US legislators warn of Y2K martial law at Washington DC conference (Wired News) : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Hey folks, long time no flamefest. I thought of y'all when writing it, even quoted from some of the posts here in the second graf of the story. Enjoy. Y2K Conspiracy Goes Mainstream
by Declan McCullagh ( 3:00 a.m. 15.Jul.99.PDT
WASHINGTON -- For many Y2K fanatics, the scariest threat on 1 January 2000 is not technology at all. It's the far more sinister specter of a power-mad president imposing martial law. Dark visions of US Marines stomping through backyards on New Year's Eve 1999 are a staple of innumerable Y2K discussion groups. A typical post: "There is nothing secret about the fact [that the] US, UK and Canada are preparing for martial law." ... They got a boost Wednesday from a conference hosted by the staid US Reserve Officers Association, an eminently respectable organization that Congress chartered in 1920. [...remainder snipped...]

-- Declan McCullagh (, July 15, 1999


Interesting article Declan - thanks. The Commander in Chief is too powerful as was painfully demonstrated by the Balkans folly.

-- Mori-Nu (, July 15, 1999.

Kiss my fanatical ass Declan.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), July 15, 1999.

Temper, temper.

-- Declan McCullagh (, July 15, 1999.

Yes, there are a lot of us "nuts" out here...

Still, us "nuts" have a point. Due, in my opinion, to both dramatic population increases and the One-World types, laws and restrictions on what we can and can't do are increasing at a mind-numbing rate.

Given the arguably illegal activities BJ Clinton and the IRS have been engaged in for years (as only two examples), it is easy for us "nuts" to imagine Y2K being taken advantage of.

Actually, though, this nut is less concerned about a 3rd-world dominated New World Odor (with the world's standard-of-living being a cross between US "middle-class" and 3rd world squalor) than simple war, at least in the short-term. Nuclear, chemical and biological weapons seem more likely to be used now than ever before. Y2K induced desperation "over there" could cause big problems "over here".

I'll assume, though, that you too are concerned for the future, and put that "spin" on your article to satisfy your editors

-- Anonymous99 (, July 15, 1999.

Hee,hee. I loved the line from a typical Doomer:

"There was Carolyn Betts, who said she was reading The Day After Roswell, a fictional account of the US government's coverup of a UFO incident. She told Wired News she suspected a clandestine agency had bombarded her Dupont Circle office in Washington, DC, with high-frequency audio. "Both the people and the dogs had diarrhea," she said, adding that the masonry had started to crumble. "

Essential reading for all newbies...

-- Y2K Pro (, July 15, 1999.

"typical Doomer"

Not typical. Dumb as a rock.

-- Anonymous99 (, July 15, 1999.

...isn't that what I said?

-- Y2K Pro (, July 15, 1999.

Ponder this:

How is it an conspiracy if we already know about it?

-- Ponder (, July 15, 1999.

"...isn't that what I said? "


-- Anonymous99 (, July 15, 1999.

To answer someone's question about am I concerned or not...

I am generally concerned about the growth of the federal government and our lost liberties as laws and regulations expand.

I have coauthored an article I wrote last year published on and in Liberty magazine about Y2K and martial law:

htt p://

I am now more optimistic.

-- Declan McCullagh (, July 15, 1999.

Senator Robert Bennett, the Utah Republican who chairs the Senate Y2K task force, has asked the Pentagon what plans it has "in the event of a Y2K-induced breakdown of community services that might call for martial law," and a House subcommittee has recommended that President Clinton consider declaring a Y2K "national emergency."

Thank you Declan.

Why not do an updated article on... those kinds of events... of potential Y2K-induced breakdowns... and the kinds of community services that may break... and how the declaration of martial law and a national emergency will impact people at local levels.


Oh, and dont forget to weave in updated details on...

During the Civil War and Reconstruction, Lincoln's government arrested and tried civilians in military and civilian courts, ignoring rules of habeas corpus. This led to the passage of the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts using the military for domestic law enforcement.


When it comes to the use of troops to restore order during riots, however, the President can suspend the Posse Comitatus Act with the stroke of a pen. The law doesn't cover soldiers deployed as authorized by the Constitution or exempted from the act by statute.

