Subject:	Getting Ready To Lock bks Up Under Martial Law
Date:	1999/09/21
Author:	Paul Milne <fedinfo@halifax.com>
	Posting History

Re: Y2K- Hot by D60sEagle 20 September 1999 06:36 UTC   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----   In a message dated 99-09-20 02:06:43 EDT, you write:   << Just to let all of you know, especially those of you in Northern California. My son just came home from National Guard weekend and said that everything that the government has denied to date about NG Y2K preparations is actually true. They have just been officially told hours ago that yes everyone is on call for door to door personal callup without use of telecommunications equipment (they had to provide locations to be physically contacted), the armories will be manned for months from just before until well after Y2K, the drill meets from now until Y2K will be for riot control training (in the Bay Area).  Yes, the Bay Area is being targetted for Y2K riot control training needs. Now what was that that Greenspan was saying that this will be nothing at all? Very obviously, the military is expected disruptions in heavily urban areas.   Osinski >>   Pumped my son for further details. The boys were told that various groups were going to use Y2K as "D-Day". The distinct impression was given that martial law will be declared (armories open and staffed at the ready for months, millenium groups seen as ready to go into armed action). Odd sidenote, the boys were told that general mayhem would be a cover for neighbors taking out grudges etc. When I summarized everything he told me  and said that the government seems to be laying the groundwork for justifying martial law. He said, "oh yeah, without question" as if the sun will rise tomorrow. Oh shit!   Osinski ==========   Rumors of martial law. Just ask yourself one question.....if they HAVE decided to do it, would they be honest and open about it NOW? No, they would not. Would they tell the population that it was even a possibility? No. They have already COMMITTED to Y2K being , basically, a non-event.   So, when it does happen, YOu will be COMPLETELY non-plussed, surprised, taken unaware, can't believe your eyes.   No skin off my nose.  Yes, this kid who says that they were OFFICAILLY told, is just lying to his father or this guy is just making it up to scare people.   I am glad that this report talks about the sequestration of the Bay area. At least bks will be under lock and key.   http://csf.colorado.edu/longwaves/sep99/msg01028.html   -- Paul Milne "If you live within 5 miles of a 7-11, you're toast"

-- a (a@a.a), September 22, 1999

Answers

Lets put Milne's jive into jive so it reads better:

Rumors uh martial law. Plum ax' ya'self one quesshun.....if dey GOTS' decided t' do it, would dey be honest and jimmey 'bout it NOW? No, dey would not. Would dey tell de populashun dat it wuz even some possibility? No. Dey gots' already COMMITTED t' Y2K bein' , basically, some non-event.

So's , when it duz happen, YOu's gots'ta be COMPLETELY non-plussed, surprised, snatchn unaware, kin't recon' ya' eyes.

No skin off mah' nose. What it is, Mama! Yes, dis kid who says dat dey wuz OFFICAILLY told, be plum lyin' t' his fada' o' dis guy be plum makin' it down t' scare sucka's.

Ah be glad dat dis report raps 'bout de sequestrashun uh de Bay area. Sheeeiit. At least bks gots'ta be unda' lock and key. Slap mah fro!

http://csf.colorado.edu/longwaves/sep99/msg01028.html

-- Fuh'rina Milne "If you's live widin 5 miles uh some 7-11, youse toast"

-- Tired of Fruitcakes (LMAO@Nutcase_Milne.Now), September 22, 1999.

You know, my oldest friend loves the saying: "When the green flag drops, the bullsh*t stops"

We have 100 days to the green flag. Then one "side" or the other is going to be eating a LOT of crow... (It may well be all they have to eat, *IF* ...)

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), September 22, 1999.

Greenspan: ".....[might hear something disturbing on the radio or TV, but don't panic..]" ...... maybe he WAS referring to the nutcases.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), September 22, 1999.

/// ---Tired of Fruitcakes used several of the Rules of Dis-Information.

Can you spot which ones?

Here's the list of 25:

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!" gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such "arguable rumors". If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a "wild rumor" which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia", "racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to -the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint. n 7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the "high road" and "confess" with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, "just isn't so." Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for "coming clean" and "owning up" to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue" with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the "play dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

///

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), September 22, 1999.

no talking please,

I love these 25 rules. Is this your work? Anonymous? Or is there a known author?

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), September 22, 1999.

Folks, check this out! Martial Law will be the bare minimum.

FBI Explosive Y2K Plans Outted

Y2K NewsWire, Breaking News

September 22, 1999

We all know the FBI lied about Waco. Government troops blazed away at the compound from helicopters, amored personnel carriers and the ground, yet the FBI insists none of their people fired a single shot.

