A Post About the Federal Y2K Stance That You MUST Read

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

<< Subject: Response to Government Monitoring of the Boards

The Naval War College's concern on Y2K is with foreign nations. It was addressing foreign nations and those who would be dealing those nations. It's on the alert as nations collapse for "Answer Man" thus bringing more rogue nations into being I suspect. Or worse, which are Answer Men in already nuclearized nations.

The "chatroom watch" is most likely to be on enemies of a given nation. Such as those groups that want a social break down in order to achieve their own revolutionary aims. People deliberately playing out the Orson Wells' War of the Worlds panic inducer.

"Panic" was defined by those using it as every person seems to have his or her own defintion of it. It was defined in the publicity stunt: Government Y2K Committee Speaks With Press. They stated openly there is the possibility that a window for the War of the Worlds mass hysteria could open. "Panic" is not preparations. None of us would qualify as citizens in panic. To further validate that, in seemingly ancient articles leading up to Koskinens hiring and then the formation of the Senate Committee, Senator Bennet openly states that the people cannot be told the truth about Y2K because there is a risk of mass hysteria, and the Committees job is to say things like, "Everything is fine!"

We are not clever slithering beings defying government and its spins on the masses with our preparations. It was decided in early/mid 1998 to cause a bit of a pre-activation in hopes that those who would prepare would do so at that early of a date. These people, they reasoned, would be lured up like guppies from the pond, wreck their havoc, and then go away.

We all noticed a stop was put into effect. As we guppies went through the Y2K "truthful" door, that door was slammed tightly shut behind us. No, the Feds did not want our help "waking up the neighbors," and no the Feds did not want us to "reorganize our local communities," and no the Feds did not want "our assistance."

People have pointed out only 2-3% prepared? Obviously, though our walks of life are different, we are not of the general population but do beat to a different drummer. We do know the "truth" already just from the published old articles in which "the truth" was told...so one can conclude the last thing the Feds want to see in the "chatrooms" as the general population feels a bit betrayed is ourselves pointing out, "Yap, they lied, see this old article, and isn't it a shame it killed off your whole family?" The person then marches out the door with a rifle crazed beyond belief. This may be something also watched for at the time.

Preparations were just that as we did them. One can't confuse that with the propaganda being used on the 97%. It isn't meant for oneself. Oneself was the result of the deliberate Fed effort to get those who would seriously prepare to do so at a very early date. You've all got to move off the propaganda meant for others. Who cares that you prepared? But plenty care if you announce your meeting December 25 to "rally the people to prepare."

Those old articles say it was hopeless for a nation as large as the American population to all prepare as they might see fit. There may be truth to that because the 2-3% did cause jamming and shortages. None of which was wrong. Somebody is going to buy the generator for a blackout. The system barely handled the 2-3%. I think some of us are in denial about this. People who sat and read the generators were being rationed, some companies no longer accepting orders, survival food companies back ordered, gold, rifles and ammo in shortages etc, and then turn around and yell, "Everyone should be told "the truth" and prepare! They have to lead and guide 97% through a terrifying and dangerous time with a supply chain already fractured that barely could/can function under the weight of the 2-3%.

I am predicting that if that 2-3% does not go happily off snug and comfy "saved" from the worst, but instead "rallies the people" as we enter more closely to "D" day, those individuals will be paid a visit, and it may even be by covert assassins. I do not think the Feds will bat one eyelash taking out a hair in the soup of its "get the 97% through this" plan.

One of the reasons the door was shut behind us in a rather nasty and biting fashion, I suspect, is because some amongst us have not seen the ugliness of the world. If the Navy is talking about *military* run Relief Centers having to control the people, keep them from congesting about them and so forth, than quite obviously, one is not handing a plate of beans and rice out at the church to the starving masses, or at the school, or the community neighborhood stockpile because to even help large crowds of people in crises requires an armed military. We saw that in the Serbian War. To help the ethnic Albanians did require armed and policing personnel. Y2K'ers failing to grasp how many *millions* of people live in L.A. alone and how many of them are no better than animals coming forth with numerous ideals out side of reality. If there is going to be a military run Relief Center the Feds and military no doubt wish to pick that location themselves. Babbit said the United States is now at 300 million people. 97% of 300 million have to be controlled through crise so the USA remains the USA.

Another point to consider, it is illegal in America to start a bank run. Like it or not folks you cannot state publically what your perception of the banks is if it could instigate a run. That law applies to Senator Bennet, John Koskinen, Bill Clinton, the Admiral of the Navy, the FBI agent etc. No one is exempt from that law. Those law breakers are watched for like a hawk I am sure. I think they will be watched for in those "chatrooms" especially as the time nears more.

