Crisis-Aware, Mandatory Duty, Drafts : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Coming across so many jarring, freshly crisis-now news articles. Many are bringing up mandatory duty, martial law, drafting critical workers. And this is December 9, 1998 !! The dam of stultified won't-think has broken, and the reactions are starting.

I wanted a thread where we all could post some of these articles, or excerpts thereof, to get an emerging view of this trend.

Have noticed several of us Yourdoneers are medical personnel. State Boards keep detailed records of our licenses, skills, qualifications. We expect to be called up eventually.

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxx

-- Leska (, December 09, 1998


Leave Cancelled For Intensive Care Nurses On Eve Of 2000


HOSPITALS are sending out secret memos cancelling all leave for intensive care nurses on the eve of the millennium because of fears that vital life-support equipment could crash as clocks strike midnight.

Despite frantic efforts by the Scottish health trusts to check that highly sensitive computerised equipment is not affected, intensive care units will be staffed on a ratio of one nurse for each patient. Jim Devine, the Scottish regional organiser for the nurses' union Unison, said: "We are in a crisis situation and there is a real fear that the system is going to collapse. We are aware that secret instructions have already gone out cancelling all leave and ordering intensive care units to be fully staffed with a trained nurse to each patient. Managers have sat on their hands for too long watching this scenario develop."

Mr Devine said Unison would be seeking an urgent meeting with the Scottish Office to get a countrywide strategy set out for nurses who will have to get to hospitals on a night when there will be little public transport.

"It is not enough for nurses to be told they are wonderful and indispensable, and we will be demanding a Scottish package for those who have to work this night."

Lynn Masson, area officer for the Royal College of Nursing, said there were real fears because of the unknown quantity of the millennium bug. "There are grave concerns that some of the machines which are computer controlled could stop working. Many hospitals are talking about cancelling leave over that New Year period because they feel it would be better to have the units fully staffed to cope with any crisis."

She said that if there was a problem with ventilators, for instance, trained nurses would have to be on hand immediately to "bag and mask" patients manually.

"Lots of machines and instruments which nurses use, such as blood pressure monitors, are computerised and the hospitals will not compromise patient care. The only safeguard we can have is to ensure there is adequate staff if there should be any hiccup at all.

"There may be some overreaction to something which may never happen but hospitals do not want to put patients at risk no matter how small that risk may be." She said huge numbers of nurses would not be involved, but those whose leave was cancelled would respond. "There is not going to be a mass outcry by nurses because this is part of their job and they accept there are concerns."

A spokesman for Stirling Royal Infirmary, one of the hospitals named by Unison, said last night it had been preparing for 2000 for more than two years.

"The hospital always rosters the relevant staff required on any public holiday as we are never closed. We will work closely with our staff to ensure that any additional support required is available."

Dundee Teaching Hospitals Trust said it was unaware of any plans to cancel nurses' leave, adding it had taken on additional staff to check out a wide variety of systems.

Edinburgh Royal Infirmary said that various departments had been asked to look at their staffing levels and to report back by the end of the year. "There will be contingency planning for the millennium. We are as prepared as you ever can be and hope everything goes smoothly."

A Scottish Office health service spokesman said the question of staffing was a matter for individual trusts. He added no directives had gone out from the Scottish Office on the subject.

According to Bill Goodwin of Computer Weekly, the UK's largest circulation computer publication, health trusts all over the country have been slow to respond to the threat of the bug.

He said there had been a great deal of confusion over whether medical instrumentation would need to be addressed, and a recent Audit Commission report had criticised the Medical Devices Agency for not getting off the mark quickly enough.

"Some trusts left it very late in the day to start their programmes while others began earlier, but all of them should have been acting more quickly."

Much of British industry could grind to a halt overnight because of a lack of preparation, said Mr Goodwin.

xxxxxxx xx

-- Leska (, December 09, 1998.

Not to mention those of us who are ex-military, military reserve or ex-GSnn, etc.

-- RD. ->H (, December 09, 1998.

See this Forum's thread: Feds Prepared To Take Over, under Military, for posters' reactions to this development. ml

WorldNetDaily Exclusive Commentary

Y2K And Martial Law

For those suspecting the federal government is making Y2K millennium bug contingency plans that include the suspension of civil liberties, fears were not allayed by the nation's Y2K czar at his first summit last week.

In answer to a question about electrical-power failures caused by embedded chip problems and other millennium bug breakdowns, John Koskinen, the chairman of President Clinton's Y2K council, said: "In a crisis and emergency situation, the free market may not be the best way to distribute resources. ... If there's a point in time where we have to take resources and make a judgment on an emergency basis, we will be prepared to do that."

