I read it again, today, on another thread:

"Rumors have been swirling for years that some military folks have been given questionnaires (sic) which asked (among other things) if they would be able, if necessary, to fire on US citizens."

I am going to attempt to put the issue in proper perspective.

< RANT MODE ON >

BEING A US CITIZEN DOES NOT NOW, HAS NEVER, AND SHOULD NEVER, CONFER AN IMMUNITY FROM "BEING FIRED ON".

IT IS YOUR BEHAVIOR THAT ENTITLES YOU TO SUCH IMMUNITY, REGARDLESS OF WHO MIGHT BE CHARGED WITH KEEPING THE PEACE!

If you are behaving in such a manner that you deserve to be shot at (ie: running around with a Molotov cocktail in your hand, assualting others, etc.) you should expect to get shot at and if the rest of us are fortunate enough to have the protection of the American military, you will be. The color of your skin will not protect you, the size of your bank account will not protect you and the kind of passport you carry will not protect you. Lawful and peaceful behavior will.

Without exception, what I have read anywhere on the 'net, including this forum, is a knee-jerk reaction that would be appropriate to Homer Simpson wannabes to the effect that for American troops to under any circumstances shoot a US citizen is unthinkable.

I suggest that if your reaction is such that you think about it.

< /RANT MODE >

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), January 24, 1999

Answers

I agree with you about the people who are "running around with a Molotov cocktail in your hand, assualting others, etc." My concern is that Clinton and some others might have some interesting ideas about post Y2K government. I HOPE that U.S. Troops wouldn't fire on people that are trying to preserve democracy through peaceful means. I HOPE that troops wouldn't follow orders that contradict everything that this nation is about.

-- d (d@dgi.com), January 24, 1999.

Although there may be a few naiive people on this forum, I think most of us are all too aware of just how easy it is to get shot by government personnel with a badge to use a gun. The police do it all the time. They shoot and kill people who pull their hands out of their pockets or carry a toy gun, and many other instances where the victim need not be killed. If the military hits the streets they will undoubtedly use Y2K as an excuse for target practice on anyone who isn't totally submissive to their commands.

-- (m.d.@web.com), January 24, 1999.

Soldiers will do what they are paid to do, and that includes killing anyone that they are told to kill. That is what they have always done and is what they will continue to do.

-- dave (wotendave@hotmail.com), January 24, 1999.

Hardliner,

Now, why would anyone think that soldiers would fire on unarmed American citizens doing nothing illegal?

Let's see: how about the four UNARMED young college WOMEN gunned down (murdered) by our dedicated soldiers?(Remember Kent State?)

Let's see: how about the 14-year-old American boy gunned down (SHOT IN THE BACK AS HE RAN AWAY) and the mother shot AS SHE STOOD IN THE DOORWAY OF HER HOME WITH HER BABY IN HER ARMS!!!! Murdered in Idaho in 1992 by our finest, who were then given rewards for their valor:

http://www.duke.edu/~gnsmith/ruby/valor.htm

But no, I'm sure they won't do it again... to YOU!

-- RU Kidding? (j@idaho.com), January 24, 1999.

Hardliner,

The problem I have with you post is that it seems to presupose that the troops will be operating under the same definition of "lawful and peaceful behavoir" that you so aptly described.

The definition (for the troops or thier leader) could change to include new unlawful acts. Such things as "hoarding" food, refusing to leave thier home for a "safe" place, or not cooperating with an assignment to a work detail could easily become "unlawful".

I for one have a lot of faith in the integrity of most of our carrer service people and the oath they took to the constitution.

I can, however, invision a time of turmoil in which the definitions get shifted in new and amazing ways.

If the troops have been "trained" to follow orders and shoot at people by some transient rule of "lawfulness" then the scene has been set for tragedy.

The rules have to be clearer. The principals have to be permanent - not at the whim of who ever happens to be inside the beltway at the moment.

My greatest fear for the future *used* to be Martial Law. It is no longer. My supreme fear now is some type of pseudo martial law in which the alphabet boys are the arbiters of "lawfull and peaceful behavior" (just like they were at Waco).

If we could go straight to **Military** Martial Law we might be allright. I just don't see that as a probability. The idea of our honorable military men having to take orders from some political hack / regianal coordinator / Alphabet Ninja is one that keeps me up nights.

I see *sever* curtailailment of our liberties in the future by some means or another, by some rule or another, by some guise or another.

