Is there any evidence to support the claim that the US government intends to impose martial law beginning 990901?

Curious Regards,
Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), August 23, 1999

Answers

No. There is no evidence. If there is such a plan, it would NOT be leaked, IMO. The problem is that with how most people view Clinton, there is not much that those here would rule out immediately. They think, hey, he's capable of it. He likes power, he doesn't WANT to leave office, it would be a way for him to stay, maybe it would even show "leadership" for the sake of his legacy, ect. I'm just pointing out what I think the general mindset here is. I'm not saying the above setiments are right or wrong.

But in answer to your question -- NO!!

I've been on this forumn for over a year. I've seen lots of threads about concentration camps and what not. In most cases, someone has done some reasearch and reported back that it was a legitimate prison building, or other sort of regular commercial activity -- but that is just "proof" for the delusional here that the "cover up" is in place for the new world order types to take over the world come 1-1-00.

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!! "They" are comming to get all 250 million or so of you! BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! Yeah, right. BWAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! "they" must have LOTS of razor wire!!! BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Delusional Doomer Dummies!!!!

For laughs, and to give the extremist delusions out there some hope, considering all the recent Y2K day of DOOOOOM dates have past so far without the DOOOOOMMMMMM that was predicted (can you say GPS???), I'll sign off as a.....

-- programmer (shill@work.now), August 23, 1999.

The general public IMHO does believe that the government is up to no good, is covering up scandals, and we have someone in the Whitehouse that proves this theory. Think about, if you don't know the truth, but were told the story, how do you know that the story was true? Were you there? Did you witness it? Only the participants can testify to the story. However, the participants could be in collaboration with each other, thus, you would never arrive at the truth. But, if you had your reputation or some money at stake, then your testimony against the guilty would only become heresay. Do you see how this all works? So therefore my friends, we really never arrive at the truth of the matter, we only arrive at "he who has the best lawyer wins."

-- I see through it all (Iseethroughitall@Iseethroughitalll.com), August 23, 1999.

Andy Ray

You are still around??? Tell you what, for every silly question you ask I will post something that will give folks an indication that Y2K is a big mess. Deal? By the way read the bottom of my post.

Kindest Regards

Brian

  Senate Y2K Committee
 

BENNETT, DODD CALL FOR CHEMICAL INDUSTRY Y2K READINESS SUMMIT

Lack of Knowledge Raises Safety Concerns

WASHINGTON, DC ­ U.S. Senators Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah), Chairman of the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 (Y2K) Technology Problem, and Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), Vice-Chair, noting a "lack of knowledge regarding the Y2K progress being made in preparing companies and others that manufacture, store, transport, or use toxic or hazardous materials in large quantities," today urged the White House to convene a special chemical safety summit to assess and improve the Y2K readiness of the chemical industry.

"The Y2K bug has the potential to disrupt the operation, transport, maintenance, and control activities at chemical facilities," the Senators said. "We rely on these systems to ensure our citizens enjoy a safe and healthy environment. A White House summit will help us better understand what the industry is doing to keep those safeguards in place."

The U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) endorsed the call for a summit. "With the millennial countdown approaching T minus 140 days, American communities must be better assured regarding chemical safety," said Gerald V. Poje, Ph.D., who oversees Y2K issues for the CSB. "A Chemical Safety Summit will help redouble efforts to prevent releases of hazardous materials from year 2000 technology problems."

A March 1999 report on the chemical industrys Y2K readiness, released jointly by the Senate Y2K Committee and the CSB, identified "significant gaps" in federal guidelines regarding Y2K chemical safety and a lack of information from small and medium-sized chemical enterprises. The industry was also the subject of a committee hearing in May, in which Senator Bennett called Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) action toward ensuring employee safety during the millennium date change "woefully inadequate."

What information does exist on the chemical industrys Y2K preparedness is based in part on a survey the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA) conducted of its membership beginning last December. To date, CMA has received only a 63 percent response. Data on another 7 percent of CMAs members was obtained through other means. Thirty percent of the countrys largest chemical companies have still not declared their Y2K status.