Now what does that mean? These guys don't think the free market is the best way to distribute resources in the best of times. But this statement requires some explanation. This is a statement that should prompt congressional hearings -- out in public, not in executive session. This is a statement that brings to mind a history of executive orders mandating emergency presidential powers that would make our Founding Fathers spin in their graves.

Yet, I saw the chilling statement reported only by Wired News, which covered the Y2K council's first summit in San Francisco last Thursday. Nothing in the Associated Press. Nothing in the San Francisco papers. Nothing on the major networks.

Worse yet, even Wired News, which, thank heavens, saw fit to publish the quote, did not choose to lead its story coverage with it.

Now, I can understand government seizing an opportunity for more power in a crisis. It's the nature of government to do just that. What I don't understand is how we could receive so many warnings by government officials of their ominous plans for martial law beginning Jan. 1, 2000 without scrutiny by the press, civil libertarians and other so-called government watchdogs. Why am I like a voice crying out in the wilderness over this issue?

This is, by my count, at least the second major pronouncement by high-ranking members of the Clinton administration that preparations are being made to scrap the Constitution in the event of problems we know are coming on a date just over a year away.

The first, to refresh your memories, came in June, when Sen. Robert Bennett, chairman of the Senate's Year 2000 committee, was interviewing a top Pentagon official, Deputy Defense Secretary John Hamre. Here's how that exchange went:

Bennett: "In the event of a Y2K-induced breakdown of community services that might call for martial law," will the military be ready? Hamre: "We've got fundamental issues to deal with that go beyond just the Year 2000 contingency planning. And I think you're right to bring that up."

Understand that Bennett, a Republican from Utah, wasn't suspiciously asking Hamre if the military was secretly planning a hideous martial law scenario. He was knowingly asking him, apparently hopeful that the military would be prepared to carry out it out.

I know it's too much to ask, but shouldn't the members of the House Judiciary Committee at least have all this in the back of their minds today as they consider articles of impeachment against President Clinton? Is this a leader the nation can trust on the brink of a potential national crisis? Is this a man America can trust with emergency powers?

Americans have come to believe their freedom is a permanent state. When people take their freedom for granted, it is most in peril. Is it not possible, with all we now know about the character of Bill Clinton, that he would attempt to turn such a crisis into a semi-permanent presidency -- one with imperial powers? And, with all we know about the character of the spineless Congress, is it unthinkable to imagine its members abdicating their authority and collaborating in such an insidious scheme?

Am I being paranoid? I don't think so. After all, it's not me who is raising the ugly specter of martial law in the context of the Y2K crisis. It is the United States government -- first in a public meeting between representatives of the legislative and executive branches and now in a public summit convened by the president's Y2K czar. This is not a hallucination, folks. It's reality. Hearings are being conducted. Plans are being made.

Further evidence of this plot comes in the form of Presidential Decision Directive 63, issued by Bill Clinton last May. It calls for the development of a plan to ensure "essential national security missions" as well as general public health and safety by, you guessed it, the year 2000.

The carefully worded directive emphasizes the preservation of order, the delivery of minimum essential services and the maintenance of a "national infrastructure protection system" involving the military, intelligence agencies, law enforcement and the mandatory participation of the "private sector."

Under the directive, the "National Infrastructure Protection Center," which includes the FBI, the Secret Service, other federal law enforcement agencies, the Department of Defense and the intelligence agencies, calls the shots. To me, the cynic, all this sounds like code for martial law.

Not interested in the federal plans? You may have to be. The document states that "it is preferred that participation by owners and operators in a national infrastructure protection system be voluntary." Note that word "preferred." You may be drafted.

The first set of plans from federal agencies were due on Clinton's desk last month. You can bet he won't be holding any press conferences on those details any time soon. I can tell you this news agency will be filing Freedom of Information Act requests for those documents. But, don't hold your breath, this White House claims a broad exemption from the FOIA that none of its predecessors has claimed -- just one more reason for impeachment, if you ask me.

Of course, maybe Y2K will come and go with no major calamities. Would you like to bet your freedom on that possibility?

Drafting us for labor in martial law?
What is the age limit for drafting?
Would they draft computer programmers, electricity technicians, engineers, medical personnel?

xxxxxxx xxx

-- Leska (, December 09, 1998.

Good topic. Why don't you post some of the articles on this topic that you've found, Leska.