Now the FBI is about to face a new round of allegations, but this time, it's about Y2K.

One of the longest-running television programs in the history of PBS, "Tony Brown's Journal," is set to reveal explosive allegations as early as this Friday. In the thirty-minute segment, already filmed, the former FBI Special Agent reveals one blockbuster allegation after another, describing, for example, how the contingency plan to relocate mass numbers of people is hardly anything new to the intelligence community. He says, "They prepare to go in and control the public in mass numbers, to move them to certain locations. They have that plan in effect, they've been training for years to do that."

About Y2K, the Special Agent says, "Y2K presents a problem because... if you lose electricity, now you're talking about making movements under the cover of darkness. ...And they realize... they have an acceptable loss rate. In these movements during night, there may be some innocent people who are harmed and shot, but that's acceptable."

Also set to be revealed in the interview: the FBI's "Mad Max" scenario that allegedly characterizes blacks as "emotional people and not an intellectual people" who are likely to loot and riot. The Special Agent adds, "Mad Max would consits of them going in and restoring order by using military force, by use of the National Guard, and by using HRT [Hostage Recovery Team] intelligence..."

But none of the allegations to be revealed in the show are a surprise to the FBI, says the former agent. "This is not even a surprise if you understand the intelligence community," he says, explaining that it is, in fact, the responsibility of the FBI and the intelligence community to anticipate and plan for these kinds of events.

In an interview with Y2K Newswire, the former Special Agent revealed that if questioned, FBI officials would certainly not deny the existence of such a plan. They would call it a "worst case contingency" and explain that their security roles require them to plan for such emergencies.

Plans for mass relocations of the population, "acceptable casualties" and removal of so-called "dissidents" after a declaration of Martial Law are only a surprise to the American public, not the intelligence community.

The full story is unveiled on your local PBS station beginning this Friday. Shows may air any day from Friday, September 23 through Thursday, September 30th. Check your local listings for exact air times.

Video tapes of the show can also be purchased for $29.95 by calling 1-800-524-3552 and asking for the show titled, "Race and Y2K." Y2K Newswire makes nothing from your purchase.

Tony Brown is the author of "Empower the People" and "Black Lies, White Lies." Brown works to bring together blacks and whites through mutual understanding of how the global power structures really operate. Brown also regularly holds Y2K rallies to increase awareness and preparedness among Americans.

Y2K Newswire is bringing an exclusive interview with the former FBI Special Agent to its members later this week.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), September 22, 1999.

Siggghhh. I see this board still has learned nothing from Steven Pooles lesson that he taught you several months ago. Maybe I will send Paul a nice email too because he will publish anything.

"If you live within 5 miles of Paul Milne...your toast."

-- MrWayCool (mustbenice@inPaulsword.com), September 22, 1999.

sorry to be so ignorant- but if martial law were established, exactly what would that mean? What would happen, what laws would be in effect, etc??

-- farmer (hillsidefarm@drbs.net), September 22, 1999.

Don't get on the bus. Remember the dead in Bosnia got on the busses and were led to their deaths.

-- y2k dave (xsdaa111@hotmail.com), September 22, 1999.

WIRE CUTTERS!!! WIRE CUTTERS!! GET YER Y2K WIRE CUTTERS RIGHT HERE, FOLKS!!! STEP RIGHT UP, DON'T BE SHY! WIRE CUTTERS!! WIRE CUTTERS!! I GOT WIRE CUTTERS...INSULATED, LINEMAN-GRADE WIRE CUTTERS!!!

-- Jay Urban (jurban@berenyi.com), September 22, 1999.

The 25 Rules of Disinformation can be found at this site. I just checked it...it works.

http://www.trufax.org/research2/disinforules.html

25 Rules

I remember when teaching about advertising (propaganda) techniques was part of public school, high school curriculm. They don't do it anymore, do they?

--She in the sheet upon the hilltop,

-- Donna (moment@pacbell.net), September 22, 1999.

---Liberty -- the 25 rules are from the "American Patriot Friends Network"

---Y2K Dave -- Don't get on the bus...I love it...

---Jay Urban -- "GET YER Y2K WIRE CUTTERS RIGHT HERE, FOLKS!!!" ...you had me ROFLMAO

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), September 22, 1999.

From the same site, this page on Indoctrination Vs. Education:

http://www.trufax.org/analysis/analy3.html

Indoctrination/Educa tion

-- Donna (moment@pacbell.net), September 22, 1999.

