Why Your Supplies Won't Be Safegreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
The one thing the government fears at this point is panic in 1999, no matter what the cause (an unmistakable, major Y2K event, a major non-Y2k event, market meltdown, banking runs, etc).
In the government's eyes, the major creator of panic are GIs. Even though they are small in number, they are zealous and their numbers are growing steadily. Just like GIs, the government is playing simulation games to guess when the herd will take off.
The first step in preventing panic, therefore (it's for the good of the country) is disinformation, using establishment media ("today, we are interviewing Joe Militiaman, a fundamentalist Christian with 800 guns who has stored 20 years of food").
If this is successful, no further tactics will be applied. However, all needed pressure will be applied if the situation disintegrates throughout 1999, including search, seizure and martial law.
Since most people sincerely believe the media that Y2K in itself is not a major problem, they are prepared to believe the media that GIs are the problem.
The most vulnerable period will be between July and the end of September, because the government will need access to its existing systems (which may go down on 1/1/2000, remember?) to implement these, uh, social policies.
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 09, 1999
With all due respect I believe that your assessment is wrong. I believe that the government already accepts the fact that there will be pretty significant Y2K events and has been plannig on it for months. In regard to the authority given FEMA the government has been planning to control the populace for years, Y2k is just the trigger event. Prior to this the trigger event might have been nuclear war. Mount Weather and Raven's Rock are but two facilities dedicated to the preparation of such an event. Guess who controls these facilities,FEMA.
The government considers anyone seriously looking at the potential downside of Y2K as a "loon". You don't need to be a survivalist or religious person to be labeled. The people storing guns and food just make more convenient target to hold up to the political elites as evidence of how terrible it could get, and how the goverment stands ready to protect us from these "Wacko's".
You have to remember to the Politically Correct, gun ownership indicates the propensity for violence and the wanton destruction of innocent wildlife. THESE PEOPLE MUST BE CONTROLLED!!
The real issue in the Y2K problem is the potential lose of our civil liberties. Do you really trust Bill Clinton with your civil liberties, I don't think so. Remember in a martial law situation the Constitution is suspended.
There is not a level of government or law enforcement that I think is not susceptible to excess. An what better excuse that Y2K to step in and protect us from ourselves.
Martial Law is an open ended proposition, as long as there is a threat, biological, cyberterrorism, ect, and they can get the people to believe Martial Law can stay in effect. A nationwide declaration of martial leaves no other political entity able to refute it as a localized "natural disaster" would.
I think the trigger event will happen by June, in fact it may have already happened. The DAY TRADER computer problems may have been Y2K related it was new software. But it has had the effect of making the market skittish about on line trading and that insecurity could spread.
Get ready for a wild ride! But the bigger issue is what kind of country will we have in 2-5 years of economic disruption.
-- Achimedes (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.
Bingo!! This is already underway, or haven't you noticed the vitriol expressed lately at the GI's for "causing the panic problem".
How soon before we GI's have to wear stars?
-- INVAR (email@example.com), February 09, 1999.
Just has a thought.
What the hell are they going to do about all those Mormans.
Bunches of those folks got food stored.
Sure they can isolate and "handle" the Y2Krazies, but a whole religous group. How they gonna spin that one?
-- Greybear - who may have to start talking like a Morman. (I sure hope they don't have multiple wives anymore [shudder]. Having TWO armed Mama Bears around is too chilling of a thought)
-- Greybear (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.
Greybear --- You raise a vital point. There are x millions of Mormons and many of them have a large stock of stored food as a matter of religious conviction. Don't mess with people who have strong religious convictions without expecting major trouble.
It may turn out that the government decides that confiscating a relatively small percentage of food stocks will not be worth the related hassles.
Maybe we should focus on the matter of guns, where there is a broader national "consensus", regrettably, though again with huge fissures . . .
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), February 09, 1999.
WalMart can't keep their shotguns in stock. There were 10 people waiting in line the other day to either pick up their firearms or purchase one. A few of my husbands coworkers are adding to their arsenal and within his group of coworkers, they are going whole hog! They are the reason for shortages of goods at WalMart. And WalMart for some reason isn't restocking their shelves. How does the government know who has food stashed and who doesn't? And do they have the manpower to go door to door to every household looking for a box of canned goods and guns? How many dogs do they need to sniff out gun powder and chili? The truth is, they don't. I'll be long gone from here if it ever came to that where I live.
"Anyone living within 5 miles of Burger King is hamburger." Bardou
-- bardou (email@example.com), February 09, 1999.
Ya know, GreyBear, I was thinking about the Mormons recently, too. The few I've had a chance to know personally were super people. Some of their beliefs seem a little wacky to me, (Christ among the Aztecs!?), but I suppose no more so than most religions with a heavy burden of traditions.
Their practice of keeping 1 year(?) of food on hand may turn out to be wise indeed. It occurred to me that if TSHTF in a serious way, this preparation might make Mormons a large and influential percentage of the functional survivors.
Not sure thats a bad thing. Conversion, anyone?