I expect there to be a lot of attempts at a forced labor "draft." There are clear provisions for this. Especially in times of war, plague, etc., corpse-disposal teams can be conscripted from the general populace, and forced to bury the dead - at gunpoint, if necessary (I knew should have gone pre-med...). If there is a labor shortage anywhere, people can simply be collected, moved where needed, and forced to work. Anyone think this will happen? Think it can't happen? Are you for or against forced labor, suspension of rights to free speech and assembly, confiscation of private property, etc. - in a declared "emergency?" If there is resistance to this in your community, would you join the resistance? Turn your resisting neighbors in to the police? If you neighbor was illegally selling chocolate, or tobacco, would you turn him in as a "blackmarketeer?"


-- E. Coli (, December 09, 1998.

Me: >>Good topic. Why don't you post some of the articles on this topic that you've found,Leska.

-which you did, while I wrote that. Thanks.


-- E. Coli (, December 09, 1998.

Those of you - medics, military - who might expect to be "called up."

How do you *feel* about it? We're dealing with a colossal technical and managerial blunder, not a war (yet). And, in case of "Martial Law" you are going to be handed the Bill of Rights as General Issue toilet paper. How long would you serve a U.S. under martial law? A U.S. without freedom of speech, press or assembly? One year? Five? Ten?


-- E. Coli (, December 09, 1998.

We may have to all "draft" ourselves too.

What do you choose to create? What do you stand for? What do you choose to do? What's important? And what is more important than all the potential goverment games played in dimmly lit back rooms?

Stay on topic for Y2K. Just have to figure out individually and locally what that is.


-- Diane J. Squire (, December 09, 1998.

E Coli, I'm not sure yet how I would feel about being drafted. I'm very picky about my jobs, and am not a go-along type if there is any hint of dishonesty or manipulation. I certainly would not be at optimal performance at gunpoint. What is the age limit for getting drafted anyway? What about conscientious objection if it involves violence?

Obviously, by voluntarily enlisting in FEMA teams, we have already committed to helping our neighborhoods. Our team members are from all walks of life, including some 'wild' suvivalist folks, and we are all grateful for the training and all want to help. I think if we have already found a place where our skills are needed, we should not be forcibly relocated, or coerced in any way.

I think, probably, most people will want to help one another, at least in residential neighborhoods. However, if somebody tried to force me to go back into a hospital on mandatory duty, I would resist with good explanations. Been there, done that, quit for very good reasons. I'm not interested in endangering myself unnecessarily. If a 'boss' does not provide a worker with the best possible tools and working conditions, and treat that worker as an invaluable resource, don't bother working for that boss.

How would we be treated under labor conscription?

It is difficult for me to address this because I know nothing of it. I'm hoping that other posters have experience and can share their lessons learned. I'm very patriotic and at the same time insanely idealistic, and my captors will probably quickly be glad to let me go. I'm not interested in suffering authority-imposed indignities. Has anybody heard of the Masada principle?

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx

-- Leska (, December 09, 1998.

I believe that preparing for, and contemplating, The End Of The World As We Know It, is a large consciousness upheaval compared to our previous lifestyle.

One must prepare materially, skill-wise, mentally, emotionally, spritually, socially, psychologically.

Part of that preparation involves envisioning possibilities and their ramifications. This is part of contingency planning. It is practical and good mental preparation. When there are outright statements from government officials in charge, about how *they* plan to handle events, it is wise to bandy around those scenarios and discuss with others, from a broad range of backgrounds, how one can best handle said circumstances.

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

-- Leska (, December 09, 1998.

I would NOT work under a government that abolished freedom of speech and especially free trade.

If there was a resistance, I would side with it. I would carry a gun and if I had to I would be prepared to use it.

Otherwise, I would try to form one. We would get to some remote place and set up a "Free America", hopefully getting more people to come along. If possible we would wage guerilla war against the neo-fascists; trying not to kill the innocent troopers (truck drivers and such, they're only obeying orders) but taking their supplies and destroying their equipment.

There is no way in hell that I would work as a forced-labor conscript.

-- Leo (, December 09, 1998.

>>> Obviously, by voluntarily enlisting in FEMA teams, we have >>>already committed to helping our neighborhoods. Our team members >>>are from all walks of life, including some 'wild' suvivalist >>>folks,

LESKA & ASHTON, can you post a description of your FEMA activities and involvement ? Covering: how you got into it, who you contacted, what you do as training, what kinds of people and attitudes, etc. ?

I think this would: (a) calm the fears of those who loathe FEMA or (b) be educational for those who want to do as you have. Anyway, it would be interesting for all of us to learn more about local FEMA modus operandi.


-- runway cat (, December 09, 1998.

You know, if I were likely to be called up for military service, I would think long and hard about the number of "Leos" there are out there.