If they decide they want to put the troops out BEFORE the rollover, then they will create some kind of staged terrorist activity. Perhaps an explosion at a government or military target, like the Oklahoma city bombing or the World Trade Center kinda thing. Then of course Bubba will make an announcement to the people:

"our top officials in the F.B.I., N.S.A., C.I.A., Defense Dept., (blah, blah) have informed me that they have identified links of this bombing to Bin laden's terrorist regime. We feel that as we approach the century date change we must avoid the possibilty of any of these anti-American terrorist organizations finding any kind of a broken link in our National Security and Defense structure. The National Guard will be deployed and will set up checkpoints at critical junctures (every corner) within our nation in order to search for any type of destructive devices, and to apprehend anyone suspected of hostile intentions. We ask that when leaving your home you always carry identification with you, and take with you only the items that are absolutely necessary (because if you don't have identification we'll lock you up in our concentration camps). The National Guard will remain for your protection until we have verified that there is no possibility of any threat to our National Security system (forever). Thank you for your cooperation, and have a nice day." :)

Of course if they decide they are going to wait until just AFTER the rollover, then it will go something like this:

"We have discovered that several (50,000) of our government computer systems have malfunctioned and we have reason to believe they have been attacked by cyber-terrorists. Even though we fixed 97% of them (6,000 out of 80,000?) for the Y2K bug, it appears that religous fanatics and Chinese terrorist organizations have found a way to send a virus into our systems that just happens to erase all of the hard work we did to fix all of the Y2K problems (well, I'll be darned!). We are implementing Federal contingency plan # 730GK25-46MANUAL-2962LABOR-BLAHBLAH. Every American citizen, except those critical personnel designated as "exempt" (politicians, wealthy businessmen, etc.) will be scheduled to volunteer 20 hours per week to assist in the continuation of normal government services to the public. The National Guard is being deployed to help you "find your way" (at gunpoint) to your job locations. Bread and water will be provided while on duty to serve your nation. As soon as the threat of these cyber-terrorist attacks has been eliminated and our computers are restored to normal functioning (never) you will be relieved of your service to the government. I want to personally thank you in advance for your cooperation, have a nice day." :)

-- @ (@@@.@), September 22, 1999.

So this means.. what? They will take people from cities that are now distributed across a few hundred square miles, somehow transport these hundreds of thousands of people, and then put them in a concentrated detainment area of a few acres... at the same time providing sanitation, medical care, public health, food, nutrition, water and cable.

The logistics are staggering. They could not do this today. And we must accept that this will happen in the dead of winter without communication, transportation, power, in a precision fashion by trained handlers who know what they are doing?

-- Spanky (nospam @spamfree.net), September 22, 1999.

Spanky, I think ML is being planned for troublemakers.

Everybody else gets carted off to the high school or stadium.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), September 22, 1999.

CAUTION: DON'T PUT THOSE WIRE CUTTERS DOWN YOUR PANTS!

-- Yikes (Yikes@Yikeess.com), September 22, 1999.

I don't think they are going to haul everyone away, just those without identification, or if they catch you with a weapon. I wouldn't be suprised if they do house-to-house searches to confiscate weapons. Resistors will go to camp.

Spanky,

You might want to ask some holocaust victims about the amenities at the camps, but I don't think they are necessarily going to provide "sanitation, medical care, public health, food, nutrition, water and cable".

-- @ (@@@.@), September 22, 1999.

Hey folks, I don't watch TV, so how am I going to see this? Anybody want to transcribe it? No, seriously, it'd be great if someone would at least post a synopsis. It sounds kind of bugus, because I don't think PBS would show something like this, unless it was already commonly reported elsewhere.

BTW, who is this former FBI special agent? Do they give a name? I assume it's not Tony Brown, or is it?

Al

-- Al K. Lloyd (all@ready.now), September 22, 1999.

No Talking

Thanks for the list. I already have it printed out and posted by my monitor. It makes a nice BS filter. It greatly simplifies the responces, too. Now instead of writing out long paragraphs, as to just HOW someone's post blows big ones, we can just write "#3", "#12", "#24", etc.

Of course, bringing this to the forum's attention is going to make you EXTREMELY unpopular, with all groups, since there are dozens of posters, representing any perspective you can think of, who regularly employ these tactics.

Quite a little pandora's box, you may have uncovered.

-- Bokonon (bon0non@my-Deja.com), September 22, 1999.

So what's the problem? In the extreme case, martial law is better than the alternative (looting, rioting, arson, loose nuts with guns). And this is something for which we'd need the National Guard. The threat is easily real enough to make martial law a possibility. So would you rather that this response were planned and practiced, or not?

