets are off.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 02, 1998.

Although Clinton is obviously NWO operative #1, I honestly believe that he actually doesn't GET it.

He is the "First DGI" ! The system has always worked for him. He honestly doesn't get it, just like your brother-in-law in Dallas. Of course, he'll use it when he gets it. But never underestimate the out-of-touchness of DC beltway insiders.

-RC

-- Runway Cat (runway_cat@hotmail.com), December 02, 1998.

Don't fool yourselves into thinking that only one person, party or group would, could or eventually WILL use y2k disruptions to advance their own agenda. All the possible scenarios that could arise are just as broad in scope as y2k itself.

I know there is a lot of distrust of the government and a lot of conspiracy theories about who and how and when and Executive Orders. Have you considered the amount of domestic terrorism that we can expect as a result of y2k disruptions? There are many groups, militias, lone lunatics, street gangs, church groups, cults, and what ever else you can possibly think of that might be planning "something" for us in the future.

All this and I haven't even mentioned foreign agents or terrorist groups or even foreign military activities. Perhaps part of the reason why certain efforts and focus has been made at domestic "monitoring" is because of these possibilities.

Mike

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), December 02, 1998.

Gee RC, and here my memory tells me the first mention of a NWO anywhere was when George Bush coined the term and used it in a speech. And I bet you wanted to vote for Bush Jr. in 2000.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), December 02, 1998.

Vic, let me clarify a little. Sure, once something happens, people can certainly use it to manipulate for their advantage. And the natural thing is to actually cause the event to happen as according to a plan. I guess that, with Y2K, my belief is that it will rip-roar through the best layed plans of mice and men, and cannot itself be "on call" to act when convenient. (Though, I guess in some sense you could try to build a plan around what you think are Y2K "spike dates". But this would be more than anyone could do, I would think....)

And thats why I discount all this New World Order stuff. It just depends on too many people being in on it, over too long a period of time. But, for those that do believe in the NWO, the good news is that Y2K will clean their clocks but good, too.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), December 02, 1998.

Now, now folks. Some very interesting posts here. The fact that some of you are entertaining the notions that Clinton has alterior motives in his governance and silence about Y2K, says much about Clinton's credibility doesn't it? I've heard a few slams at Bush over the NWO, but NEVER heard even ardent supporters of that theory suggest he would undermine U.S. sovereignty for it. Now look at Clinton, he actually DID undermine our soverignty selling missle technology to China for campaign bucks --- and no one cares!. My, my how far we've fallen in such a short time.

But know this, Clinton has been looking for crisis after crisis since his first inauguration. We had a "health care crisis", and "education crisis", a "tobbacco crisis", a "global warming crisis", an "internet crisis," a "gun crisis".... crisis after crisis in order to implement some stupid government oversight program or more money to be thrown at some govt. agency to regulate it, in order to give this guy a "legacy" or platform his Administration would claim credit for. We have surrendered more freedoms to this administration WILLINGLY, to ensure our personal security than at any time in our history.

The Y2K crisis is a real crisis. Don't think for a moment he isn't aware of it. They are biding their time, for when the American people realize their way of life is in jeapardy, and cry out for their Savior Bill, their King to save them as the sheeple have now for 5 years for every other perceived threat there was. The only question in my mind is will Bill scare the crap out of them as he did with the Health Care and Medicare scam in order to "justify" Executive Orders? Or will he just wait for the media to set the stage for him? Perhaps both?

The bottom line is Clinton is going nowhere. He has demonstrated EVERY trait that the world's modern dictators have demonstrated through history. He loves power. He has no regard for law or the Constitution. He uses people. He politically assasinates his detractors. He creates emotional ties to himself. He has corrupted every independent agency in our government that served as a system of checks and balances. His motives are for self-preservation only. He is a liar. He talks through legal prisms. He demands loyalty to him above all else. He has an inner circle of elites that will do anything to protect him, even be destroyed themselves. He divides people through classifications ("The rich need to pay their fair share - It's a right-wing conspiracy"). He denounces what is decent. He rejoices at what is vile. He is evil.

He will be crowned King by the emotionally-driven sheeple who looked the other way at perjury and treason (as to not upset their economic apple cart), who when the Y2K winds begin to blow, turn to their Prez for safety and refuge. And he will oblige them. And America as we know it will be over. What's left of us after we rend ourselves apart will become a state of the NWO, by desperation or force.

Clinton is a Global Stalinist folks. Just look at how he governs, and what he WANTED to do in his first term. Look how he's cut down our military. He consults the UN at every foreign policy turn, and puts our troops under their commands. He deploys them worldwide like a meals on wheels to enforce UN resolutions. He derides Americans he politically disagrees with by making claims they should be more like Europeans. He has snubbed and angered many of our allies. He supports despots and leaders of nations that hate us.

I have said before to others that doubt this scenario: why is he fighting so hard to stay in office after the embarrassment he caused himself, his family and the nation if he doesn't plan to stay permanently? Why will he suffer the ridicule and distrust of the nation as a lame duck for 2 more years? What's the motive?