The Senators also expressed concern that a Y2K survey conducted by a coalition of associations representing smaller chemical firms this spring was overly optimistic. Almost 6,000 companies were contacted. The results, however, "were based on self-reported data from only 300 companies (a five percent response rate) that were in turn projected to the remaining 5,700 companies that did not participate."

In a letter to John Koskinen, Chairman of the Presidents Council on Y2K Conversion, Bennett and Dodd cited California as a possible model for nationwide action with regard to chemical Y2K safety. California recently instituted a program to survey and assist the 110,000 hazardous materials facilities located in the state. At present, no similar effort has been pursued at a national level, leading to the need for more accurate preparedness information.

"The Federal Government has an important role in providing Y2K leadership, coordination, and direction," the Senators wrote Koskinen. "The outcome of a federal summit should lead to a coordinated federal plan of action and communication on chemical safety and Y2K." The Senators support wide disclosure and dissemination of the summits findings at the earliest possible date.

The chemical industry is potentially vulnerable to the Y2K problem on two fronts. First, there is there a great deal of automation in the production, storage, and movement of chemical products. These automated systems may fail in unpredictable and potentially dangerous ways when the year 2000 arrives. Secondly, chemical production and storage facilities are often very dependent on external utilities, especially electricity, water, and telecommunications, for safe operations. There are concerns that failures may occur in one or more of these services in localized areas in the US and in parts of the world where US firms have chemical plants.

A July safety bulletin from the U.S. Department of Transportation provides an example of the vulnerability of the chemical sector to technological problems. Stemming from an investigation into a recent pipeline safety incident involving the transport of hazardous materials, the bulletin warned pipeline operators of potential problems with their computer systems, known as Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, which electronically monitor and control pipeline operations. The bulletin said that in one particular situation, the systems had become temporarily "overburdened" as a result of database errors, a lack of reserve computational power in the SCADA processor, and the unusually dynamic changes that occurred during the incident. Operators nationwide were warned to review their own SCADA systems to safeguard against similar problems.

Also
 

Year 2000 Issues
 Technology Problems
 and Industrial Chemical Safety

 Year 2000 Issues
 

The chemical process industry relies on software and microchips
for the operation, maintenance, and control activities that are vital
to the safe operation of the plants as well as the profitable
manufacture and distribution of chemical products. Software or
microchips that store dates as two digits could render incorrect
results. For example, a control device may have been programmed
to provide a reading or report every six months using the two-digit
arithmetic. Such a device could interpret the year 2000 as 00
and calculate a negative number when measuring time intervals.
The outcome of such an event could pose a problem. The question
is: would the computer ignore the incorrect answer, or could it
cause the hardware to malfunction, or cause a major process upset?
Other such date-programming or date-embedded problems can be
categorized as follows:

* Dates stored as two-digits may assume the year 1900 instead of
the year 2000;

* 00 may not be allowed as a valid date;

* Dates may be required to begin with 19;

* Dates may have assumed a range that ends in 1999;

* Reports may assume and print a 19 as the first two digits of the
year;

United States Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board Page 24

* Dates such as 9/9/99 may cause hardware and software
problems;

* Leap year may be incorrectly calculated for the Year 2000,
resulting in problems around February 29, 2000 and December
31, 2000 on the 366 th day of the year.

Potential for Catastrophic Events Stemming from Year 2000 Non- Compliance

The potential for catastrophic events stemming from Year 2000
Non-Compliance can be divided into three categories. First,
failures in software or embedded microchips within the process
plants may cause process excursions or control problems resulting
in accidents. Second, external Y2K-related problems, such as
power outages may cause various problems, such as accelerated
shutdown of processing, monitoring, and safety systems.
Accelerated shutdowns may cause other problems such as the
triggering of fire suppression systems, causing loss of water
pressure for actual fires, and disabling such systems. Third,
multiple Y2K-related incidents may exceed the capacity of
emergency response organizations to respond.

Other factors that must be considered are applications that are
purchased from a supplier and customer applications that are
developed by the users. In addition, the current utilization of
integrated operations using multiple applications all of which pass
on information/data, or use information/data makes it mandatory
that users consider this in their readiness and operational
contingency plans.