And YES I DO think there is a difference when the Military shoots at citizens.

Greybear - who things being an American means something special, and YES, responsibile action is one of those things.

- Got papers?

-- Greybear (greybear@home.com), January 24, 1999.

Just for the record --

The "troops" that went berserk at Kent State were National Guard, not Army, and were green to boot.

The attacking force at Ruby Ridge was FBI, not Army.

Just the same, raise your hands slowly, and never carry a toy gun. Throwing rocks at guys with weapons is also risky.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), January 24, 1999.

Hardliner,

Some actions are just clear-cut no brainers. If you carry an AK-47 and are firing on police, fire fighters, emergency management personnel, military, SWAT teams or even innocents, EXPECT to receive a return on your actions. Action = Reaction. Thats a given.

Its the T word ... TRUST ... that has average people concerned about our militaries intentions. Especially the commanders. For the most part, I expect them to honor my inalienable rights as stated in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and even the oaths they swore to your Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). However, I have seen things in reports which suggest, especially with the National Guard, that they are trying to find Total Force ways to circumvent UCMJ obligations. Then ... I wonder.

Maybe its their military mindset I dont quite trust -- some, not all -- when things could get dicey on the home turf.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), January 24, 1999.

See wonderful article in July 27, 1995 Wall Street Journal entitled:

"'New' Marines Illustrate Growing Gap Between Military and Society."

It will warm your heart and make you fell mushy. Hoist your flag....

....of surrender.

-- fly .:. (.@...), January 24, 1999.

A recently retired special forces type said that in the last 6 to 8 years training has shifted from combating foreign forces to urban warfare as in urban America. He said there was much debate within the army both on and off the job about this. His opinion was that 30 to 50 percent of the gun toting military would go against the government should they be called on to fire on American citizens.

Evans Pritchard the British reporter was allowed inside the militia movement something not granted to American reporters. Prichard wrote that the militia's in Texas and Oklahoma were under the control of two army generals one of whom was still active duty. He was also allowed inside a militia communications center that was partially manned by off duty Air Force personal.

The lines have already been drawn. The fact that Bill Clinton is POTUS makes for a very distinct line in the sand. Every night on SW radio the militia is reaching out to the military, NG and foreign forces within this country.

Just think about it. It would never have come to this had we as a people rose up and demanded honest government.

Ed

-- Ed (ed@no.mail), January 24, 1999.

The question is who will be labled as a terrorist, survivalists, gun owners, people who store food, or gold. What ever the controlled media convince the people, those are the terrorist. Under martial law everyone that does not comply will be a suspect. Young men are easily minuplated, some wont some will fire when told and they know who they are.

-- moose (tkh@earthlink.net), January 24, 1999.

Carrying a toy gun is the same thing as carrying a real one as the responsible authorities do NOT have enough time to differentiate between toy and real. If you have never played in a fun house or run the video equivalent you have no idea of how you will react under the Shoot-Don't Shoot drill.

And I know experienced officers who still say that in Shoot-No-Shoot scenarios they would NOT be able to predict what they are going to do ahead of time.

The human brain catagorizes things; first as a threat or not, then as what type of threat or not; then as what it is that it has seen. Officers are trained, correctly, to shoot at a subject showing anything that looks like a gun, because, it saves their lives.

With first hand experience in demonstrations and managing both the demonstrators and the responding police, it is easy to modify the response of the law enforcement responding to a demonstration. All you have to do is run your demonstration as a truly non-violent demonstration. done it a numbe of times, and the police responding relax, maintain their lines, we maintain our lines, have our say, get carted away, if that's in the cards, and everyone goes home in one piece.

Contrasted with some of the demonstrations you may have seen where the "demonstrators" were more intersted in the amount of damage they could do in getting their "message" out, and the police were justifiedly angry, and agressive, and broke a few heads.

Also, remember that the Guard at Kent were severely outnumbered, and were (rightly or wrongly) in fear. Also, there were a lot of rounds fired that afternoon, and not too many of them found targets, which might be an indictment of the training of the guard unit. Remember too, that in 1970, not much had been done in terms of proper training for the Guard in Civil Unrest situations, since the incidents in Watts, Glenville, and Hough, in the early sixties, and all of what had been done interms of training was for the violent scenarios.

My personal jury is still out on Ruby Ridge, but I am leaning toward over-use of force.

Chuck, who was a non-violent trainer in his mis-spent youth.