Does anyone here think Leo's position is "extremist?" I think it would be a mainstream response, if the Federales turned their totalitarian drug war machine on the general populace.

I honestly don't know which would be worse: a balkanized U.S. made up of Leo-villes, or a U.S. that managed to hang together - by hanging all it's Leos.

-- E. Coli (, December 09, 1998.

From the article Leska posted: "Is this a leader the nation can trust on the brink of a potential national crisis? Is this a man America can trust with emergency powers?"

Can anyone suggest a real alternative?

Who do you know that can swim upstream? Who do you know that can lead? Who do you know who won't jump through any hoop to keep office?

Who would you trust to call out the troops at need, and call them back later on?

What public figure would you trust in that position?

-- Tom Carey (, December 09, 1998.

1)Colin Powell


-- Uncle Deedah (, December 09, 1998.

Hello All, First of all I want to state that I am very impressed at the calibur of people that use this forum. This is one of three stops I make each day. With all do respect to all, I also want to state that I see intolerance to anyone who brings up the goverment conspiracy therories when replying to some of these threads. I rarely give my .2 cents on this forum because I get shot down every time as being paranoid. I am an INDEPENDANT MINDED self-employed 38 year old self-made millionaire, that would not be so if I walked the party line of trusting authority. I beleive we need more Leos on This forum, and it seems anytime Leo type replies come onto this forum, they are ridiculed and labled as radical. I also respect the intelligence that the Diane Squire lady has but I must take issue with her reply to this particular thread on this subject. It seems many here patronize her, which she runs with, and trys to label Leo type responses in the don't belong here catagory. Example:"Stay on topic for Y2K." I beleive many Leo type thinkers have a higher degree of awareness then the people that mock them and make jokes of them. I have been aware for 10 years of the pending cataclysm that is on our door step about to greedily devour whats left of our once great Republic, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. The people that I have talked to in the past no longer brush it off that know me. Their coming for advice more each day. Now that I have that off my chest to answer Dianes' question "What is more important than all the potintial goverment games in dimmly lit back rooms?" First off all these elitists have to much "class" to play these games in dimmly lit rooms, their doing it right out in front of us and thinking...What are they going to do about it? Whats more important than this, you ask. STOPPING IT AND TAKING BACK OUR COUNTRY. I choose to create a free "Dont tread on me Country" What do I stand for? GOD, Honesty, Equality, fairness in the judiciary to name just a few. What do I stand for "FREEDOM" Whats important to me "FREEDOM". When the day comes, and it will, I will die for my FREEDOM and yours. I will entrust my life to my GOD only. No man or beast will tread on me.

-- flierdude (, December 09, 1998.

Wife and I are SERIOUSLY considering letting our Paramedic certs lapse in 1999. Just so we would NOT be draftable. Which in all probability will NOT shelter us. We were fairly sure that there would be a draft of EMT-P's at the time of Desert Shield/Storm, and I suspect, had there been enough casualties, or had the WoMD's fallen and the NDMS system been activated, we'd have been in some hospital or DMAT somewhere.

I was successful in not being selected in 1971, though I have changed MANY of my closly held views since then. In the upcoming debacle, I would hope that I would be equally successful, and would contemplate any of a number of strategies to ensure that success was repeated. The "legality" of the strategies at this time (or that time) would have NO bearing on the employment/deployment of said strategies.

Chuck, who has roused his share of rabble in his lifetime.

PS Conf to Hardliner, MVI, and teh rest of you know who you are: Yep. I stood in a VERY different mental and spiritual place then than I do now, and we were on slightly different facets of the issue. All I can do at this juncture is plead youthfull stupidity and repeat the request I made for absolution and understanding the last time I visited the travelling wall. I have ALMOST forgiven myself. This is a part of my past that, while I am NOT ashamed of it (I did it in good faith at the time), I am a bit less than proud of it. (Except, that what I did, I did DAMN WELL!)


-- Chuck a night driver (, December 09, 1998.

E: one ticket to Leo-ville, please

-- a (a@a.a), December 09, 1998.

you know, I bet if everybody on this forum did a rewind to five years ago there would have been about oh, maybe four of us who had ever seriously contemplated resisting an unconstitutional government through force of arms.

oh, and before anyone decides to lecture on the topic of nonviolent resistance to tyranny I'd suggest that they do a little research on the White Rose (pacifist intellectual resistance to the Nazis in WWII - which was completely wiped out by the Gestapo), and realize that surveillance techniques today are several orders of magnitude more effective than they were then.

we are indeed living in interesting times.

Arlin Adams

-- Arlin H. Adams (, December 09, 1998.

E.Coli: you forget something.

