It's the oldest trick in the book, dating back to Roman times; creating the enemies you need.

PROBLEM

REACTION

SOLUTION In 70 BC, an ambitious minor politician and extremely wealthy man, Marcus Licineus Crassus, wanted to rule Rome. Just to give you an idea of what sort of man Crassus really was, he is credited with invention of the fire brigade. But in Crassus' version, his fire-fighting slaves would race to the scene of a burning building whereupon Crassus would offer to buy it on the spot for a tiny fraction of it's worth. If the owner sold, Crassus' slaves would put out the fire. If the owner refused to sell, Crassus allowed the building to burn to the ground. By means of this device, Crassus eventually came to be the largest single private landholder in Rome, and used some of his wealth to help back Julius Caesar against Cicero.

In 70 BC Rome was still a Republic, which placed very strict limits on what Rulers could do, and more importantly NOT do. But Crassus had no intentions of enduring such limits to his personal power, and contrived a plan.

Crassus seized upon the slave revolt led by Sparticus in order to strike terror into the hearts of Rome, whose garrison Sparticus had already defeated in battle. But Sparticus had no intention of marching on Rome itself, a move he knew to be suicidal. Sparticus and his band wanted nothing to do with the Roman empire and had planned from the start merely to loot enough money from their former owners in the Italian countryside to hire a mercenary fleet in which to sail to freedom.

Sailing away was the last thing Crassus wanted Sparticus to do. He needed a convenient enemy with which to terrorize Rome itself for his personal political gain. So Crassus bribed the mercenary fleet to sail without Sparticus, then positioned two Roman legions in such a way that Sparticus had no choice but to march on Rome.

Terrified of the impending arrival of the much-feared army of gladiators, Rome declared Crassus Praetor. Crassus then crushed Sparticus' army and even though Pompeii took the credit, Crassus was elected Consul of Rome the following year.

With this maneuver, the Romans surrendered their Republican form of government. Soon would follow the first Triumvirate, consisting of Crassus, Pompeii, and Julius Caesar, followed by the reign of the god-like Emperors of Rome.

The Romans were hoaxed into surrendering their Republic, and accepting the rule of Emperors.

Julius Caesar's political opponent, Cicero, for all his literary accomplishments, played the same games in his campaign against Julius Caesar, claiming that Rome was falling victim to an internal "vast right wing" conspiracy in which any expressed desire for legislative limits no government was treated as suspicious behavior. Cicero, in order to demonstrate to the Romans just how unsafe Rome has become hired thugs to cause as much disturbance as possible, and campaigned on a promise to end the internal strife if elected and granted extraordinary powers.

What Cicero only dreamed of, Adolph Hitler succeeded in doing. Elected Chancellor of Germany, Hitler, like Crassus, had no intention of living with the strict limits to his power imposed by German law. Unlike Cicero, Hitler's thugs were easy to recognize; they all wore the same brown shirts. But their actions were no different than those of their Roman predecessors. They staged beatings, set fires, caused as much trouble as they could, while Hitler made speeches promising that he could end the crime wave of subversives and terrorism if he was granted extraordinary powers.

The Germans were hoaxed into surrendering their Republic, and accepting the rule of Der Fuhrer.

The state-sponsored schools will never tell you this, but governments routinely rely on hoaxes to sell their agendas to an otherwise reluctant public. The Romans accepted the Emperors and the Germans accepted Hitler not because they wanted to, but because the carefully crafted illusions of threat appeared to leave no other choice.

Our government too uses hoaxes to create the illusion that We The People have no choice but the direction the government wishes us to go in.

In 1898, Joseph Pulitzer's New York World and William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal were arguing for American intervention in Cuba. Hearst is reported to have dispatched a photographer to Cuba to photograph the coming war with Spain. When the photographer asked just what war that might be, Hearst is reported to have replied, "You take the photographs, and I will provide the war". Hearst was true to his word, as his newspaper published stories of great atrocities being committed against the Cuban people, most of which turned out to be complete fabrications.

On the night of February 15, 1898, the USS Main, lying in Havana harbor in a show of US resolve to protect her interests, exploded violently. Captain Sigsbee, the commander of the Maine, urged that no assumptions of enemy attack be made until there was a full investigation of the cause of the explosion. For this, Captain Sigsbee was excoriated in the press for "refusing to see the obvious". The Atlantic Monthly declared flat out that to suppose the explosion to be anything other than a deliberate act by Spain was "completely at defiance of the laws of probability".

Under the slogan "Remember the Maine", Americans went to war with Spain, wresting from that nation ownership of what is now much of the American southwest.