-- Chuck, night driver (rienzoo@en.com), January 24, 1999.

Chuck,

For what reason is your "jury still out" regarding the Ruby Ridge matter?

c

-- c (c@c.c), January 24, 1999.

Chuck

Methinks your personal jury must be out on a bender, that's a "gimme", no contesto, the feds went WAY out of line on that one.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), January 24, 1999.

If TSHTF I expect that there will be a need for them to fire on "predators". Less trouble for me to deal with.

-- Sue (Conibear@gateway.net), January 24, 1999.

Sue and Chuck,

WAKE-UP!! You have already been labeled TERRORISTS by your government. Everyone on this forum is an Enemy of the State.

Ed,

Don't be scared, Be prepared.

-- Patriot (wakeup@america.com), January 24, 1999.

Hardliner:

Needless to say, anyone harming the rights, life or property of another must be dealt with swiftly and surely. However, it is all too easy for the 'goonverment' to create new classes of unlawful behavior, and send its forces against the new-found "outlaws". If you fall into the gun-owning/food-storing/rights-demanding arena, the time may come when you will be classed as a criminal for exercising your God-given rights. What will dictate your course of action then? If your response to the situation is not grounded in a love of freedom, just lock the chains onto your feet and lick the boots of your master. If you do love your freedom, be prepared to fight and, if necessary, die for it. If you are not willing to die for freedom, you cannot ever be free.

Chuck:

Picture this: two men and a young boy are fired upon by unknown assailants in the woods near their home. They return fire, hitting one of the assailants. The boy is told by his father to run home, and as he is doing so is shot in the back and killed by one of the unknowns.

Then, picture this: The two men lay the body of the dead boy in a shed outside their home. While returning to the house, they are shot at by hidden snipers who have failed to identify themselves and are thus as unknown as the first group of assailants. As the mother of the dead boy opens the door for the two men who are fleeing the gunfire, all the while holding her baby in her arms, she is shot in the head by one of the snipers from a distance of less than 100 yards, and dies a few minutes later in a pool of her own blood and brains.

Don't take my word for it, get a transcript of the Senate hearings on the matter, or one of the innumerable books written on the incident. If you wish to sit on the fence after knowing the facts, that is your choice... but an extremely poor one, in my opinion. 73...

-- Why2K? (who@knows.com), January 25, 1999.

Patriot,

I sincerely doubt that. In fact I rather suspect this forum, and others, are watched to see just what the heck in happening with Y2K awareness in this country!

"They" are us, with families and children. Many of "them" can appreciate, that more of us can (and will) make it through Y2K, if ALL of us are better prepared ... and we help one another.

Does that mean I trust them? No. Trust, is earned. IF, this country, and the world, muddles through 2000, mostly prepared because they helped encourage that preparation, then helped protect and serve, then go back to business as usual, respecting and honoring this nations founding principals and citizens rights, then, and ONLY then, will they have EARNED our respect ... and gratitude.

And then, they will have earned the right to walk tall.

In the time of our greatest need, it can be everyones finest hour, or not. Its all a matter of personal choice.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), January 25, 1999.

I had only intended to make a simple declarative post, not ignite a series of spin-off arguments as seems to have happened. One subject at a time please! The subject that I introduced was BEHAVIOR.

Some of the posts here clearly come from those who have no clue about the military. For those who equate the military with guns with fear, I suggest some education. It could easily give you some much needed peace of mind and quite possibly save your life. If I believed that I lived in a country where, "If the military hits the streets they will undoubtedly use Y2K as an excuse for target practice on anyone who isn't totally submissive to their commands.", I would leave the country, immediately. If this is your accepted version of the American dream (and it's a nightmare, all right) You need some help in the form of some factual information about, and real life experience with the American military. It simply is not so.

Some others need a biological clue. Testosterone interferes with and alters synaptic transmission. While you are standing on your hind legs, beating your chest and howling about whatever, you may well find yourself on the wrong end of some form of lethal force.

RU Kidding? (j@idaho.com),

You've got a severe factual disconnect with reality. Your facts are all mixed up with inaccurate, untrue and misleading information. Do some research on the incidents that you attempted to discuss in your post, and you will find some different conclusions.

Greybear,

Your stated fear is that there will be new definitions of "lawlessness". That is indeed possible, but to make the leap that because something is against the law an American soldier will shoot you makes no sense. Even if "hoarding" (for example) should become a crime, summary execution by troops in the field has seldom been the answer for any government. I am quite sure that any tyranical government would have enough self-preservation "instinct" to know that allowing field commands such latitude would be suicidal. Not only that, but public and well planned trials and executions (should it come to that) are far more effective in molding the behavior of a populace than simply letting the military massacre people.