I am a capitalist and an individualist who believes that government exists purely to maintain and keep secure individual freedom. If a government decides that it will, like a disobedient servant, turn on the people and remove their freedom, it is evil and must be destroyed.

That is the logic that I use when I say that if the government began conscripting people in peacetime and confiscating resources, then I would fight it. I would fight it to the best of my ability and, if I had to, I would be prepared to risk dying in that fight.

You seem to think that I am some kind of radical right-wing survivalist type. You are wrong. I am not a Christian and I believe that people should be judged on the basis of ability and achievement, nothing else. I have nothing against queers or blacks or anyone else; they're all humans, and the only fair discrimination is their ability.

I would not consider taking violent action against a government unless it began to directly destroy that liberty. I understand that some peoples' liberty must be curtailed for the greater good (such as prisoners in jail), but I will never accept that governments have any right to confiscate the legally acquired property of any non-criminal, for any reason whatsoever. If the government hasn't stocked up on food then that is its own damn problem; it has no more justification in taking the food that I have than a neighbour who comes around with a shotgun demanding that I give him my food because he hasn't had the intelligence or the foresight to look after himself.

I don't think anyone here who knows me would consider me an extremist. Read my first paragraph for what I am.


-- Leo (, December 09, 1998.

Why is that "have" italicised?

badly-written post. Forget the words, focus on the meaning.


-- Leo (, December 09, 1998.

RC, someone else asked us that a while back, so I'll just post my old response here, and go into it more after I call to verify some facts about the extent of FEMA as of December 1998. This old eMail was a very basic reply; the training is rigorous and goes in depth. The following is the most superficial of outlines and does not do the program justice:

The training is FREE. But some prep equipment is required and necessary along the way. All of it good to have in your kit!

In March 1993 the Portland area experienced a 5.6 "Spring Break" earthquake which shook people up. Geologists had been warning ppl there would be a mega-quake here soon. In fact they found hard evidence that on January 17, 1700 at @9/p (hope I'm remembering the #s correctly) there was an 8 or 9 which re-did the coast and caused a tsunami in Japan which killed people.

They say we're due for a 8.5 - 9 any moment.

The 1993 quake made ppl wake up a little. There was some damage. Then killer quakes in Southern Oregon. And then the bigger quakes in California + Japan. The Fire Dept had personnel go to California to investigate their Neighborhood Emergency Teams, also called Community Emergency Response Teams. Statistics showed that the overwhelming majority of rescues and help were provided by "normal" citizens and that EMS was way overloaded in natural disasters.

Portland began training citizens, certifying them as a volunteer part of the Fire Dept when done, offering advanced training, skill sets, ham radio cert, neighborhood team interactions, etc. We were in the pilot program and have kept in touch ever since. Our friends in California encouraged us to get the training and always be prepared.

Training is done w/ FEMA & other materials, some FEMA sponsorship, FEMA oversight, some FEMA ppl present when the trainees do their Final Exercises and Rodeos, and FEMA field ppl giving presentations. Some cities directly use the FEMA manuals. Course content is meaty and includes, but is not at all limited to:

Disaster Preparedness
Neighborhood Emergency Team Operations
Utility Control
Fire Fighting Equipment and Techniques
Hazardous Materials
Disaster Medicine
Light Search and Rescue
Disaster Psychology
Special Considerations
Emergency Supplies
Disaster Forms
Logistic Strategies
Emergency Leadership Management
Command Posts
It is hard to describe how involved and detailed it gets. We had policemen in our class who said the training was the best they'd ever had. People were excited to learn so much, and everybody felt it all was supremely useful.

The classes are filled with all types. There were neurosurgeons and survivalists, secretaries and military personnel. It was fascinating. Much audience participation. Hands-on drills. The firemen were terrific. We get more opportunities to practice the skills than we can attend. Portland manages to get some extraordinary experts in to give advanced courses.

There are @ 90 neighborhoods in Portland and now there are ppl trained in all of them (I haven't seen the stats lately, will update this later).

"A certification training on disaster preparedness and emergency response, presented by the Portland Fire bureau.

"For certification, NET trainees need to attend all of the classes and participate in a practice exercise scheduled at the end of the course. Total training will include *at least* 25 hours over seven classes."

There is quite a bit of homework, and there are weekly shopping assignments where trainees have lists of supplies they have to present at the next class. This really helps the procrastinators get ready incrementally!

We have been really busy the last two years, and don't feel ready enough, so we're going to take yet another city's (done 2 already :) full course in Winter, Spring or Summer of 1999. "If you don't use it, you lose it," and we don't want anything lost for Y2K.