In 1975, an investigation led by Admiral Hyman Rickover examined the data recovered from a 1911 examination of the wreck and concluded that there had been no evidence of an external explosion. The most likely cause of the sinking was a coal dust explosion in a coal bunker imprudently located next to the ship's magazines. Captain Sigsbee's caution had been well founded.

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt needed a war. He needed the fever of a major war to mask the symptoms of a still deathly ill economy struggling back from the Great Depression. Roosevelt wanted a war with Germany to stop Hitler, but despite several provocations in the Atlantic, the American people, still struggling with that troublesome economy, were opposed to any wars.

Roosevelt needed an enemy, and if America would not willingly attack that enemy, then one would have to be maneuvered into attacking America, much as Marcus Licinius Crassus has maneuvered Sparticus into attacking Rome.

The way open to war was created when Japan signed the tripartite agreement with Italy and Germany, with all parties pledging mutual defense to each other. Whereas Hitler would never declare war on the United States no matter the provocation, the means to force Japan to do so were readily at hand.

The first step was to place oil and steel embargoes on Japan, using Japan's wars on the Asian mainland as a reason. This forced Japan to consider seizing the oil and mineral rich regions in Indonesia. With the European powers militarily exhausted by the war in Europe, the United States was the only power in the Pacific able to stop Japan from invading the Dutch East Indies, and by moving the Pacific fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, Roosevelt made a pre-emptive strike on that fleet the mandatory first step in any Japanese plan to extend it's empire into the "southern resource area".

Roosevelt boxed in Japan just as completely as Crassus had boxed in Sparticus. Japan needed oil. They had to invade Indonesia to get it, and to do that they had to remove the threat of the American fleet at Pearl Harbor. There never really was any other course open to them.

To enrage the American people as much as possible, Roosevelt needed the first overt attack by Japan to be as bloody as possible, appearing as a sneak attack much as the Japanese had done to the Russians. From that moment up until the attack on Pearl Harbor itself, Roosevelt and his associates made sure that the commanders in Hawaii, General Short and Admiral Kimmel, were kept in the dark as much as possible about the location of the Japanese fleet and it's intentions, then later scapegoated for the attack. (Congress recently exonerated both Short and Kimmel, posthumously restoring them to their former ranks).

But as the Army board had concluded at the time, and subsequent de-classified documents confirmed, Washington DC knew the attack was coming, knew exactly where the fleet was, and knew where it was headed.

On November 29th, Secretary of State Hull showed United Press reporter Joe Leib a message with the time and place of the attack, and the New York Times in it's special 12/8/41 Pearl Harbor edition, on page 13, reported that the time and place of the attack had been known in advance!

The much repeated claim that the Japanese fleet maintained radio silence on it's way to Hawaii was a lie. Among other intercepts still held in the Archives of the NSA is the UNCODED message sent by the Japanese tanker Shirya stating, "proceeding to a position 30.00 N, 154.20 E. Expect to arrive at that point on 3 December." (near HI)

President Lyndon Johnson wanted a war in Vietnam. He wanted it to help his friends who owned defense companies to do a little business. He needed it to get the Pentagon and CIA to quit trying to invade Cuba. And most of all, he needed a provocation to convince the American people that there was really "no other choice".

On August 5, 1964, newspapers across America reported "renewed attacks" against American destroyers operating in Vietnamese waters, specifically the Gulf of Tonkin. The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an "unprovoked attack" on the USS Maddox while it was on "routine patrol".

The truth is that USS Maddox was involved in aggressive intelligence gathering in coordination with actual attacks by South Vietnam and the Laotian Air Force against targets in North Vietnam. The truth is also that there was no attack by torpedo boats against the USS Maddox. Captain John J. Herrick, the task force commander in the Gulf, cabled Washington DC that the report was the result of an "over-eager" sonarman who had picked up the sounds of his own ship's screws and panicked. But even with this knowledge that the report was false, Lyndon Johnson went on national TV that night to announce the commencement of air strikes against North Vietnam, "retaliation" for an attack that had never occurred.

President George Bush wanted a war in Iraq. Like Crassus, George Bush is motivated by money. Specifically oil money. But with the OPEC alliance failing to keep limits on oil production in the Mideast, the market was being glutted with oil pumped from underneath Iraq, which sat over roughly 1/3 of the oil reserves of the entire region.

George wanted a war to stop that flow of oil, to keep prices (and profits) from falling any further than they already had. But like Roosevelt, he needed the "other side" to make the first move.