Even the Nazis didn't treat Germans in such a manner. Even that hideous and twisted government used its civil "police" (Gestapo) to "take people away", etc. The only ones "shot on sight" (as seems to be the vision driving the fear) were those who ran from authority or were caught in the act of sabatoge, or violent acts. The scapegoats; the Jews, the Gypsies, those "undesireables" identifiable as "enemies", were dealt with largely by the civil police. Even the death camp guards were not really military, although they did indeed wear the uniform. That our civil police are starting to dress like real military is one of the most disturbing aspects of life in these United States to me. Seeing a small town police chief wearing even a single star on his collar makes me gag. Talk about wannabes!

You say, "The rules have to be clearer. The principals (sic) have to be permanent - not at the whim of who ever happens to be inside the beltway at the moment. "

I submit that the documents on which America is founded are quite clear and explicit and that the principles are clearly intended to be permanent (". . .endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. . .") Unfortunately, they have always been subject to the whims of those "inside the beltway", even before there was a "beltway". Remember the "Separate but Equal Doctrine"? Remember when it was against the law to kill unborn children? Those are only two examples. Surely you can remember many more. "We the people" are to blame for allowing this to happen. If it is to change, "We the people" are going to have to do the changing.

Being an American should mean something special. It should not mean that you are immune from being shot at; by the military or anyone else. It should mean that you are willing to be shot at in order to preserve the gifts of Life, Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness, Equality under the Law, Freedom of Religion, Speech and all the others; we all know the words.

My own belief is that Y2K is going to alter human society worldwide. The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution(s) (US & State), and a fairly comprehensive law library are among my preparations for the future. I intend to be a part of something far better than what we now have and I intend it to be far closer to the society described in those documents than the sad travesty of a Republic that we now inhabit.

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), January 25, 1999.

Come on Diane, if the "They", that are suppose to be "Us" are so caring, why is there no warning being sounded? Why are these Anti- Terrorist MJTF groups being implemented in the NW and Carolinas? Who are they looking for? Did they not state, "people who are of a mind set to believe in freedom from tyranny and repression" (me paraphrasing)?

You know the Terrorist types, ie., home schoolers, self sufficency groups or families, y2k preparedness nuts, food hoarders, millenium doomsayers, Bible believing Christians, Constitutionalists, Patriot movement types.

Oh, and lets not forget those people who sell their urban homes and move to very rural areas. Now that is a group we must really be suspicious of. Who knows, they might sell non government inspected eggs to the unsuspecting public from their non government inspected chicken coup.

Just remembered another group to be leary of, the Preparedness Expo going "SURVIVALISTS", very dangerous group of people in this category.

Oh, lets not forget those 2nd ammendment wackos, very dangerous and armed to.

This was all in the press in the last few weeks. I think you have even alluded to it in some of your recent postings.

How can anyone trust a group who has known about a problem for years, "They" can't even put a consistent spin on the story. They send mixed messages to confuse people. They have a consistant record of persucuting anyone who is not in line with their stated and unstated agendas. My God, just look at the body count that Bill and Hilliary have behind them, and the damn thing keeps growing.

Look at all of the EO's that do nothing but destroy our God given rights (if we let them), replacing them with Klinton rights, Marshall Law!

I know that you are an optimist, but there is more than enough evidence that to put any trust or faith into the most corrupt government, next to King George's, this country has ever seen.

Would you trust these people with your children or grand children, especially the little girls in your family?

If not, why would you trust them in the event of y2k, or any other possible disaster scenerio we are facing, because of a lazy public and a bought and paid for (chicom) government.

Stalin had the best interest of the people in mind when he murdered them by the millions, and remember he had help.

-- Patriot (wakeup@america.com), January 25, 1999.

Hardliner,

God bless you.

God help us all.

I share your sentiments. It warms my heart to hear a true American.

Let's not loose site of the fact that Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison, et. al. were revolutionaries who were overthrowing the "lawful" government. I'm sure the lawfully constituted authorities would have used the modern term "terrorists" if it had been in vouge then.

It was, as I recall, Jefferson who said "The tree of Liberty has to be watered with the blood of patriots ocassionally."

I hope there are enough.