I am not a Christian. I do not turn my check ever. I have no difficulty in watching and interpreting the signs of the times. You were putty in the Feds hands, you did exactly what they wanted you to do which was to wreck havoc at a very early date, you are supposed to have completed all those preparations, you as people vowing to be so Y2K informed, savvy and in the know, were expected to have read those articles which talked about the reality of 97%, and you are expected to rise above juvenile emotions, use your head, and with quiet intelligence begin to make your exit, and leave Y2K and the 97% for the Feds to handle. Your assigned Y2K role, which you accepted when you activated to prepare, was to keep yourself and loved ones in a measure of security and out of harms way. The nation is entering a volatile time period so stay out of the stores, stay out of the banks, and stay out of the "chatrooms."

If you can't go cold turkey than go into a withdrawal until your off. I am in my own withdrawal as we speak. But whichever, do it to mean it.

97% have to be escorted through a scary and dangerous period of history, the nation has to survive it all with flag, capitalism, and Republican democracy intact, and martial law is probably going to occur in some areas depending on the scenario. We read articles about the Florida food distribution warehouses being under armed protection, and yet this doesn't suggest to you that you might be grateful for martial law? You with your cans of ravioli as the mobs storm a warehouse for a can of ravioli?

No Fed is going to take your cans of ravioli. It may not have been the agenda, but if you think about it, what the Feds managed to do was get all its discontents, fringe folk, activatists, those too in the know about Y2K (CIO's & Programmers), and Internet loud mouths prepared so they haven't any reason to be out there making what it might perceive as trouble. Don't claim the Feds were out to get you as you sit the 2-3% prepared and spared misery.

One thing to know, and you really can't be emotional and not intellectual people about this. The CIA is the most powerful espionage entity on the globe, and in working with the American people, it has experienced what is called a "backfire." If you go forth "waking up" people who do not want to be woken up you might find yourself in a "backfire." Gary North has already mentioned threats he recieves. Art Bell had a caller telling him the individual was going to steal Arts' food. Those good ole Americans you all want to "save" may come at you in a "backfire" you could not foresee or predict. *President Reagan found out how careful one has to be. He went forth with a famous speech called "The Threat" to wake up Americans, tell them "the truth," and lay out his plan of action to "save" them all. He went forth to a religious community and gave his speech. The people became dangerous and it went into an unruly mob. He fled back and it took people from Los Alamos to eventually work out "The Threat" speech to the point it could be said without being dangerous. If President Reagan and the Los Alamos staff couldn't predict a backfire how would any of you? Maybe that is why "Y2K war games" were conducted? How can the trigger button be so known and predictable when Reagan had to flee a church community for telling the people The Truth?

Cool it. Just cool it. A part of growth is finding out you didn't know it all afterall. If you have such a love for "the masses" and such a deep concern over the nation, and such horror martial law may called to control irrational beasts, "chatrooms may be monitored," then get rid of all your preparations and actually be "one of people." No one is stopping you. You can go forth robbed in your bedsheets, you head shaved, and "lead the people" thus preventing all your claimed obvious things. Just remember Reagan has SS all around him. You won't. Go on. Go ahead. Spread your gospel all across the Internet all you who did not fit the mindset of the 97% but claim to know them and what is good for them.

I myself am going off with my preparations, will not be drawing attention to myself in a chatroom or otherwise, and leave the 97% to the Feds. It expects the possibility of serious and acute mass hysteria. I don't intend to be in front of that train when it starts rolling. And that 97% mass hysteria all hitting the Internet is probably what the "chatrooms being monitored" is really all about. Hysteria is overwhelming terror that overides all reasoning ability. Picture that going at it in the "chatrooms" January 1. People who have never been in a chatroom now on spreading the word that "the aliens have landed with high powered weapons-I saw it for myself in Bradford, Illionis!" People in total hysteria don't see the truth. They look out with eyes altering reality and rearranging it. They go on the net with a system fracturing in their local community, be the 97%, and will read, "Yap, if you didn't prepare for a year you're as good as dead and that's a fact."

I am going to repeat this naysayers. You broke "the system" as the 2- 3% who prepared. The days of Little House of the Prarie ended over 100 years ago. This is not or could ever be a "system" that can handle 300 million, (6 billion globally), to suddenly play "Prepare for the long winter." There are 3rd world nations still in the days of Little House on the Prarie and due to overpopulation the people "living off the land" with their Victory gardens and chickens are starving to death. Not even the old systems could possible have managed 300 million people preparing for a long winter. You all know it and yet you deny it. So just what do you want to say in the "chatrooms?" "6 billion people prepare?" To the Asians who will die after working as slave labor to make the Powerpacs, flashlights, lamps and batteries you bought to save yourselves? Urge buying the rice from the paddies the workers could not themselves afford to buy for even daily use? A globe that already doesn't have enough food for daily use? To America in which one-third of the children already live with chronic hunger?