If Paul is saying that this is a valuable NG contingency plan, then I second the motion. He's right, it is a valuable contingency plan. On the other hand, if he's saying this plan is guaranteed to be put into place just because it's one possible response, this is a common error. Contingency plans are NOT guarantees, they are part of being prepared for anything (or as much as possible). Prudent, that's all.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 22, 1999.

Flint, I agree with you halfway. Martial law may indeed be part of the short term solution to managing the y2k period and I concur. But the problem is that the government is telling people y2k will be minor inconvenience and that they have no plans for martial law. This is dishonest, regardless of whether or not you couch it in terms of being "delibertly misleading".

Other countries are openly planning for this type of military intervention during the rollover. Since the US is not, they are guaranteeing that there will be public outcry.

-- a (a@a.a), September 22, 1999.

Once again, flint-boy shows himself to be an idiot. We are not talking about the mobilization of the NG in the event of a natural disater. They do NOT hide their potential plans for those sort of deployments.

In this case, they are most definitely making plans, and those plans are not being made public. Why can they not say that there may very well indeed be disruptions due to Y2K. PLAN for serious disruptions. If the disruptions get bad, we may need to call out the National guard.

What is so hard about that? Instead they make secret plans and deny everything.

This is NOT America. This is the age when an out of control government, hides what it is doing and calls it in the public interest to keep it hidden.

If I see a national guard troop coming up my quiet peaceful driveway, and they announce that they want to 'take' things' or 'remove us' for our own good, I will gladly blow their heads off. They have NO buisness here at all.

And if it means that they kill us, so be it. They will have behaved like criminals and we wil treat them as criminals.

If the government actually has plans for rounding up the population in the event of Y2k problems then they had a DUTY to have informed the citizens BEFOREHAND. Since they did not, they are NOT behaving in our best interest but THEIRS, and they are CRIMINLAS only worthy of being fought against.

This country was meant to be one that was servant to the people. A national guard or other military unit that takes action post Y2k will only be able to do so because the government did NOT warn the population in advance or actually KNEW full well all along they were going to do it.

The federal government is already criminally liable for their gross inaction on Y2K

They are criminals and when they show their faces here, in the absence of rioting on MY property, I will treat them like the criminals that they are.

Paul Milne "If you live within 5 miles of a 7-11, you're toast"

-- Paul Milne (fedinfo@halifax.com), September 22, 1999.

I apologize in advance for my idiocy, but I agree with Paul completely on this one. They should tell us what this contingency plan is, and they should announce what is expected of the citizens in advance. Two issues here. The first is the secrecy Paul mentions, which should not be so. The second is, even the best preparations come out much worse if those being protected by martial law have no idea what they're supposed to do or why. Communications are a must. So this practicing the plan while denying any such thing is both dishonest and impractical -- a blueprint for failure, should martial law prove necessary.

My guess (NOT my argument) is that someone up there worries that revealing such preparations in advance might trigger the very event the plans are designed to suppress. There are, face it, some here who would interpret an announcement such as "in the unlikely case we should need to do this, here's your responsibility" as a direct, immediate threat to their precious liberties.

And you notice that the reaction to this news isn't "how can I help", but rather "do it MY way or I'll blow your head off". NOT an indication of a public eager to help in an emergency, eh?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 22, 1999.

Flint - have you started smoking again? If so, them ain't menthol you be inhaling. Agreeing with Mr. Milne? take two tetanus shots and call me in the am.

ROFLMAO

-- justme (finally@home.com), September 22, 1999.

I find it hard to believe that a reasoned person could assume evil intentions if a policing force showed up on their lawn from the government, be it state or federal, that is unless there was presupposition of evil.

Paul is suggesting the reaction will be based on the for-knowledge of evil intent.

If the government was acting in the best interest of it's citizens, it would inform the citizens of all intentions prior to action.

The stance of keeping the public un-informed is a socialist point of view that 'we the governing body knows better' and 'we will make the decisions for our citizens'. I take great exception to this and I, for one, will not tolerate it. I hope most of you out there will do the same. They work for us, not the other way around.

-- OR (orwelliator@biosys.net), September 22, 1999.

Or ---- Are you at all aware what is happening with the LA Police Dept. It gives a whole new meaning to "They work for us, not against us"

-- thinkIcan (thinkIcan@make.it), September 22, 1999.

