With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

For the story behind the story...

Wednesday December 15, 12:32 AM

Australian Report: Y2K "Nightmare" Plans

When we first saw the news report from an Australian paper, we had difficulty believing it. NewsMax.com's Inside Cover receives truckloads of emails from viewers. Some check out. Some don't.

But we were titillated by the email of one NewsMax.com reader who forwarded us a story that appeared in the Melbourne Herald Sun, one of Australia's major dailies and the flagship paper for Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. media empire.

The headline was innocuous: "Law Ready for Y2K."

The lead followed: "Food may be rationed and inspectors will have the power to seize private property if disaster strikes on New Year's Eve."

The article continued: "People who refuse to hand over vehicles or any property needed for relief efforts face big fines and jail if they obstruct government-appointed inspectors.

"The emergency laws have been introduced into State Parliament and will be passed before the new millennium.

"Transport Minister Peter Batchelor told Parliament the laws may seem draconian but would not be needed if adequate contingency planning was in place for Y2K disasters."

This revealing story received such little press attention, Inside Cover thought it may have been fabricated. We contacted the Herald Sun and confirmed the story.

Perhaps we should not be so surprised. Most Y2K stories that acknowledge concerns or problems about the "Millennium Bug" get little press ink. Stories that give a positive Y2K spin get major media coverage.

-- bb (b@b.b), December 16, 1999

Answers

Yes, the most AMAZING things happen to people who surrender their right to keep and bear arms, as the Australians have done. It's like, you give up that ONE right, and you effectively give up ALL of them....

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), December 16, 1999.

The odds of seizure being on ones personal food is probably zilch. When I read that article I pictured items such as privately owned bulldozers being seized. I think a large storage of gasoline is under threat of seizure to run those bulldozers seized from Hanks Bulldozer Shop. The problems will be catastrophic not small irritations. Australia will be dealing with huge crises not trivial concerns that Joe Public is hungry. It is not going to care if Joe is hungry or even dies. I suspect people who picture the broken code causing trivial problems picture rice bags being confiscated from a private kitchen, when in truth it is how to bury the thousands of bodies in a mass grave, how to stop a whole town from burning, and the likes. Last year Australia put out another "shocking" article, it read literally that Australia did not care if Joe Publics' tummmy was growling, and stated that people can go without food for a month before dying. It is not going to "feed the masses."

-- Paula (chowbabe@pacbell.net), December 16, 1999.

Paula, got new for ya. They'll take anything they can get their grubby little hands on. Can you say generator? Can you say food? Wake up and smell the roses. We're not living in Mr. Rodger's neighbourhood....

-- bb (b@b.b), December 16, 1999.

Oh please DO get a clue. The USA has equally draconian emergency laws, and they were introduced without even the excuse of Y2K to justify them.

-- Servant (public_service@yahoo.com), December 16, 1999.

They ain't gonna confisk...confors...take any stuff to save the masses, they will take it to save themselves. Like the kossacks of old, the sword will rule. Since the Aussies have been effectively disarmed, the modern day warlords will take what they want.

KookCzar

-- Y2Kook (Y2Kook@usa.net), December 16, 1999.

This artical is trus , saw it in the local paper the other day. If the Australian government thinks that they completely dis-armed the population they are in for a really rude supprise. Most people simply burried their firearms in the back yard. Even if they wanted to come around and pillage personal supplies , they have very limited resources to do this with , most of the police would be unable to deal with it (and are poorly armed and equiped anyway), and our armed forces , depleted to a pathetic attempt at a security force are mostly overseas.

-- XOR (drwizzard@usa.net), December 16, 1999.

Borrowed from: http://www.otherside.net/gunowner.htm

*The Soviet Union established gun control in 1929. From 1929 to 1953, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

*Turkey established gun control in 1911. From 1915 to 1917 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

*China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1976 20 million Anti-Communists, Christians, political dissidents and pro-reform groups, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

*Germany established gun control in 1938. From 1939 to 1945 13 million Jews, Gypsies, mentally ill people and other "mongrelized peoples," unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

*Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

*Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

*Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977 1 million "educated people," unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and executed.

If you add up the numbers, that amounts to more than 55 million innocent people who have been slaughtered by their own governments. The first step was always the same--rendering citizens defenseless by restricting or confiscating their firearms.

Freedom-loving people are at far more risk from their own government than from all the criminals in the world combined! An armed man/woman has a chance to defend himself/herself against any would-be gangster or criminal. An unarmed man/woman has no chance at all against anybody, especially an oppressive, tyrannical government.

An armed citizenry is the only force that insures freedom. It isn't the militias that can insure freedom. It is simply the fact that if nearly every home owner is also a gun owner there isn't an army in the world big or strong enough to take the freedom of an armed populace like that, and tyrants know it.

Listen to Adolf Hitler: "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty." (Adolf Hitler H.R. Trevor-Roper, Hitler's Table Talks 1941-1944 London: Widenfeld and Nicolson, 1953, p. 425-426)

Even Mahatma Gandhi agreed that an armed citizenry is of extreme importance. "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." (Mahatma Gandhi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", M. K. Gandhi, page 446)

The purpose of owning a gun is not to be a part of a militia, wear camouflage, and play soldier. The hope is that as long as we enjoy an armed citizenry we will never have to use those guns for anything other than sport. I would rather own guns and never need them than to not own one and wish I had.

Look what Jesus himself said: "When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace." (Jesus Christ, Luke 11:21-22 King James Version) He also said if his disciples didn't own a sword they better sell their clothes and go buy one. (Luke 22:36)

-- Sgt. Rock (sly@dark.nes), December 16, 1999.

Those countries also had functional millitary forces. Australia's millitary is a complete joke, when we sent our troops overseas (5000 troops , and that is allmost all them) we had to "borrow" 4500 flak jackets/bullet proof vests from the US. Make love not war -: be prepared for both. Heard that somewhere can't remember where.

-- XOR (drwizzard@usa.net), December 16, 1999.

Sgt., I agree. Just wondering how I can defend myself against a Bradley or Abrams (sp?) with my shotgun. Problem is we "stand united"... but as individuals! Will you come over to my place and help me out, or just watch it on the news and say "look at what those dirty Ba***rds are doing now". Don't know who the Bad Guys really are or if such a scenario could even play out. However, I do know that they would be armed,in number and organized. We, the Sheeple, will just be a fragmented group running hither and yon trying to survive. So easy to "Divide and Conquer"!

-- OneGun (I'm@JustThinking.Com), December 16, 1999.

All I know, is that I would rather burn my supplies than let some government thug get hold of them. Not to say that I have much worth using.. I mean, if you like rice, sure, my 60 kilos of it could be of value.. but the supermarket up the road would have hundreds of kilos.

Besides.. if things get ugly, I'm going to take a few precautions. Under the house, I have about eight hundred kilos of pamphlets (surplus ones from my old job as an area representative supervising deliverers). Do you know how much space 800 kilos takes up? Do you know how hard it would be to find anything in them, especially given three-foot-high surroundings and no light? (The pamphlets, I figured when I stored them, could be useful as firewood if something happens.

Leo

-- Leo (lchampion@ozemail.com.au), December 16, 1999.