So accept the horror the Feds might know what they're doing. You have your revenge already for any "beef" you might have with the Feds. It's comfy, cozy, prepared Y2K surviving population is a bunch of radicals, activists, headaches, and all the last the other nations hope would survive a terrible crises.

It's hard to quiet down. I know. I've been out there the worst of em myself. All I had to do was go back to the 1997-to mid 1998 articles to realize a few things. Don't thank your gods, thank the Feds, who lite a match under you, you now sit prepared, and leave them and those HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of eating machines they have to control alone.>>

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), October 08, 1999



I was intrigued this nameless person's comment that "This is not or could ever be a "system" that can handle 300 million, (6 billion globally), to suddenly play "Prepare for the long winter."" Aside from the minor point that there are only 260 million in the U.S. (maybe he's including Canada, too), he's obviously arguing that our JIT economy can't handle stockpiling activities on the part of business or individuals.

But I think it's a question of degree. Perhaps the entire country could not achieve the level of stockpiling that, say, Gary North has accomplished for himself; but I think we could have done a lot better than the 2-3 day figure that the government has settled on.

Consider the arithmetic associated with a one-month stockpiling effort. One month is one-twelfth, or 8.333%, of a year, right? So, if we boosted our food production by 8% during the course of a year, we could accomplish a one-month stockpile for the nation.

Not possible? Well, maybe not, though no one has ever shown me detailed evidence to back up such an assertion. But in any case, remember that Senators Bennett and Dodd began their Senate Y2K committee during the summer of 1997. Let's be generous, and assume that it took them (and the rest of the Big Cheeses in Washington) six months to figure out that Y2K could be a serious problem. Actually, I think Monynihan had written a serious, detailed letter to President Clinton in 1996, making just such an argument, and there may have been a few folks ringing the alarm bell in DC as early as 1995.

But let's start the clock in mid-1997, and give Senators Bennett and Dodd another six months to figure things out. That brings us to the beginning of 1998, at which point we still had TWO FULL YEARS to crank up production (notice that we have to take into account the spring planting season, so perhaps the decision would need to have been made earlier, in order to make plans, acquire seeds, etc,). Given two full years, all we needed to do was increase production, overall, by 4.16667% per year for 1998 and 1999.

We might also have done some additional things: pay the farmers a bonus for growing larger crops. Stop sending so much wheat to Russia, where it gets lost and/or spoiled. Take more care of the contents of the grain silos in this country, so that we don't lose anything that's been stockpiled. Encourage the concept of Victory Gardens, and devote some of the PR "spin campaign" money to encouraging citizens to use their food economically.

In any case, increasing the overall food production by 4% per year, for only two years, would have given us a one-month stockpile. If we could have increased that to 12% per year, for 1998 and 1999, then the entire country would have a three-month stockpile, which would be enough to get us through the worst of the winter months.

I've heard the argument that JIT industries are so finely tuned that they simply can't accommodate any sudden changes. But this is the agriculture industry we're talking about! The vagaries of Nature cause production to go up and down all the time, whether the JIT planners like it or not. Obviously, this means that a serious Y2K "mobilization" effort could have been doomed by two years of drought or flood, but my main point is that there seems to be a lot of fluctuation at the beginning of the "supply chain", on the farms and fields. Someone would have to show me some production figures from the slaughterhouses, canneries, bakeries, and other "food factories" to convince me that they have been running 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and could not possibly have handled a modest 4% increase, in order for me to believe this oft-repeated argument that the country could not have planned for Y2K.


-- Ed Yourdon (ed@yourdon.com), October 09, 1999.


Who is John Galt, indeed ... reading through my last posting on this thread, I see that I have fallen into a trap that many of us have complained about: assuming that it was the government's responsibility to marshal the resources necessary to facilitate a national food stockpiling.

If the individual citizens who make up this country had taken a close look at the situation in mid-1997 when the first serious Y2K articles began to appear, and if they had decided in the aggregate that stockpiling was a good idea, then the free market would have taken care of things all by itself. If the average citizen had gone to the grocery market once a week and had said to himself, "Instead of spending $100 for groceries for the family this week, I think I'll spend $104.17," then the production facilities within the food/ agriculture industry would have adjusted.

Even more interesting: if the average citizen had said to himself, during his weekly visit to the grocery store, "I'm still going to spend $100, because I'm on a limited budget. But instead of spending $4.17 on Twinkies and Jolt Cola, I'm going to spend it on tunafish and rice," the free market would also have found a way to adjust. One of the minor bits of awareness that I've achieved in my own Y2K preps has come from the simple act of actually looking at the contents of grocery store shelves. At least a third of it seems to be utterly useless stuff if you're even vaguely aware of nutrition -- e.g., the aformentioned Twinkies, plus Cheeze Doodles, rows and rows of pretzels, potato chips, taco chips in ten different flavors, frozen corn dogs, mint-flavored bubblegum, etc. And beer: 30-can cases of beer, piled from floor to ceiling in the grocery store. The most incremental redistribution in food-buying choices would have accomplished the stockpiling that some of us think will prove so important next year -- and while that redistribution might have wreaked some havoc in the JIT supply chain, I believe the free market would have adjusted if we had started a couple years ago.