One thing we noticed that was really neat was that ppl are bringing their children for the training. The kids pay close attention and are really into it. It's like Boy Scouts for grown-ups, only with an urban flavor and a serious tone. Pretty nitty-gritty, at least for me :)

You can ask your Fire Dept if they offer the same thing. Highly recommended. We're going to the next Portland training session (we get lifetime drop-in privileges) as soon as we can to see if ppl are starting to talk about Y2K yet.

I always wanted to be prepared, but it took these classes to *make* us prepared.

Hope I answered some of your questions!

Thank you so much for posting on the Y2K forum. We are learning a lot. I've got the instantaneous eMail option for all posts, so I'm kinda dizzy now from info overload, but it's making my brain slowly accept that I've got to prepare a lot more. Naturally I'd rather be comfy and lazy and just assume everything's gonna be just fine and "they" will never let a collapse happen. *sigh*

xxxxxxx xxxxx

-- Leska (, December 10, 1998.

Leo, I should have made myself more clear: I don't think you're an "extremist," I really wanted to hear from anyone who might challenge your position, however. That's why I put "extremist" in quotes.

My statement: "If I were likely to be called up to serve in a martial law situation, I'd think long and hard about the number of Leos out there," is a warning to anyone who thinks that a Koskinen-type wealth-redistribution plan is going to fly in this country, under any circumstances. I won't be sitting idly by if I saw any abuses whatsoever from a federal occupying force in my neighborhood, and that includes confiscation of private property. Particularly firearms, or food supplies. Same goes for any local forces who might try the same thing. Unfortunately, speaking out against this sort of statement puts you and I on a (FEMA-sponsored) "REX84"-type of dissident round-up plan. I'm ready for that, too.

One concern I have is that the militia organizations that any popular resistance might rally behind have been heavily infiltrated by agents provocateurs, who would mislead such groups to unpopular and demoralizing terrorist acts. Read "OKBOMB!" by Jim Keith to get a sense of how problematic this can be.

I asked if anyone thought you were an "extremist," because the socialist/internationalist propaganda coming from the media cartel would, without question, brand you as such. And then they'd flash a picture of the OK Federal building to drive home the point. I think the fact that Koskinen can so blithely speak of confiscating and redistributing private property without being challenged from every side speaks volumes for the socialist agenda of the international banking establishment and their catamites in the mainstream media. This country was founded on the outrage of citizens who had their goods confiscated by occupying armies. Research "civil forfeiture" laws; they are the future of every citizen.

And again, I'm asking: does anybody think this is "extremism?" I really want to know if anyone other than the talking heads, who has read and values our Constitution, really believes that.

If you think my concern about FEMA is unfounded, read the article I'm posting on a following thread. Here's an excerpt:

SOME HISTORY: In a July 1983 series in the San Francisco Examiner, two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner Knute Royce reported that a presidential directive had been drafted by a few Carter administration personnel in 1979 to allow the military to take control of the government for 90 days in the event of an emergency. A caveat on page one of the directive said, "Keeping the government functioning after a nuclear war is a secret, costly project that detractors claim jeopardizes U.S. traditions and saves a privileged few." Ac cording to Royce there was a heated debate within the Carter administration as to just what constituted an "emergency." The issue arose again during the Iran-Contra affair, but even in the wake of all the copy on that scandal, the public got little sense of how far some America's soldiers of fortune were willing to go to achieve their ends. When the Iran-Contra hearings came close to the matter, chair Senator Daniel Inouye backed swiftly away.

Here is an excerpt from those hearings. Oliver North is at the witness table:

REP BROOKS: Colonel North, in your work at the NSC, were you not assigned, at one time, to work on plans for the continuity of government in the event of a major disaster?


SEN INOUYE: I believe that question touches upon a highly sensitive and classified area so may I request that you not touch on that.

REP BROOKS: I was particularly concerned, Mr. Chairman, because I read in Miami papers, and several others, that there had been a plan developed by that same agency, a contingency plan in the event of emergency, that would suspend the American constitution. And I was deeply concerned about it and wondered if that was the area in which he had worked. I believe that it was and I wanted to get his confirmation.

SEN INOUYE; May I most respectfully request that that matter not be touched upon at this stage. If we wish to get into this, I'm certain arrangements can be made for an executive session.

With few exceptions, the media ignored what well could be the most startling revelation to have come out of the Iran/Contra affair, namely that high officials of the U.S. government were planning a possible military/civilian coup. First among the exceptions was the Miami Herald, which on July 5, 1987, ran the story to which Jack Brooks referred. The article, by Alfonzo Chardy, revealed Oliver North's involvement in plans for the Federal Emergency Management Agency to take over federal, state and local functions during an ill-defined national emergency.

