The government's secret Y2K plans

By Jack Anderson and Jan Moller

The story our government doesn't want you to know was broken not by a major TV network or national newspaper. It was encapsulated instead by a front- page picture, which ran in February on the front page of a small Virginia paper called "The Potomac News." Captioned "Y2K riot training," the photo depicted a Marine private trying to "force herself backward through a line of Marines during a civil unrest exercise at Quantico Marine Corps base" outside Washington. In this case, unfortunately, a picture was not worth a thousand words. In fact, a Quantico spokesman denied the story and says the Marines were not, in fact, preparing for civil unrest. But the reporter (and photographer), Dave Ellis, stands by his story. "They told me what the exercise was about and then asked me not to report it," he told us. "(The Marines) were worried that people would think they were painting helicopters black and training for a huge government crackdown at the millennium." Such is the great dilemma behind preparation for the phenomenon know as Y2K: No one knows exactly what will happen to our technologically dependent lives when computer dates roll forward from "99" to "00" at midnight on Dec. 31. Yet planning for the worst-case scenario carries the danger of inciting panic and becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy. This might explain why most military folks we talked to claimed no knowledge of any Y2K-specific preparations. But we have learned that the U.S. military is quietly planning a sophisticated social-response network in case civil unrest should erupt. It was confirmed to us recently by Sen. Robert Bennet, R-Utah, who chairs a special Y2K Technology Problem Committee. "This problem is everywhere and nowhere all at once," Bennett told us. "We can only take a snapshot of portions of infrastructure and attempt to provide the most accurate information we can. But there is simply not sufficient time to understand where all the problems are going to surface, so we must be practical and prepare for the worst."

=====

Here we have the major Butthead Bennett, doing it again. "Prepare for the worst", he says.

This is double talk. Preparing for the 'worst' would entail SUBSTANTIAL preparations. You know, a couple months worth of food at a minimum. Taking your money out of the bank and the stock market. That WOULD be the 'worst' wouldn't it? Of course it would. But, Bennett is the Lip service king. He says to prepare for the worst and then comes out and poo-poo's making serious preparations.

Maybe he does not understand the meaning f the word worst. i think not. He is covering his ASS, so that after the fact, he will be able to point to these statements and say, "See? I said prepare for the worst, didn't I?"

Bennett is scum. Anyone who breaths the words "Prepare for the worst" could NOT just sit there and tell you that you don't need to take your money out of the bak. That would not be preparing for the wors,t now, would it?

Bennet is a two faced liar.

If you think for one minute that the rest of the story about the government engaging in milkitary excercises for civil control is inaccurate, guess again. Or, not.

But when you are clinging to a chain link fence and peering out between your fingers, don't blame me. When you have to go out and steal food because you did not prepare and are incarcerated as a looter, it will be your own fault. You will have no one to blame but yourself.

Bennett will have himself ensconced in a Government bunker. Safe and sound.

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,80001844,00.html?

Paul Milne If you live within five miles of a 7-11, you're toast.

-- a (a@a.a), May 07, 1999

Answers

Bennett is troublesome. He does talk out of both sides of his mouth, but he's more out front than any other high-level elected official.

My theory is that you can rest assured that all the bad news from government sources is true, because there is no reason to make up bad news. It's separating the wheat from the chaff. It would be nice if wheat came without chaff, but it doesn't.

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), May 07, 1999.

Bennett is a politician...I think doublespeak is taught in Big Politics 101.

Actually, I think the government may well feel that they have a better chance at keeping itself together if they have complete control. Look at what they are constantly preaching. They say it will be like a natural disaster. They say to prepare for 3 days to a couple of weeks. Why? Because they want to ride in and save the day with federal help. It's a control issue. FEMA can't be put into a situation if everyone is prepared, right?

You can't control "panic" if you don't have your control measures in place first, right? You can't even have FEMA go in until an emergency is declared. It's about control. The big problem for those who fear losing their control is that the Internet provides resources out of their current ability to manipulate or spin effectively.

I guess an excellent case in point is you Mr. Milne. You've already done more to raise awareness than Mr. Bennett has and you've been a lot more consistant with your message!

Mike ================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), May 08, 1999.