In any case, I don't think it was the government's job to accomplish it -- it was OUR job. I do think, though, that the government deserves strong criticism for going out of its way to actively aggressively discourage people from stockpiling. In so doing, I believe they have taken upon themselves the responsibility for guaranteeing that the food supply will remain uninterrupted. And since (as a previous poster on this thread reminded us) they can't even figure out where the Chinese embassy is located in downtown Belgrade, it stretches the limits of one's credulity to believe that they can prevent serious disruptions in the food/agriculture industry.


-- Ed Yourdon (ed@yourdon.com), October 09, 1999.

Mara Wayne,

YOU ARE A BLATHERING IDIOT.....2 paragraphs into your little speech I literally said to the screen "SHUT THE HELL UP"! Now that you can hear me.....SHUT THE HELL UP!!!!!

Lator gator

-- Jack (mercer@usa.net), October 09, 1999.

Jack, she has a right to her opinion too (just like you have the right to not read her post). Who the heck said you HAD to Finish it? Was there someone there with a .357 to your monitor saying "If you don't finish this, your 17 inch is dead!"

Sorry. Rant mode off. I just feel that Mara certainly has a right to state her opinion (especially if al-d can do so).

-- Lobo (atthelair@yahoo.com), October 09, 1999.

hey, she's right, admit it, it's over. Mara? hey Mara? thanks ok? I knew you were right in 1998, when I first heard about it, but I let my optimism get the better of me. When march 31st 99 hit and the gov didn't make it I praye d that the media woudl pick it up and "people would prepare" I was actually broken up when they didn't. They were dead back in 95, they've been dead for at least 5 years. Get it? When I was a graduating senior in high school, these people were already dead. It's over. Go home.

-- jeremiah (braponspdetroit@hotmail.com), October 09, 1999.

Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear enough that I was quoting someone else's post, just so people could see it as the response was just posted, but in the archives. Due to what the poster says, I didn't copy that person's identification. But I do think the post is interesting and makes a very valid point. The feds wanted SOME people to GI.

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWAyne@aol.com), October 09, 1999.

You gotta admit it's an interesting slant on the issue. Gov.org held a population-wide audition for people smart enough to recognize long- range danger.

People were allowed a peek at the issue and if they "got it" they prepped and they're in "the club". So now it's time for the club members to sit back and feel glad to be "the chosen". And the 97% that failed their IQ test are gonna be punished.

Boy would that put a twist in the knickers of the "I want nothing to do with the government" crowd if it's true. Gov.org as the freindly shepherd, cutting them out from the majority of the herd and directing them away from the chute that leads to the slaughterhouse.

This could be one thread to watch as this idea bounces around.


-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), October 09, 1999.

how dare the gobmint montior this site? You guys are kidding right? I mean like, who puts something on the internet they want to keep private? You post something where you know millions will have access to it and then complain about who might be reading it. What's wrong with this picture.

and for Uncle Sam, if you're looking for those who might, after y2k, urge others to rally against the feds for lying to us then you're talking about leaving our nice secure well-stocked little hidey-holes to mingle with unhappy hungry pollys. Not likely. I doubt if many doomers will object to your rounding them up to help with rebuilding. And if your giving them even three meals a day of slop and hardtack it will probably be more then these unprepared nitwits would otherwise have and can therefore be considered humanitarian aid

-- thomas thatcher (jabawaki@erols.com), October 09, 1999.

Thanks for the post Mara. It is something to think about. Most people are so lame, even the smart ones.

-- Carol (glear@usa.net), October 09, 1999.

You guys are giving ***WAY*** too much credit to our government. They're simply not that smart. They ARE that sneaky, but I don't think they could do anything this complex.

There's an old saying, I think is appropo here:

"Never ascribe to malice what can be adequately attributed to stupidity."

Still prepping.

'nuff said.


-- Jollyprez (jolly@prez.com), October 09, 1999.

Mara, If you could possibly lewt us know where this actually DID come froim, you know what archives, etc. I think we'd ALL apreciate it.

Night train

-- a very CURIOUS ex -footballer, a-scratchin his head (nighttr@in.lane), October 09, 1999.

Mara, Let me see if I have the gist of the post... "Evolution in action."

That about sum it up?

-- just another (another@engineer.com), October 09, 1999.

Mara, you are exactly correct. It's not that the people don't know, they just don't want to know. I repeat your challenge to the arrogant, "Spread your gospel all across the Internet all you who did not fit the mindset of the 97% but claim to know them and what is good for them." And I'll up it one notch; be a real hero - spread your gospel in public to a crowd of strangers. Anyone who believes our government would not cause "accidents" to happen to troublemakers should take a quick look at history. The empire perpetuates itself by planning for the majority. How ironic that we demonize socialism.