Read the entire article to understand that martial law is not something "called up" and "put down" by our elected government. It is initiated by the forces -intelligence forces- in the military, and is ended at their discretion. FEMA is a public-relations device, OF THESE INTELLIGENCE FORCES, to make the introduction of a police state more acceptable to the people. Once such a state has been established, it -by definition- doesn't matter if we accept it or not. It doesn't matter how many food baskets you concerned citizens hand out after a storm or an earthquake - FEMA is a facist front organization. Research it, and find out precisely who you're working for.


-- E. Coli (, December 10, 1998.

If this is true, E Coli, wouldn't it be just my luck? "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Where is the time machine, I've been wanting it a long time, and now I really need it.

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx

-- Leska (, December 10, 1998.

>>You seem to think that I am some kind of radical right-wing survivalist type. You are wrong. I am not a Christian and I believe that people should be judged on the basis of ability and achievement, nothing else. I have nothing against queers or blacks or anyone else; they're all humans, and the only fair discrimination is their ability. <<


Get a grasp of the terminology you use. "Christian" is NOT repeat NOT synonymous with "radical", "right-wing", "survivalist" or any combination thereof.

On the other hand, you have shown by your statements that *you* are in fact a radical, right-wing, survivalist.

-- Elbow Grease (, December 10, 1998.

Geez Leo, why the hell did you bring up "Christian" in that sentence at all? I can't figure out why you brought up religion when E. said nothing to prompt that whatsoever. You may not be biased against the other groups you mentioned but you're talking like you're plenty biased against Christians.

-- Franklin Journier (, December 10, 1998.

Right wing- yes. I believe that no man has the right to use force in taking what I have produced. If that's the sole definition of right wing beliefs, I'm an extremist.

I'm not an American. I'm not totally fluent with the political definitions you're using. To me, the American "right wing" is the Republican party and further to the right. People who hate abortion because it's not Christian, who think prayers should be imposed in schools again and so forth. I do not agree with any of that; I believe church and state should be secular.

I have a lot of Christian friends. Hell, my present girlfriend is a Christian. Of course, out of maybe 150 people who I know would call themselves "Christians" maybe one or two of them go to church, but the non-churchgoers are still Christians.

Anything political that I say and mean can be traced to one thing: I want to be allowed to make a million dollars and keep it. I am a low-tax Libertarian.

Elbow: How the hell am I radical right-wing? The only time I have ever been called that before is when I've been arguing with lefties. Unless, by talking to you, I am one?

E: I see your point; thanks for explaining. All offence is cleared ;)


-- Leo (, December 10, 1998.

I have to emphatically agree with Leo. If they are going around and taking what people have stored, I'll resist that. As I see it, if they try to take my food, or firearms, they're trying to KILL me, and I'll respond as appropriate.

We all have to die sometime, and I'd rather die on my feet as a free man, than live on my knees as a NWO slave.

-- Bill (, December 11, 1998.

Bank runs, ominous expectations that govts will stop them ....

Global Cash Crisis Waiting In The Wings

By Andreea Papuc, Financial Review

Financial market traders have dubbed it the millennium butterfly. It is their way of describing the distortion in interest rates on December '99 bank bill futures sparked by concerns about the approach of 2000. The market and banking authorities are anticipating a massive withdrawal of cash from the banking system by people afraid of technological havoc caused by the Y2K computer bug.

"People are afraid that banks will crash," said Mr Phil O'Sullivan, strategist at Bankers Trust Australia. "The speculation is that what will happen leading into 2000 is that people will be concerned that the banks' computer systems won't handle it, and they will withdraw cash from the banks more than usual and force up short-term rates."

The distortion is not restricted to the Australian market. It is even more pronounced in the euro-US dollar and the euro-deutschemark markets.

The phenomenon is called the millennium butterfly because of the shape of the graph of 90-day bill futures. This is because the implied rates on the December '99 contract are sharply higher than the September '99 and March '00 contracts and December contracts in other years.

Central banks meet the seasonal increase in demand for cash by pumping liquidity into the system. Already the US Federal Reserve and the Bank of England have said they expect larger than usual demand for cash in December 1999. The Fed has announced that it will put an extra $US50 billion ($81 billion) into inventory and the Bank of England has said it may have to print an extra #54.45 billion ($146 billion). "In the long run, one can expect rationality -- and a generous supply of liquidity by central banks -- to prevail, but it is hard to imagine when this anomaly can begin to correct," said Mr Glenn Maguire, senior economist at SG Australia. "Its effects are beginning to be felt in the front of some European yield curves, where there is a small kink in rates roughly corresponding to this point."