Greybear

- Got Liberty?

-- Greybear (greybear@home.com), January 25, 1999.

Patriot ,

The Y2K warnings HAVE been sounded for years among Clinton, the government and business circles -- among themselves -- and not the way WE would all like them to have been shouted.

Then as we get closer to 2K, they find out that it is bigger, higher, wider, deeper and more extensive than they thought. Remember, they thought it was first a computer problem, followed by a mis- management problem, then an embedded chip problem, then a global systemic problem, and now a preparation and contingency plan problem ... without ... causing panic and collapsing the whole thing. Mix in the extra ingredients: natural disasters on the rise, global warming, terrorist threats, nuclear threats and failing worldwide economies, and you have one big mess. Who gets called for mess duty? The military, and everything else theyve got to throw at the problem.

Is there a solution? Yes, but not one they are used to. The solution, is all the rest of us, not just them.

Sorry, Patriot, but some of the Militia groups are about as scary as some of the Black Ops groups. Fortunately, they ARE the minority. The vast majority, I hope and do believe, are more like Hardliner. In that I trust. If Im wrong, then I die. Then the real adventure begins.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), January 25, 1999.

Amen!

-- Leska (allaha@earthlink.net), January 25, 1999.

Don't ASS-ume that it will be US troops that get used against you, should that occur. You may well find they are foreign soldiers wearing the sky-blue U.N. beret. Some of our politicians (and yours) are sneaky enough to have that one all worked out beforehand. Why do you think former Aussie prime minister Paul Keating signed a "mutual defence pact" between Australia and Indonesia. Aussie has, maybe 27,000 armed military men (and women) it can call on at most and our politicians disarmed the law-abiding licensed shooters and quietly destroyed 600,000 reserve stored weapons from Korea and Vietnam. Indonesia would have no problem producing close to 1,000,000 men with arms. Could the pact be so our beloved government can call for foreign help should the sheep ever wake up enough to march on parliament? Think about it.

-- Aussie_Dave (sorry@anon.com), January 25, 1999.

Thanks Hardliner, it has been very educational. I agree with you. The government angers me every day. However, I will not be heading out to overthrow it any time soon. I wounder if those who are so inclined plan to use Y2K disruptions to futher their cause???????

-- Sue (Conibear@gateway.net), January 25, 1999.

I watched a PBS special last night on the Protestant/Catholic problem in East Europe. I believe the title was "The Road to Bloody Sunday." On Bloody Sunday demonstrators were shot at and killed. As I understand it, subsequently the civil disobedience folks, seeing that even peaceful disagreements with the government would be met with violience and death, threw in the towel. Of course, that's not the US, but I believe when it comes to the nut cutting and the government sees a group of folks threatening the status quo, they will take whatever measures they see fit at the time to diminish their ability to do so. Open fire? Internment? Imprisonment?

-- Other Lisa (LisaWard2@aol.com), January 25, 1999.

After reading the Ruby Ridge inquiry, released by Lexis Counsel Connect, I am with with Chuck on this. Some of you are overly paranoid, and especially Why2k with his way off-base statements about the case.

It appears that through miscommunication and mismanagement between the FBI and HRT, and lack of experience and assertiveness of senior command negotiantor, the balance between tactical force and negotiantions were uneven, leading to over-use of force.

It is easy to make strong judgements on the authorities without knowing the full story, I suggest you read the entire inquiry. To me, there appear to be one guy in perticular that was mostly at fault, plus the inevitable miscommunications that occur during times of crisis and stress, not the entire FBI/HRT/local law enforcement etc.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), January 25, 1999.

Lawyers have been firing at citizens for decades and lawschool are cranking them out in ever greater numbers.

I trust our military more than our liars.

Read 'Standoff At Ruby Ridge' and 'Trial By Fire' by Gerry Spence, a lawyer.

'Trial By Fire' relates to the present capitol circus. When reading this keep a barf bag handy.

-- fly .:. (.@...), January 25, 1999.

Going back to the original question...

If the US can't pay the military, then there is no US. If there is no US then it is simply not possible to fire on US citizens.

The real question is if the Military will fire.

--Jim the window washer

-- The Window Washer (Micaiah@2kgs.bbl), January 25, 1999.

I don't normally get into these discussions but I have a big dislike for what happened at Kent State.