-- Klar (klarbrunn@lycos.com), October 09, 1999.

As far as I'm aware in any natural disaster the government needs fully functioning volunteers who have been affected by the disaster in a limited fashion. These volunteers help start the ball rolling until the government can get in there and also supplements the people the government puts into place to organize and rebuild.

If the governments intention was from the start to get even only 2-3% of the population prepared so they can function in the first month of next year then that gives them a resource to draw upon to help things along. They don't have to worry about that 2-3% as those people do not need looking after as they are already looking after themselves without outside assistance.

When people are suffering and don't what to do they will gladly turn to people who seem to know what they are doing to lead them into setting everything right. It is entirely possible that the 2-3% may need to organise their neighbourhoods in the first week of next year until the government can take over.

Myself I am prepared and honestly next year I'd rather be out there helping people survive till the government can help them rather than be boarded up within my home peeking through my windows watching people starve while I am happily munching on my food.

I'm not saying that I will be sharing my food, this would be counter productive (and some may think me callous or some such) but the reality is I cannot feed everybody with what I have and I'd would soon be in the same boat as them. I'll be out there helping and during the night I'll be eating my food (and possibly crying at the same time) so I can keep my strength up and keep functioning so I can help others survive.

Regards, Simon

-- Simon Richards (simon@wair.com.au), October 09, 1999.

 Some might want to review the NWC document agian.

(New) Year 2000 International Security Dimension Project

Who knows, Y2K might be a bit more structured than folks think.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), October 09, 1999.

Sorry, Mara. I just noticed that you were not responsible for the content. Whoever was is correct.

-- Klar (klarbrunn@lycos.com), October 09, 1999.

Couldn't you tell that this wasn't Mara writing? Unless she had gotten into her medicinal preps. LOL. I think the guy had something to say, and I think the message is important. But, the whole thing was so cobbled up that I had a real problem following his train (wreck) of thought. Taz

-- Taz (Taz@aol.com), October 09, 1999.

Mara, darn good stuff.

97% of the people deserve what will happen to them come 1/1/2000 and there is no point in "us" trying to start a fire under them, they dont want to be prepared for anything. Even if Y2K turns out to be a joke its sad that the 97% dont even want to prepare just in case, at least to some extent. I dont talk about Y2k to anyone anymore and if it hits hard I will still not tell them I am prepared and they can just go down to the high school and live in the gymnasium until society somehow manages to pick itself back up and get rolling again.

Bring on the state of emergency or martial law, its the only thing that will protect us from the 97% who "just didnt get it".

We cant ALL prepare for the "long winter storm", we couldnt do it 6 months ago or a year ago. Yesterday I went to Home Depot and bought a couple more 5-gal Kerosene cans and noticed there were no Kero heaters, the guy told me they only had a dozen and sold them out in a few days and wont get more for a couple weeks. I dont think the JIT industrial method could handle more than 10% preparing at this point without it totally collapsing. Its time to just shut up, sit back and hope we just wasted our time and money worrying over this, because if it turns out to be bad its going to be hell out there.

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), October 09, 1999.

Yes, Taz, not very well written, but a most interesting perspective.

Thanks, Mara. I too, innitially, thought you had lost it and gone 'Sybil' on us. Whew! Glad to know you are still your sweet, intelligent, inquisitive self. I hope you're long gone from NY.

So, if we have been merely puppets on a string so far, what plans for us do our puppet masters have, locked in their small black hearts, in act three?

And who might our 'Answer Man' be? W? Pat? Jesse? Donald?

We're gonna need a double-dose o'


-- Pinkrock (Aphotonboy@aol.com), October 09, 1999.

To some degree I think this view is correct and I have detected some trace of behavior on the part of people like Bennett which seemed to be hints directed at those GI's out there while at the same time saying all the comforting words that the 'public' should be told.

Jolly Prez also has a point. There's alot of stuff that just sort of bumbles along which looks like a plan but is really just a screw up in process.

My feeling is that the 'leaders'/'owners' are taking a calculated risk on their approach to this. They know it will be bad enough to disrupt the normal processes of government (including judicial processes). So they don't have to worry about someone suing them. They are trying to deal with this catastrophy as best they an from their perspective.

I believe the approach they have chosen will not take them where they want to go.

-- ..- (dit@dot.dash), October 09, 1999.

Mara says, "I am not a Christian. I do not turn my check ever."


-- Vernon Hale (create@premiernet.net), October 09, 1999.

Yeah, I think Jolly got it right. These guys are in the operational stage known as TARFU. They recently arrived there from SNAFU. They are heading for their ultimate NWO stage known as FUBAR.