Iraq had long been trying to acquire greater access to the Persian Gulf, and felt limited confined a narrow strip of land along Kuwait's northern border, which placed Iraqi interests in close proximity with hostile Iran. George Bush, who had been covertly arming Iraq during its war with Iran, sent word via Jean Kirkpatrick that the United States would not intervene if Saddam Hussein grabbed a larger part of Kuwait. Saddam fell for the bait and invaded.

Of course, Americans were not about to send their sons and daughters to risk their lives for petroleum products. So George Bush arranged a hoax, using public relations firm Hill & Knowlton, which has grown rich on taxpayer money by being most industrious and creative liars! Hill & Knowlton concocted a monumental fraud in which the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States, went on TV pretending to be a nurse, and related a horror story in which Iraqi troops looted the incubators from a Kuwaiti hospital, leaving the premature babies on the cold floor to die. The media, part of the swindle from the start, never bothered asking why the "nurse" didn't just pick the babies up and wrap them in blankets or something.

Enraged by the incubator story, Americans supported operation Desert Storm, which never removed Saddam Hussein from power but which did take Kuwait's oil off of the market for almost 2 years and limited Iraq's oil exports to this very day. That our sons and daughters came home with serious and lingering medical illnesses was apparently not too great a price to pay for increased oil profits.

Following the victory in Iraq, yet another war appeared to be in the offering in the mineral rich regions of Bosnia. Yet again, a hoax was used to create support for military action.

The above photo of Fikret Alic, a Muslim, staring through a barbed wire fence, was used to "prove" that the Bosnians were running modern day "Concentration Camps". As the headline of "Belsen 92" indicates, all possible associations with the Nazi horrors were made to sell the necessity of sending yet more American troops into someone else's nation.

But when German Journalists went to Trnopolje, the site of the supposed Bosnian Concentration Camp. to film a documentary, they discovered that the photo was a fake! The camp at Trnopolje was not a concentration camp but a refugee center. Nor was it surrounded by barbed wire. Careful examination of the original photo revealed that the photographer had shot the photo through a broken section of fence surrounding a tool shed. It was the photographer who was on the inside, shooting out at the refugees.

Once again, Americans had been hoaxed into support of actions they might otherwise not have agreed with.

While several American Presidents have willingly started wars for personal purposes, perhaps no President has ever carried it to the extreme that Bill Clinton has.

Coincident with the expected public statement of Monica Lewinsky following her testimony, Bill Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack on Sudan and Afghanistan, claiming to have had irrefutable proof that bogeyman extraordinaire (and former Afghani ally) Osama Bin Ladin was creating terrorist chemical weapons there.

Examination of the photos of the debris revealed none of the expected structures one would find in a laboratory that handled lethal weapons-grade materials. Assurances from the CIA that they had a positive soil test for biological weapons fell on their face when it was revealed that there had been no open soil anywhere near the pre-bombed facility. Sudan requested that international observers come test the remains of the factory for any signs of the nerve gas Clinton had insisted was there. None was found. The Sudanese plant was a harmless aspirin factory, and the owner has sued for damages.

Later examination of the site hit in Afghanistan revealed it to be a mosque.

http://www.accessone.com/~rivero/LIE/fake-mig.gifclick for larger image

Meanwhile, back in Kosovo, stories about genocide and atrocities were flooding the media (in time to distract from the Sudanese embarrassments), just as lurid and sensational and as it turns out often just as fictional as most of William Randolph Hearst's stories of atrocities against the Cubans.

Again, the government and the media were hoaxing Americans. The above photo was shown on all the American networks, claiming to be one of Slobodan Milosovic's Migs, shot down while attacking civilians. Closer examination (click on the photo) shows it to be stenciled in English!

Like Germany under Chancellor Hitler, there have been events in our nation which strike fear into the hearts of the citizens, such as the New York World Trade Tower bombing, the OK City Federal Building, and the Olympic Park bomb (nicely timed to divert the media from witnesses to the TWA 800 shoot down). The media has been very quick to blame such events on "radicals", "subversives", "vast right wing conspiracies", and other "enemies in our midst", no different than the lies used by Cicero and Hitler.

But on closer examination, such "domestic terrorist" events do not appear to be what they are made out to be. The FBI had an informant inside the World Trade Tower bombers, Emad Salam,

http://www.accessone.com/~rivero/POLITICS/OK/wtcbomb.html

who offered to sabotage the bomb. The FBI told him "no". The so-called "hot bed" of white separatism at Elohim City, occasional home to Tim McVeigh in the weeks prior to the OK City bombing, was founded and is being run by an FBI informant! http://www.accessone.com/~rivero/POLITICS/OK/TRUCK/TRUCK2.gifclick

for larger image

And nobody has ever really explained what this second Ryder truck was doing in a secret camp half way from Elohim City to Oklahoma City two weeks before the bombing.