The ravings of a Recovering Fundamentalist named
-- Lewis (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.
What's 6 million Mormon's spread out over the world in comparison to the whole population of the world? I would say in our county there are probably around 1,000 mmebers but 1/3 of those are children. Mormons will take care of their own before they will take care of anyone else. However, if all of sudden you become interested in learning more about Joseph Smith, they will gladly visit you once a week for indoctrination. Because you were not born into the religion but a convert, expect to be treated differently, but not indifferently. The Mormons that I know are good people, they stick together, but they don't give away anything without getting something in return. Anyone who is a Mormon and questions doctrine and church authority are usually disfellowshipped. They don't like members around who may upset the money flowing in. It's mandatory that all members pay a 20% tithe of income. However, if you work overtime, the overtime money belongs to you. They keep the Sunday Sabbath, no TV, etc., but it's okay for Mormon football and basketball players to play on Sunday...keep that big money rolling in to the church. So, if you plan on hitting up some Mormons for food, good luck!
-- formerLDS (formerLDS@wisetoit.com), February 09, 1999.
I think you are WAY off on you estimate of numbers. Several orders of magnitude. I worked on some projects in Alaska with officials in the Morman church (this was in 1982) and there were over 1000 members in ALASKA.
No way 100 members or even 1000 families could support all the activities in Salt Lake, even if they were contributing 100% of their income.
Anyone out there have any good numbers on Morman membership? (Just curious)
The complicating factor for the FED is that if they want to confiscate food storage how do they make the distinction between the Y2Krazies and the Mormans.
I personally think they will go after guns. It's much easier to villify all the gun wackos. And they ALREADY have a nice list with home addresses, SSN, etc. Pretty easy to make the sheeple scared and offer to reduce the danger by controlling the wackos. Then the Sheeple will DEMAND action. (Go check out WorldNet Daily for a revealing article on Australia - they got all the guns a while back. Now they are trying to get all the KNIVES. I don't make this stuff up. Truth is truly stranger than fiction.)
-- Greybear - who is not quite ready to give up his pocket knife yet.
- Got wheat?
-- Greybear (email@example.com), February 09, 1999.
Grey Bear is correct about private guns being the crux of it all. This is the maddening final gadfly to those who are ready to assert complete control - they have to deal with it somehow, and soon.
However, Bardou wrote And do they have the manpower to go door to door to every household looking for a box of canned goods and guns? How many dogs do they need to sniff out gun powder and chili? The truth is, they don't.
This house-to-house search scenario probably will not happen. What they'll do is first pass a law making private firearms illegal. Then there'll be an amnesty or buyback period. After that, there'll be no house-to-house search, but the line will be drawn and can then be used to hunt down troublemakers selectively as needed.
In the time of the Chinese Emperor Kang Xi, when he decided to hunt, the entire Imperial Army would mobilize and fan out in a line several miles wide, a few feet between soldiers. They would then beat drums and make noise, walking and riding slowly forward keeping the line, and driving all animals before them. When they came within a few miles of a natural barrier such as a river, the forest in front of the beaters would be thick, teeming with panicked game. THEN the Emperor would begin to hunt, easily picking off prize animals at his leisure.
-- Runway Cat (Runway_Cat@hotmail.com), February 09, 1999.
Greybear, you wrote: (snip) ...personally think they will go after guns. It's much easier to villify all the gun wackos. And they ALREADY have a nice list with home addresses, SSN, etc. Pretty easy to make the sheeple scared and offer to reduce the danger by controlling the wackos. Then the Sheeple will DEMAND action. (Go check out WorldNet Daily for a revealing article on Australia - they got all the guns a while back. (snip)
If they come for my gun, I'll let them have it :) Multitudes have the same attitude... "they" will run out of agents in about six blocks, I'd say. As for Australia, check your sources - they didn't "get all the guns" by any means. As a matter of fact, I read a recent news article where the NSW police were bemoaning the fact that so few had turned in their guns.
Shoot anyone who comes for your weapons - he is your enemy.
If you are not willing to die for freedom, you can never be free.
-- Why2K? (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.
There are millions of guns out there that are not registerted. People sell them to friends or trade for other stuff. People also move around and tracking down people is time consuming and if they do find you, how do they know you still own the gun? Tell them you turned yours in to be melted down when Diane Feinstein was mayor of San Francisco, or to some police campagin. I worked as a volunteer for a police department and when we received paperwork for people who purchased guns in the county, we threw them in a file cabinet bundled together. After about 6 months accumulation, we shredded them. No one ever looked at them, there was no need to. There were only about 4 that came in that said "denied," because the person applying for the gun had a felony. The IRS is 2 years behind in auditing, how far out do you think any government entity would be to go confiscate guns? They just don't have the manpower. I'm more worried about the thugs.
-- bardou (email@example.com), February 09, 1999.
Last I heard only a small percentage (maybe under 10%) of Mormons actually practice their church's recommendation of storing a year's supply of food.
-- Joe O (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 09, 1999.