The guard at Kent were outnumbered because they were on a college campus; with live ammo. They shouldn't have been there. They were there because the police had had a small disruption one night in town and so made the blunder of clearing out all the bars and telling everyone to go home. They did this during an important game everyone was watching on T.V. and no one was able to see the finish. That caused the police a major problem with all the disgruntled patrons out on the street and it escalated. The guard was finally brought in by the governor govenor who was out to prove a point. The guard was led to believe they were in danger, by their superiors, even though the students were putting flowers into their gun barrels most of the preceeding days. They were in gas masks, hot and unable to see very well. It was never determined where those first shot(s)came from (nor even I believe that they *were* shots) but the guard reacted as though they were being sniped at. They went nuts to put it mildly. Students were killed who were not close to the guard at all, and in fact were walking in a direction away from them. They were innocent bystanders and even less involved than the peaceful demonstrators closer at hand. No guardsmen were hit by any of those initial "shots". These details from from memory of the book "Kent State" by James Mitchner. It just seems to me that crowd control tactics and "phycom" can work on the forces too, as well as those they are supposed to be controlling. Best not to piss em off or scare them. :-)

Me.

-- Floyd Baker (fbaker@wzrd.com), January 26, 1999.

Diane,

I never said I belonged to any group. Because I use the moniker of Patriot makes me a member of a militia group?

You state that, and quote "Sorry, Patriot, but some of the Militia groups are about as scary as some of the Black Ops groups. Fortunately, they ARE the minority. The vast majority, I hope and do believe, are more like Hardliner." end quote.

Would you please inform me of these so called "scary" militia groups that are equal to the "Black Ops Squads"

I would suggest that you know nothing of what you speak. I live in the heart of the so-called Militia country in my state. It is one of the safest places I have ever lived. We have some of the most giving people here that I have ever met. We love our country, we go to church, we work, we have families. We have no crime, I've never heard of any break-ins around my area, none of our women have been raped in their homes, our vehicles are safe in the driveway. I do not live in paradise, nor do I live in fear. We do sometimes have trouble with the local teenagers, but nothing like the media reports from around the "yuppie" local suburban neighborhoods.

As far as living in Militia country, I wouldn't know a Militia member if I fell over one. They are supposed to be on every corner around here. Where are they? If I live in Militia country, as the media and State Police say I do, I'll stay here.

I would also suggest that if we had more people, that thought about, and practiced, and I hate to use this old and outdated cliche "God and Country" (that is what Militia people believe in, according to the Feds), that we would not be in such a sorry state of affairs. What we have in this land is nothing more than a "Democracy", as any good Patriot would point out to you.

Look it up sometime. Democracy has everything to do with the present regime in DC, and probably a good reason as to why they are silent on y2k. Our founding fathers fought to escape a "Democracy", and the "TYRANNY" that is associated with it.

Lenin ran a "Democracy". I wonder if the millions of murdered men, women and children in the "Soviet Democracy", if they would of had a Militia, you know, that evil nationalist group of God fearing men, that loved their God, Country and Families. If that, when they saw the first round of murders, and other attrocities, which seems to be the direction our "Democracy" is headed. Would the, mainly Christian, Sons and Daughters of Russia would have stood up and said NO!, could they have stopped the murder and mayhem? I believe they would have, if they would have been armed. With weapons yes, but also with knowledge. We have that knowledge today, it is called history.

Yes, history. Are we doomed to repeat it? Has our society been so dumbed downed? Our children are not taught right and wrong, the difference between good and evil. They are taught grey. Everything is relative. Is is "is". Our yuppies and baby boomers worship their sports and stocks, while what little freedom we have left is being openly stolen from us, under the guise of Klintons welfare state.

Look at your postings from the other day, Terrorist attacks on our computer infrastructure, they are expecting them? When has this bunch ever told us the truth on anything? Why are they always slithering around, playing mind games with the sheeple. They are setting us up. y2k is just a small part of their plans, or is it the trigger? They want a panic. You may think that I am being delusional. That our government would never do that. Then tell me what they are doing? Don't get me wrong, I am not looking for them to swoop in and save the day. I just wonder what they are up to. We have had more than enough time to warn people about what is happening with y2k. If the SSI started in 89, they knew this was going to be a problem. The alarm was being sounded years ago, and yet they still publically deny that there is any major problem? Wake up and smell the herbal tea Diane.

Oh, if you find any Militia types, send me a picture. I'm sure my neighbors would get a kick out of it. We always wondered what we are supposed to look like.

-- Patriot (wakeup@america.com), January 26, 1999.