Failures in Software or Embedded Microchips

The chemical process industries, irrespective of size and type of
operations, use a variety of software and embedded microchips to
operate, maintain, and control their processes. Y2K-related
failures, can at the minimum, cause off-specification products or
shutdown of the process and at the extreme cause process
malfunctions leading to accidents. For example, the agitator on a
batch reactor may fail to operate causing the initiation of a
runaway reaction. The emergency shutdown system (ESD) is
expected to stop the runaway reaction but the ESD itself may have
an embedded chip that may be susceptible to Y2K-related failure.
Many other examples exist for both batch processes as well as
continuous processes used by the chemical process industries.15
Chemical processes are usually built with multiple layers of
safeguards that require the congruent failure of various systems to
precipitate an accident. However, many accidents in the U.S. and
overseas have occurred when multiple simultaneous failures
resulted in catastrophic accidents. In addition, some automated
safeguard systems are on-demand or in reserve, making
recognition of the potential for failure very difficult. Thus, it is
prudent to explore the catastrophic potential of single Y2K-related
failures as well as combinations of various failures.

Power Outages

No effort was made in this study to assess the potential of power
outages from Y2K-related failures. However, potential Y2K-related
power outages represent another set of problems for
chemical and petroleum facilities. While many chemical and
petroleum manufacturing facilities have backup power generators,
Y2K failures may include concurrent loss of power, cooling water
and other system malfunctions. First, plants without auxiliary
power backup systems face a threat to parts of their processes that
may not shutdown in a fail-safe mode. Batch chemical processes
are especially susceptible because the safety of the process is quite
often dependent on time-dependent factors such as precisely timed
mixing, heating or cooling requirements. Second, a potential
scenario is that widespread power outages may cause shutdowns of
many plants, which in turn will require simultaneous startups.
Although startups of chemical plants are infrequent and their
durations are short compared with the life cycle of a plant, process
safety incidents occur five times as often during startup as they do
during normal operations 16 . Thus, a large number of simultaneous
startups may increase the potential of incidents in one or more
process plants. In addition, the simultaneous restarts of large
power-consuming facilities will impose large demands on the
electrical grid.
 
 

-- Brian (imager@home.com), August 23, 1999.

Miss me yet A-R??

-- Brian (imager@home.com), August 23, 1999.

Brian,
I promised I'd pop back in after the next "day of predicted doom."
If you wish to post fear-mongering drivel, be my guest - this forum is filled with it, after all. Y2K is turning out to be the first joke of the new millenium. ;)

Dear I see through it all,
Excellent points, sound argument, and all-around good form. Lian, are you paying attention? ;)

Sping of Kain,
Porky would like to mud-wrestle.

go away,
Did this same person tell you to expect power fluctuations this weekend? Just kidding...but seriously, doomers believe what they want. They only see what they wish to see in anything they read. I'm back for a while - deal with it.

Dear programmer,
I agree with your assessment of the meme behind the belief. I suppose I did not wish to associate anti-government sentiment with this belief structure; but the evidence is overwhelming. Thank you for your on-topic and well-reasoned response.

Regards,
Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), August 23, 1999.

Programmer-

You're absolutely right- There's plenty of razor wire.

-- Sam (Gunmkr52@aol.com), August 23, 1999.

If there was any evidence, all your civil servants would be in jail. What kind of a stupid question is this?? Never trust a woman or a government.

-- setec astronomy (number9@minspring.com), August 23, 1999.

"Never trust a woman or a government."

Isn't/wasn't your mother/sister/aunt/grandmother a woman setec? What kind of irrational creature are you?

-- Chicken Little (panic@forthebirds.net), August 24, 1999.

From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr near Monterey, California

Urban Warfare exercises being carried out in communities across the country, such as mine.

Updating of Executive Orders which spell out emergency property distribution rights of government

Official denials that there are "any plans" to impose martial law (never believe anything until it has been officially denied)

Official statements folks may have to show that they have sufficient preparations to avoid being forcefully evacuated from their homes

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage.neener.autospammers--regrets.greenspun), August 24, 1999.

There is no good reason for the governemnt to implememt martial law. They have a tremendous amount of power during an emergency without martial law. They can also continue to issue executive orders.

-- Dave (dannco@hotmail.com), August 24, 1999.