They've done such a good job telling people not to prepare, that they are now faced with really laying it on hard just to get people to marginally prepare. They blew it, as they often do. I would have expected no less.

Definitions: SNAFU (Situation Normal, All Fu#$% Up!) TARFU (Things Are Really Fu#$% Up!) FUBAR (Fu#$% Up Beyond All Recognition)

-- Gordon (g_gecko_69@hotmail.com), October 09, 1999.

Interesting,when I read "I am not a christian"I give the poster a little more credibility and read on.Ya gotta love divirsity!At least until the Jihad starts(then all Buddhists should hide,the big three tend to be violent)

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), October 09, 1999.

Extremist writing with some curious points. If I got it correct, then the messages are:

1. The Feds believed from the start that you couldn't produce a nation of GIs without severe problems kicking in.

2. The Feds had to slowly usher the most dangerous activists out of the system early so that they could then start a successful "don't worry, be happy" PR campaign.

3. I'm not so sure on this one, but I think the author is saying that their intention is to let us exist more comfortably while the struggle with the serious problems.

In the event that it gets sufficiently ugly that it was clear the Feds had to have known all along, then this is a pretty good description. I've also had the sense that there was a brief window left open in late 98/early 99 to become a GI without serious resistance. The notion of them closing the window rings very true to me. It also seems to me that recent stances by de Jager, Bennett, etc. are consistent with the door closing.

I guess we'' just have to do the experiment now.

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), October 09, 1999.

Night Train:

This was a recent response to the thread entitled (loosely) "Government Monitoring of this board?", which first appeared about a month or so ago, if I recall correctly.

The responder whose comments Mara posted for us on *this* particular thread had most likely been reading threads from several weeks back, added his/her own comments, which brought the said "Government Monitoring of this board?" thread back up into the "NEW ANSWERS". I'm sure Mara did what I did (click on NEW ANSWERS), and found this response, found it interesting, and posted his/her response as a new thread for the benefit of the forum.

I'm still amazed that some folks thought Mara herself wrote this.

-- Wilferd (WilferdW@aol.com), October 09, 1999.

For future reference, here's the thread in question:

Government Monitoring of the Boards
http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch- msg.tcl?msg_id=001Nh0

-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), October 09, 1999.

Thanks Mara. I just read it on the original thread. I'm afraid she gives too much credit to the Feds for 'forethought'. Let's not forget some of those brilliant events like 'the Bradley', NASA's latest metric measure screw up, the bombing of the Chinese embassy, and our president's carefully thought out actions (complete with cigar props), none of which are sterling examples of brilliance, planning or insight.

They shut the door once they realized that *they* might create the "self-fulfilling prophecy" and then began pointing fingers at those who had figured it out AHEAD of many of *them*. Gary North comes to mind. 2-3% of GIs INCLUDES the government.....let's not kid ourselves about it. Just because they are in high positions with great power does NOT mean that more than 3% of *them* ever GI. Heck, that's been a major part of this problem to begin with. How naive could anyone be to assume the majority of our government officials got it years ago. Now that WOULD be the ultimate 'tin foil hat' theory.

They've bungled their way through Y2K and finally decided to do anything possible to shift the blame. I've no doubt they examined the issue for the best ways to exploit it, rather like the utility companies who began remediating their billing depatments FIRST. Let's examine their feeble attempts to point fingers at the preparers, foreign countries, terrorists, Christains......ANYBODY but themselves. They're still doing it with furocious PR campaigns, and the frantic pace of 'spin and grin, blame's the game' picks up with each day. Hell, they couldn't coordinate a government picnic for all the stupidity and in-house conflict they've suffered from for years. Day-care centers are more organized and disciplined than our federal government is. What a joke.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), October 09, 1999.

Paula's advice is to stay out of chatrooms. My advice is to not heed her advice, lest we will have already lost the battle.

-- a (a@a.a), October 09, 1999.

How about a Forum vote on these questions....

"I do not think the Feds will bat one eyelash taking out a hair in the soup of its "get the 97% through this" plan."

How many think they plan to get 97% through?

"Let's not forget some of those brilliant events like 'the Bradley', NASA's latest metric measure screw up, the bombing of the Chinese embassy, and our president's carefully thought out actions (complete with cigar props), none of which are sterling examples of brilliance, planning or insight."

How many believe the bombing of the Chinese embassy was an accident?

I felt disturbed after reading the original post, but not just because of the poster's attitude. Am I the only one who felt this may have been posted from some kind of government insider? Did anyone else hear a barely veiled threat and warning? I'll be thinking about that post a lot today.

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), October 09, 1999.

On *OCTOBER 9TH, 1999*, we've already lost the battle. I just need a place to vent.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), October 09, 1999.