So, here we are today. Like the Romans of Crassus' and Cicero's time, or the Germans under a newly elected Hitler, we are being warned that a dangerous enemy threatens us, implacable, invisible, omnipresent, and invulnerable as long as our government is hamstrung by that silly old Bill of Rights. Already there have appeared articles debating whether or not "extraordinary measures" (i.e. torture) are not fully justified under certain circumstances such as those we are purported to face.

As was the case in Rome and Germany, the government continues to plead with the public for an expansion of its power and authority, to "deal with the crisis".

However, as Casio watch timers are paraded before the cameras, to the stentorian tones of the talking heads' constant dire warnings, it is legitimate to question just how real the crises is, and how much is the result of political machinations by our own leaders.

Are the terrorists really a threat, or just hired actors with bombs and Casio watches, paid for by Cicero and given brown shirts to wear by Hitler?

Is terrorism inside the United States really from outside, or is it a stage managed production, designed to cause Americans to believe they have no choice but to surrender the Republic and accept the totalitarian rule of a new emperor, or a new Fuhrer?

Once lost, the Romans never got their Republic back. Once lost, the Germans never got their Republic back. In both cases, the nation had to totally collapse before freedom was restored to the people.

Remember that when Crassus tells you that Sparticus approaches.

Remember that when thugs in the streets act in a manner clearly designed to provoke the public fear.

http://24.142.63.193/forum/Remember that when the Reichstagg burns down.

Please feel free to copy this article everywhere. ======================================================================

How Iraq Was Allegedly Given Tacit US Approval To Invade Kuwait

Note - This following transcript cannot be officially certified but appears to accurately reflect events as reported by a number of news sources:

From The Free Republic

http://24.142.63.193/forum/a3862ee83626f.htm#22 Posted on 12/24/1999 00:46:36 PST By Uncle Bill

Yes, remember April Glaspie and her amazing stint at Middle East diplomacy?

I cannot confirm the reliability of the source, a strange website called which I found via a meta-search engine, but here's their scoop on Glaspie and Saddam:

Saddam-Glaspie meeting

Transcript of Meeting Between Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie. - July 25, 1990 (Eight days before the August 2, 1990 Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait)

July 25, 1990 - Presidential Palace - Baghdad

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - I have direct instructions from President Bush to improve our relations with Iraq. We have considerable sympathy for your quest for higher oil prices, the immediate cause of your confrontation with Kuwait. (pause) As you know, I lived here for years and admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. We know you need funds. We understand that, and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. (pause) We can see that you have deployed massive numbers of troops in the south. Normally that would be none of our business, but when this happens in the context of your threats against Kuwait, then it would be reasonable for us to be concerned. For this reason, I have received an instruction to ask you, in the spirit of friendship - not confrontation - regarding your intentions: Why are your troops massed so very close to Kuwait's borders?

Saddam Hussein - As you know, for years now I have made every effort to reach a settlement on our dispute with Kuwait. There is to be a meeting in two days; I am prepared to give negotiations only this one more brief chance. (pause) When we (the Iraqis) meet (with the Kuwaitis) and we see there is hope, then nothing will happen. But if we are unable to find a solution, then it will be natural that Iraq will not accept death.

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - What solutions would be acceptable?

Saddam Hussein - If we could keep the whole of the Shatt al Arab - our strategic goal in our war with Iran - we will make concessions (to the Kuwaitis). But, if we are forced to choose between keeping half of the Shatt and the whole of Iraq (i.e., in Saddam s view, including Kuwait) then we will give up all of the Shatt to defend our claims on Kuwait to keep the whole of Iraq in the shape we wish it to be. (pause) What is the United States' opinion on this?

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - We have no opinion on your Arab - Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960's, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America. (Saddam smiles)

On August 2, 1990 four days later, Saddam's massed troops invade and occupy Kuwait. _____

Baghdad, September 2, 1990, U.S. Embassy

One month later, British journalists obtain the the above tape and transcript of the Saddam - Glaspie meeting of July 29, 1990. Astounded, they confront Ms. Glaspie as she leaves the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

Journalist 1 - Are the transcripts (holding them up) correct, Madam Ambassador?(Ambassador Glaspie does not respond)

Journalist 2 - You knew Saddam was going to invade (Kuwait) but you didn't warn him not to. You didn't tell him America would defend Kuwait. You told him the opposite - that America was not associated with Kuwait.