Do explain what that MEANS, and where we stand now in this country. (Remember the National Guard, please).


Oh, and dont forget this...

California proposed bill to give governor power to declare state of emergency prior to any actual crisis 0015Hc

And some key information buried down on...

Where was detention center located on I-5 South of Eugene, Oregon? 0014q5

-- Diane J. Squire (, July 15, 1999.

Thank yuhs, Declan! No matter what some of the hardcores around here say, you deserve a lot of credit for expanding the role of y2k (and all its possibilities) in the public consciousness.

Martial law?? I think it could be a good idea in the short term, welcomed by many in fear of their lives. Of course, it shouldn't last too long or people would forget that our nation's greatness comes from living free. And gradually our citizens will--more than ever--become satisfied with the dangerous idea that power is best excercised from the barrel of a gun rather than the rule of law. Best to use it sparingly and with great reservation toward the sole aim of protecting human life and property.

Fascism, here we come?? I sure hope not but a subtle danger is there. (Look at the present cadre of leadership in Congress and the Executive branch...these guys aren't in business to protect our freedom but to grafify their own insatiable, gargantuan libidos _and egos_ by flaunting their carefully-honed manipulative and cunning facets to the delight of constituents. Many of them are on psychological performance enhancing drugs--bloodstreams coursing with Prozac and rHGH and cortisol inhibitors to mimick the neurochemical profile of the Alpha Male gorilla...) Thus, I fear not martial law itself but the people who will be overseeing it.

-- coprolith II (, July 15, 1999.

That article is a hoot! Loved the goof with the high frequency audio.

You would think she would hook up a detector and check - probably take me about 10 minutes in Radio Shack to get the parts, and half an hour to put it together.

Of course, if she did that, she wouldn't be having fun claiming someone is shooting ultrasound at her.

-- Paul Davis (, July 15, 1999.

Declan, why did you choose to highlight an obvious nutcase for your article? When US senators are agreeing that martial law is imminient and that we have to be careful of loss of our (remaining) liberties, why would you choose to make a joke of such a thing? Is it be because you are brain dead, or just too afraid to consider the ramifications?

-- a (a@a.a), July 15, 1999.

It's because I'm part of the Vast Media Conspiracy, of course. Duh.

-- Declan McCullagh (, July 15, 1999.

Declan -

It's funny - I came across a copy of those wonderful Y2K haiku from your site the other day and was wondering why we hadn't heard from yez in a while. Timely...

I have to say that you did seem to lead that article with some fairly perjorative terms. In the first five sentences, we were treated to "Y2K fanatics", "scariest threat", "far more sinister specter", "power-mad president", "dark visions", and "fringe conspiracy buffs". Only when we get to sentence six do we get at least a fairly neutral "staid" and then finally the positive "eminently respectable organization" before the flak of negatives resumes.

So why DID you include that "tinfoil hat" example as the ONLY attendee profiled? Answer honestly, not with flippant remarks about "Vast Media Conspiracy". And by the bye, that's a "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy". You should quote the First Lady correctly, sirrah.

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), July 15, 1999.

"It's because I'm part of the Vast Media Conspiracy, of course. Duh."

Hmmm... VMC. Kinda just rolls off the tongue wouldn't you say? I nominate this acronym as the official term to be used on this forum whenever referring to any mainstream news article. This should prove to be a great time-saving device for many here. (Wouldn't have to do all that complicated "explaining".) Just type "VMC" and move on to the next subject. Of course, this would not apply when reviewing articles written by such highly vaunted organizations such as "" or "". We all know they the hold themselves to the absolute highest standards of journalism and would never spin, fold or otherwise mutilate a "story".

-- CD (, July 15, 1999.

On the note of liberty and martial law.

There is no need for martial law or to prepare for it.

If it is possible to prepare for a "bump in the" there is no need for it.

If you could not with all of your technology and money and power prepare for a "bump in the road" then you should be removed. You are a failure and an embarresement.