The truth of the matter ie mara post. All people are different. Some have the resources and have prepared in a way you cannot even comprehend, and they will not make it. Some have not prepared at all and will not only prosper but prevail. Like it or not your government is made up of you. No more intelligent, no more foolish. This board gets boring when generalizations are made and topics are attacked without solutions offered. Any idiot can complain, think and offer suggestions and you become part of the solution. Not just with Y2K but with everything. Who is John Galt? Where is John Galt?

-- (roark@not.now), October 09, 1999.

Well, whatever. Everybody's gonna get it in 82 days.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), October 09, 1999.


Thanks for your usual, sensible, grounded comments and analysis. I wonder though just when the government really GIed. I am not sure that Clinton has yet GIed, although others in the government, obviously, have.

As for John Galt and the survival of the fittest concept, well, it might be true overall, but it has its limits. We don't all have the same capacities. Civilized man has a responsibility for the weak. Who would we rather follow--Ayn Rand and Alan Greenspan or someone who has GIed in the spiritual realm?

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), October 09, 1999.


I would surmise that the bulk of the dot govs and dot mils suffer from babysitter syndrome. And the belief that they and only they have the right to know and decide for all.

Sad, but there it is.

Clearly, there have been so many Y2K games and counter-games, and alternates to the counter-games, that I would guess just about every Y2K agenda imagined has been tried.

I will always remember a quote from Koskinen on the supply chain...

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission Briefing On Y2K
Thursday, February 11, 1999



... That brings me to my request of the Commission and the staff and the industry. That is that our other major problem and risk in the United States will be overreaction by the public to the perception of what this problem could look like.

We are concerned that if a few people decide to change their economic behavior, it won't make a lot of difference, if even a reasonable number of people do that, but if 200 million Americans decide to do anything very differently all at one time, the system is not geared up to deal with that, and we could have a self-fulfilling prophesy where we have a major economic problem even though the systems basically are functioning appropriately. ...

[snip -- to end]

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/COMMISSION/TRANSCRIPTS/ 19990211b.html

And dont forget the quote from Cohen...

"...Mere months before the attack on Pearl Harbor shocked America out of its slumber, Walter Lippmann wrote, 'Millions will listen to, and prefer to believe, those who tell them that they need not rouse themselves, and that all will be well if only they continue to do all the pleasant and profitable and comfortable things they would like to do best.' ..."

-- William S. Cohen, U.S. Secretary of Defense, "Preparing for a Grave New World," in the Washington Post, July 26, 1999

Bureacratic Babysitters. And the American people write their paychecks so we can ignore the undesired details of life. And stay asleep.


As Ed pointed out, we had a choice in this country to mobilize the food supply... or not. It was most likely a CHOICE made by those with vested economic interests and NOT by those who care about their fellow humans. It says a lot about our leaders, and about the bulk of the populace who ignore our world.

Now... to the internet... and monitoring...

A couple more quotes to remember from someone associated with all the Urban Warrior research we did last spring...

by Vice Admiral Jerry O. Tuttle, USN (Ret.), Member of the NIUSR Executive Board, and Extreme Information Infrastructure Oversight Panel. (XII)., President of MANTECH Systems Engineering Corp. Senior VP of MANTECH International Corporation

http://www.niusr.org/ planforsurge.html


The utility of the global Internet should be viewed as a major asset over and above being an information artery. It should be monitored and those interested in transnational activities and information identified and exploited, including "chumming", and information pertaining to essential elements of information for transnational threats harvested. The Internet should be used for perception management, creating the illusions of grander and diversions of nefarious actors to pseudo-information domains. "World citizens" should be rewarded for information leading to transnational threat perpetrators. ...

And ...


Prepared by
Mr. Charles Swett
Assistant for Strategic Assessment

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (Policy Planning) 17 July 1995


The political process is moving onto the Internet. Both within the United States and internationally, individuals, interest groups, and even nations are using the Internet to find each other, discuss the issues, and further their political goals. The Internet has also played an important role in recent conflicts. As a result, overseas segments of the Internet can be a useful tool for DoD, both for gathering and for disseminating information. By monitoring public message traffic and alternative news source s from around the world, early warning of impending significant developments could be developed, in advance of more traditional means of indications and warning. Commentary placed on the Internet by observers on the scene of low-intensity conflicts overse as could be useful to U.S. policymaking. During larger scale conflicts, when other conventional channels are disrupted, the Internet can be the only available means of communication into and out of the affected areas. Internet messages originating within regions under authoritarian control could provide other useful intelligence. Public messages conveying information about the intent of overseas groups prone to disrupting U.S. military operations can provide important counterintelligence. The Internet could also be used offensively as an additional medium in psychological operations campaigns and to help achieve unconventional warfare objectives. Used creatively as an integral asset, the Internet can facilitate many DoD operations and activities.

For the rest of the story ...

http://www.fas.org/cp/ swett.html


It has ALL boiled down to Choices. Made... or not made. For whatever reasons.