.... "I think we've had many years of preparations for it and we've got another 12 months to go, and even if there is a problem with regard to financial flows, the monetary authorities are not going to sit on their hands; they are going to do something about it," said Mr Peter Pontikis, technical strategist at Westpac Banking Corp. "I don't think that part of the spread blowing out is justified and it is not sustainable."

The euro-US$ spread widened from under 20 basis points to 80 basis points on Friday.

"It's dawned on people that over the end of 1999, banks may just decide not to lend any money at all because they don't want to risk lending money to someone who gets hammered by the Y2K bug," said one market participant. "People are realising that money at the end of 1999 might be pretty expensive." Some people are getting so worried that discrepancies have also become apparent in gold forward prices and even soy bean futures.

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xx

-- Leska (, December 11, 1998.

Being that my hubby was just out of navy not long ago, most probable he would have to do whatever....He spent 4 yrs in and did a 6 mos, which turned into a 8 mos med cruise with Iraq actions...Then came home one week and went back out to pull dead babies out of the waters in hte Cuba crisis when they all tried to get to States. He was due to reup at that time and couldnt/wouldnt reenlist although money was offered at a great rate.....I dont know what he would do "if" I wouldnt want him to leave me alone to 'face' angry mobs of 'clevelanders ever!!!!! Chuck, correct me if i'm wrong but the westsiders can get pretty ugly at times.......think this is a xanex thought?

-- consumer (, December 11, 1998.

Uh, um, they just voted to impeach Clinton. Wonder if Gore will find himself mandatorily drafted to be Pres soon?

Does anybody think Gore will seize the Y2K thing if he's his own boss and alert the public better than Clinton?

12/11/98 -- 4:26 PM, BULLETIN

WASHINGTON (AP) - The House Judiciary Committee voted 21-16 today to approve Article One of impeachment, accusing President Clinton of perjury before a federal grand jury investigating the Monica Lewinsky affair.
Copyright 1998 Associated Press.
xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxx

-- Leska (, December 11, 1998.


>>Right wing- yes. I believe that no man has the right to use force in taking what I have produced. If that's the sole definition of right wing beliefs, I'm an extremist.<<

If you are describing yourself as an extremist, that's your choice. But my point is that "right-wing" does not mean "extremist" either. Certain elements in our society (who would probably classify themselves as "liberals" and that is also untrue) have a desire to pass their philosophies off as middle-of the road. To do so, they use these largely-undefined heavily-charged hyphenated terms like radical, right-wing, Christian, etc. when referring to anyone to the right of their own position in order to displace them, and make their own positions appear to be mainstream or centrist. But in most cases, there are NO significant groups or political platforms to the LEFT of their own. Where do they really fit in the political spectrum? Out on the left wing. Sometimes, very far out.

>>I'm not an American. I'm not totally fluent with the political definitions you're using. To me, the American "right wing" is the Republican party and further to the right... <<

This view is the result of propaganda, not from a serious study of political science. Think for yourself, man! When I called you a radical, right-wing, survivalist, I was deliberately playing a dirty trick because I took phrases generally used perjoratively and directed them at you in the dictionary sense.

>> ...People who hate abortion because it's not Christian, who think prayers should be imposed in schools again and so forth. I do not agree with any of that; I believe church and state should be secular. <<

"Church and state should be secular." What does that mean? Leo, atheism is a religious belief (it's a belief system that excludes the existence of a deity), and there is nothing exceptional or superior about it. Historically, the political systems based upon that belief have been totalitarian, cruel, genocidal, corrupt and arbitrary. Be careful what you ask for; you may get it. But just because Christians want to impress a certain set of standards on the political system with which they live does not brand them as extremists. What defines an extremist? Methods. Force. Violence. Yeah, I know what you're thinking. Funny how certain stereotypes and bigotry are permissible.

>>I have a lot of Christian friends. Hell, my present girlfriend is a Christian. Of course, out of maybe 150 people who I know would call themselves "Christians" maybe one or two of them go to church, but the non-churchgoers are still Christians. <<

Maybe you need to ask yourself what makes them Christians.

>>Anything political that I say and mean can be traced to one thing: I want to be allowed to make a million dollars and keep it. I am a low-tax Libertarian. <<

And you think a "secular state" will allow that? History does not support you.

>>Elbow: How the hell am I radical right-wing? The only time I have ever been called that before is when I've been arguing with lefties.<<

You are proving my original point.

>> Unless, by talking to you, I am one? <<

Ow! You have wounded me! :-) Hopefully, I've answered that question.

-- Elbow Grease (, December 11, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