However if you could not prepare for something greater than a "bump in the road" then you would have a civic resopsibility to be forthright and inform the public at risk so they could take the responsibility to prepare for the coming "snow storm", "tidal wave" or whatever may come.

In light of the fact that if things were taken seriously long ago the "need" for it may not be so today. And any contemplation of Martial Law is a result of your negligence. You should be removed from power.

The only way to legaly or properly prepare for martial law is to have congress vote and amend the constitution.(Which of couse would take years) The other way is to remove the president and then the chief of staff of the Armed forces would be given complete power until order could be established.

The Government has no authority over an individual who has been law abiding in this country. Given an event that could be prepared for there is no cause to give the government the authority to preside over an individuals liberty.

The only way to justify Martial law is in the event of terrorist activity. The act of insurrection against the state would suffice as well.

If it doesn't scare you, you may not be American.

A Maryland Farmer, (see the debate over your precious constitution.)

-- A Maryland Farmer (, July 15, 1999.

Hear, Hear Maryland Farmer. I agree with you. but, Consider this: How much blood will be shed before it all ends?? As a patriot, I am willing to "Live Free or Die", I just want to make sure that I take my own honor guard with me when I go.

Anyone remember the date for Lexington & Concord -you know, the "Shot heard 'round the world"???

-- Brent James Bushardt (, July 15, 1999.

April 19, 1775. Paul Revere had spread the word during the night. Smith and Pitcairn's British force of 700-900 light infantry and grenadiers surrounded Parker's much smaller force of Lexington Militia. Parker ordered his men to disperse. Someone instead fired a shot and the British responded, killing 8 and wounding more. British then advanced on Concord, ran into a much more prepared force of militia, and got their butts kicked.

And the rest, as they say, is history...

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), July 15, 1999.

He suckered you in with the title: "US legislators warn of Y2K martial law at Washington DC conference (Wired News)." Then you open up the post and find out immediately it emphasizes Y2K "fanatics." Even says he thought about us all when he wrote it. All??? Looks like time to regurgitate the thread about the infamous Time article, "Millennium Madness," in which this scoffer played a major role and which, along with this Wired article, is partly responsible for people thinking we're all a can of beans short of a stash.

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), July 15, 1999.

Anyway, I may be part of the VMC -- who knows? -- but I suggest I'm an unlikely suspect.

I've written for Reason and Liberty, both libertarian magazines. I've given guest lectures as faculty to libertarian organizations and have co-authored articles with lawyers from the Cato Institute. The Federalist Society has published my articles. I go on Paul Weyrich's radio and TV shows and frequently interview Rep. Ron Paul, the Libertarian Party's 1988 presidential candidate.

PS: I'm told my Bilderberg secret decoder ring is in the mail. Along with my CFR membership card and a contract to write the followup to Millennium Madness. Digital Derangement is our working title. You like?

-- Declan McCullagh (, July 15, 1999.

From: Matthew Gaylor

That conference organizer Cliff Kincaid is a religious loon who speaks of the need to regulate the Internet to protect children. I saw a tape where Kincaid spoke about how great the CDA was and he talked about the usual boggeymen, the homosexual conspiracy and whatnot.

I'm Kincaid says some stuff that's true, but I'd take anything he does with a huge grain of salt.

Regards, Matt-

-- Declan McCullagh (, July 15, 1999.

Never heard of Mr. Kincaid until your article, but a little balance to that e-mail seems in order: Cliff Kincaid bio

What is it with this constant barrage of adjectives and such, Declan? You pass along an e-mail message that is almost completely devoid of thoughtful criticism, or even thought. What's your point?

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), July 16, 1999.

If Carolyn Betts is not a Koskinon paid employee, I'll eat a tinfoil hat WITH antennas.

-- Gia (, July 16, 1999.


You may have written for the libertarians, but you have no compassion.

Report with some balls and stop pandering to your editor.

Then you "might" be an American Patriot.

A Maryland Farmer

-- A Maryland Farmer (, July 16, 1999.

You may be right. My articles stick to facts.

Compassion in the abstract is all well and good. But compassion when dealing with DC politicos and conference organizers is not compassion at all. There's a phrase for it: sucking up.

-- Declan McCullagh (, July 16, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