The motive is, he's biding his time. All is in place. All the independent agencies are his, the Congress is afraid of him, and the sheeple are mesmerized by him. Y2K will be his Trump card. He's known about it for 6 years, and appointed a czar to oversee a special committee at his behest. Y2K WILL be the crisis that finally galvanizes the nation to unconditionally surrender to Federalism, in order for each to hold onto what is his.

So as time ticks away each second....closer to 2000, the time will come sometime soon, shortly before or after panic, when we who are awake will shudder when we hear the words "My fellow Americans..."

He who has an ear to hear, let him hear... - Revelation

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 02, 1998.

INVAR, that is an incredibly insightful description of our lusterless leader's character and motives. (Unfortunately).

Paul Davis - George Bush, the lipless wonder, did not coin the phrase "New World Order". All the presidents back to Carter have used the phrase. Look at the back of your One Dollar Bill. it's there too.

-- Elbow Grease (Elbow_Grease@AutoShop.com), December 02, 1998.

INVAR:

Your so full of it.

I'm so sick of people being called "sheeple" too.

You called me an idiot in another thread. Look in the mirror, fella.

To answer Bardou, the President may be smart and he may be powerful, but he ain't that smart or that powerful.

-- Buddy (DC) (buddy@bellatlantic.net), December 02, 1998.

Amazing how right-wing Christians fear Clinton and put him on such a pedestal, evil as it is.

You give him way too much credit. He's actually nothing without Hilary. She's the one who's power hungry in my view, holding the brains, but with a lot more self-respect and grace and poise than her gigolo husband. If Hilary wouldn't care so much for power, she wouldn't have gone through this torture of public humiliation while defending him. Clinton doesn't have the guts or smarts it takes to be the evil schemer you say he is.

Some people watch too many Holywood conspiracy movies. The government is too clutz to put a foot forward without making 2 steps backwards, let alone controling people and traffic via satellites. Remember Hobble? Challenger that went poof? The $600 hammers and toilet seats?

Y2K will render Clinton and the government as impotent as the rest of us.

-- . (.@...), December 02, 1998.

Buddy (DC) -

Full of truth yes. It hurts, doesn't it?

To . -

Clinton is definitely smarter than you are giving him credit for. Read up on his actions as Govenor of Arkansas. He's no fool, and no clutz. His answers to the Starr Grand Jury last August should give you an idea on just how intelligent (and evil) he is. Bumbling imbeciles are never that crafty or evasive as he was. He was able to bend or "fence" the law without commiting perjury beyond a reasonable doubt in the eyes of the public. Hell, Congress can't decide if he commited it or not. It takes intelligence to do that.

If you do believe Clinton is a bumbling idiot, you bought into a cleverly designed veil he created that masks his true intentions. This is how he governed Arkansas, this is how he almost got away with transforming 1/7 of our economy into a government beaurocracy.

Don't be fooled. It's what he wants.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 02, 1998.

No, INVAR, not much truth in what you say, just some warped sense of reality.

As for being a "leftist" as you accused me of elsewhere. You must be pretty far to the "right" if you think that. When it comes to politics I usually find myself in the middle. I don't much like either extreme.

As for Clinton...he lied in the Paula Jones case, he lied to the grand jury, and he won't even admit that the President is the chief law enforcement officer of the United States. That's smart?

-- Buddy (DC) (buddy@bellatlantic.net), December 02, 1998.

Yes it's smart Buddy! By not admitting he is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer relieves him of the conflict of interest that arises from his "misleading statements". In other words it gets him off the legal hook of committing perjury! Who's not smart here?

As for reality, of course you're going to state "not much truth in what you (INVAR) say". Truth is irrelevant to you gutless Middle-of- the-roaders. It's all perception right? All a big grey area right? You're not extreme either way Buddy because you can't make a stand on any issue with conviction.

Actually I'm finding most leftists today are using the phrase "Moderate" or "middle-of-the-road" to make the rest of us think they are "enlightened" and not "extreme".

It's a shame that in today's society, people of firm conviction and the belief in right and wrong are labelled "RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS".

Even in the battle for survival.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 02, 1998.

No, INVAR, you're wrong about us "middle-of-the-roaders." Truth is everything. I can make a stand on any issue you name, it just won't fit a pattern that can be described as left, right, democrat, or republican.

-- Buddy (DC) (buddy@bellatlantic.net), December 02, 1998.

"Extremizm (spelling?) in the defence of liberty, is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." Cow Palace, 1964. AuH20 As to spelling, I am having frequent Mental Pauses. A penny for your...

-- Charon (Thatplce@below.com), December 02, 1998.

* Answered by . (.@...) on December 02, 1998. *

Who's fly specking in my email box?

-- fly . (.@...), December 03, 1998.

You paid for that annonymous sig? How you gonna stop me from using it, hmm?

-- . (.@...), December 03, 1998.

Latest news from the Hill - 12 Republicans are calling for the impeachment hearings to be wound up with Clinstone receiving a mere fine (wonder what this will work out per BJ?) to "resolve" the situation. 12 is enough to do the trick. Slick does it again.

-- Andy (andy_rowland@msn.com), December 03, 1998.