If there's any one thing that I am thankful for today, it's the freedom to own firearms and the freedom to protect myself from the enemy. Paul is absolutely right, when the government keeps vital life threatening information from the public, they will have no one to blame but themselves. But I can hear the spinmeisters already, it makes me sick to my stomach. Will the public wake up? No they won't, not until it's too late.

"A public eager to help?" Help in what way? No food, no water, means death. So, what about us who have prepared for our own family? I nor you could possibly feed and water the crowd. As much as some of you would like to think so, it's just not economically or even humanly possible to do so. What happens when the food and water runs out? What about the treatment and the spread of disease? Have any of you really thought about this to the bitter end? If Y2K ends up being a total break down of society, many will not make it due to the lack of survival skills. My God! Just take a look at all the books and preparation forums teaching the basics for survival. Stans posts are good, but unless people put into practice what they have learned, what good is it to anyone outside of yourself? Sorry to ramble on, but there will be thousands of losers who could have been saved if they would only have listened to the voice of reason.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), September 22, 1999.

thinkican, please refresh *our* memory on the LA police dept deal. Thanks.

-- OR (orwelliator@biosys.net), September 22, 1999.

justme:

I read what Paul says, and if he's right I agree with him. If he's wrong, I try to show why as carefully as I can. Unlike Paul's approach, I don't *start* by calling him an idiot and then searching for some reason to do so. He's tied himself in a few knots that way, when he's tried to support this name-calling with thought rather than mindless knee-jerks and repetitions of his tired chants.

And in this case, I agree with him. You will notice he calls me an idiot anyway. I guess everyone with enough opinions will be right sooner or later. Someday he might even get a prediction right, we'll see.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 22, 1999.

Here OR:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/19990917/aponline013539_ 000.htm

-- a (a@a.a), September 22, 1999.

Flint said

They should tell us what this contingency plan is, and they should announce what is expected of the citizens in advance. Two issues here. The first is the secrecy Paul mentions, which should not be so. The second is, even the best preparations come out much worse if those being protected by martial law have no idea what they're supposed to do or why. Communications are a must.

No shit Sherlock. WHAT DO YOU THINK WE HAVE BEEN PREACHING ON THIS FORUM FOR THE PAST 18 MONTHS???? You on the other hand have been ranting that all the "good news" means y2k will be insignificant and therefore no sense in getting JQP's dander up. Which is it Flint?

But at least you're slowly wising up to the situation that is now unfolding.

-- a (a@a.a), September 22, 1999.

Orwelliator must have just returned from an extended visit to another planet. Only a person completely out of touch could write:

"I find it hard to believe that a reasoned person could assume evil intentions if a policing force showed up on their lawn from the government, be it state or federal, that is unless there was presupposition of evil."

Quick refresher:

Incidents: New York

New York: Amadou Diallo

New Jersey: State police"

Bay Area: police violence

Oakland, CA: FBI and Oakland police

Boston: botched raid

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), September 23, 1999.

Get a clue guys,

Yes Paul this is for you, I don't care how many heads you bloe off, you and I both know that if you try to fight a military unit, YOU ARE DEAD. You can be a hero in your on mind, standing on top a pile of bodies, your gun smoking and your woman worshiping at your feet. But you know that you are making everyone on the board scared s*itles, and when they see a uniform after TSHIF they will shoot first AND THEN BE KILLED. This makes you feel good I think.

-- truth (just@the facts.com), September 23, 1999.

Tom, I got your point, but you didn't really get mine. Perhaps my statement should have read "automatically assume evil intent". Does JQP get suspicious when approached by anyone in a uniform? Of course not.

I am not suspicious of every single law enforcement officer, be it community, county, state or federal. The natural reaction is to anticipate they are there to deal with some kind of trouble. I do not feel personally threatened when a cop pulls me over to ticket me, or if the local sheriff stops me in the park to chat. Hell, I don't even flinch when the military, the SS and god knows who else comes to town accompanying the criminal-in-chief.

However, when y2k rolls around and I see law enforcement or military crawling all over my neighborhood moving people and property, I'm going to presuppose evil intent. That is, unless I'm told in advance why, who, where, when, how and .... IF I agree with it.

Kapiche?

-- OR (orwelliator@biosys.net), September 23, 1999.

isn't paul a pig farmer??

why would anyone listen to a pig farmer about y2k issues?

especially a pig farmer with bad manners........

jqp

-- jqp (youh@vegottobekidding.com), September 23, 1999.

Donna,

They stopped teaching about "propaganda" somewhere in the 1970's when it became apparant that "They" were going to make use of it to brainwash children in the Public Schools!

-- K. Stevens (kstevens@ It's ALL going away in January.com), September 23, 1999.