Personally, Id rather have the ever-shifting TRUTH, right between the eyes, rather than someone elses parsed perceptions made for me.

The internet has always been the wildcard in the Y2K truth equation. I hope it remains so. You just have to be *very* good at sorting wheat from chaff, and know whats important. (Hint: peoples lives are more important than the machines or the system).

I fear saving lives was NOT the Y2K priority.

There is a military term bandied about, even on Ted Kopples Nightline BIOWAR segment... something to the effect of acceptable losses. (Paraphrased). Im concerned that our governments Y2K planners, some time ago, decided, for us, that some lives were... expendable.

Somehow, I doubt theyd alert the fringe as the choosen ones. More likely, theyre hanging onto the internet tigers tail and dont know how to control it.


-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 09, 1999.


As for John Galt and the survival of the fittest concept, well, it might be true overall, but it has its limits. We don't all have the same capacities. Civilized man has a responsibility for the weak. Who would we rather follow--Ayn Rand and Alan Greenspan or someone who has GIed in the spiritual realm?

If you want to take responsibility for those who can't or won't prepare, go right ahead. Just don't try to force me to "contribute". Note that I'm not saying I won't help those whom I feel are deserving, but simply that no one has the right to take anything from me at gunpoint. By the way, have you actually read Atlas Shrugged, and if so, did you understand it?

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), October 09, 1999.

"Civilized man has a responsibility for the weak."

I suppose that inables the 'weak' to take no responsibility for themselves? Sorry Mara, but that's complete bullpucky. The biological system was not set into motion with that in mind. Civilized man was also given the ability to CHOOSE. We choose who we will be responsible for. We're putting our efforts toward the worthy. It is not my life's purpose to babysit fools, do my share and a stranger's as well or coddle the doomed. I'm not the world's mother.

God helps those who help themselves.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), October 09, 1999.

Ed asked the critical questions about America's (now mostly lost) ability to prepare for Y2K. Diane gave the most probably answer...

"I fear saving lives was NOT the Y2K priority."

There is a mentality bordering on racist regarding those who GI and prep and those who DGI. Those who have prepared are not superior to and more worthy of life than those who have not prepared. Many people are not on the internet, do not even own a computer, and just do not have good information. Many people still barely know what Y2K is, even though the term may now be somewhat familiar to them. I pity the people who do not have a reliable source of information. And yes, there are those who do not want to really know, but we should be careful how we judge others even on this basis. Think about all the people you have been close to over your lifetime. They all have different strengths and weaknesses. Some people cannot easily face some of the hard things of life. I still love those people. The DGI's and DWGI's may have other strengths that the GI's lack. Perhaps we who prepare are like sprinters, and we would do well to care for those who once awakened, can run a marathon. I do believe in limited government versus Big Momma/Brother, but I think the information should have been presented honestly a long time ago to the general populace, and I believe our leadership should have taken steps such as Ed described, i.e. increasing food production. The lack of compassion expressed by many who say their preps are finished or near completion is chilling. There but for the grace of God...

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), October 09, 1999.

There was a thinly-veiled, threatening undertone to "Paula's" odd post that Mara copied here. It is also odd that "Paula" has not been seen here before (or since), yet picked this one dead thread out of the archives to post on...why? I think it's a good bet, judging from the syntax of the post, that English is not Paula's native language. In fact, his or her use of the language reminded me a lot of one of c4i's incarnations (and those are obviously not all the same person).

If so, what would any of this mean? I have no idea. But, it is interesting...and strange.

-- (RUOK@yesiam.com), October 09, 1999.

RUOK, that was my initial response too.

I had the distinct feeling that it was a warning from an insider.

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), October 09, 1999.

Mumsie, I just spotted a post from Paula on another topic that leads me to think my impression may be mistaken. I put a link there to this topic in case she returns to that thread.

-- (RUOK@yesiam.com), October 09, 1999.

RUOK,...I guess I didn't think this poster held a position of any real authority, but maybe had a lower echelon connection to something interesting. The general attitude left me a little cold. Would you send me that link? (email is real, thanks)

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), October 09, 1999.

Ed, I guess with this second posting I've gone from Lurker to participant. I work a lot of late nights and always check out this board before I quit. I thought I'd expound just a little. If the SHTF, those who didn't prepare can be "taught to fish". Those of us who can (and there are many) have a responsibility only to ourselves and our immediate family. However because I have prepared to some extent I'll have time to help others if I chose to do so. Steve Heller, I like Atlas Shrugged, and I love the Fountainhead, but the best book ever on individualism is A sorrow in our heart by Alan Eckert. It's the biography of Tecumseh. As far as someone understanding Atlas I don't think it's possible. You read the book and say to yourself, "these people live the way I want to". If you're not headed in that direction anyway the book won't lead you there in my opinion.

-- (roark@not.now), October 09, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