Journalist 1 - You encouraged this aggression - his invasion. What were you thinking?

U.S. Ambassador Glaspie - Obviously, I didn't think, and nobody else did, that the Iraqis were going to take all of Kuwait.

Journalist 1 - You thought he was just going to take some of it? But, how could you? Saddam told you that, if negotiations failed, he would give up his Iran (Shatt al Arab waterway) goal for the Whole of Iraq, in the shape we wish it to be. You know that includes Kuwait, which the Iraqis have always viewed as an historic part of their country!

Journalist 1 - American green-lighted the invasion. At a minimum, you admit signaling Saddam that some aggression was okay - that the U.S. would not oppose a grab of the al-Rumeilah oil field, the disputed border strip and the Gulf Islands (including Bubiyan) - the territories claimed by Iraq?

(Ambassador Glaspie says nothing as a limousine door closed behind her and the car drives off.)

======================================================================

link at

http://www.sightings.com/politics6/fake.htm

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 25, 1999

Answers

Andy,

History always seems to vindicate the one or two lone voices who cry out against unrestrained government. Here's another classic...a government wiiling to sacrifice their own citizens in order to look good.

---------------------------------------

INCIDENT AT SAKHALIN The True Mission of KAL Flight 007 Devvy Kidd November 19, 1999

As regular readers of this web site know, I'm always recommending books for people to read that I feel are well documented and present the facts in a truthful manner. For about a year now I have had one of the most remarkable books I've ever read, Incident At Sakhalin: The True Mission of KAL Flight 007.

For those who might be unfamiliar with this tragedy, on September 1, 1983, KAL Flight 007 was allegedly shot down by the Ruskies with all 269 civilians perishing in this crash, including United States Congressman Larry McDonald. Of all the accounts I have ever read, no luggage and no bodies or remains have ever been found. Incident at Sakhalin is not only compelling, it screams with cover-up, deception and demonstrates how this puppet government has decayed almost beyond redemption. Like Waco, OKC, TWA Flight 800 and Vince Foster, just to name a few major incidents in America, KAL 007 is another reprehensible and immoral cover-up. When enough Americans find out the truth about these tragedies, they will shed their final innocence and recognize how evil this puppet government has become over the past 90 years....

(the article is quite lengthy, but can be read in it's entirety at the following website.) http://www.devvy.com/kal007_19991120.html

Incident at Sakhalin

-- TM (mercier7@pdnt.com), December 25, 1999.

Agree TM - thanks.

This from an R.C. thread... interesting...

Thanks Paula. I can see that the preps that are being and have been taken are in line with the goals of anti-cyber-terrorism. Of course another interpretation (which came out early.. esp. by Gary North) is that CIAO, by focusing on cyberterrorism managed to deflect blame for any breakdowns onto terrorists, much as creating a Y2K Czar deflected blame from the Whitehouse. It gets all the players in place without triggering bank withdrawals and "hoarding". And of course it lets CEO's and CIO's and CFO's off the hook. Not that cyberterrorism isn't a REAL risk, but it is also a clever "transference"* of concern from Y2K (a problem that SHOULD have been solved, so lots of someones are to blame) to terrorists.

*"transference" - interesting term used in a new CNN reported Gallup poll (who pays for these polls? Rendon Group? CNN?), and referred to by reporter Harris in questioning Bill Richardson recently (search on CNN for "Richardson". This was the interview where Richardson said that there is plenty of gas/oil, no need for worry, so if you fill up your tank before rollover just get half a tank. "Transference" - interesting term, me thinks.

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), December 24, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

snippet from the transcript:

HARRIS: You know, earlier this morning, we saw the results of a new CNN Gallup poll that showed a transference among the American public of concerns from Y2K to terrorism. Now, that -- with the headlines that we've seen of late, is that -- is there a transference of like -- like minds, if you will, happening as well in your department? Are you concerned more now about terrorism and possible acts around the globe more so than Y2K? RICHARDSON: Well, we're concerned about terrorism, too. We have a terrorism unit that is active on these issues. But we want to send the message, Leon, is that the American people should not panic on the Y2K rollover. They should stay cool, prepare as if it's going to be a winter storm, have flashlights, batteries.

This morning, I'm going to join AAA in urging motorists -- just recommending that they not fill up their gasoline tanks, leave it half full; that's sufficient. There's plenty of gasoline. So we're just sending the message to stay cool as a nation. Our systems, electricity, oil and gas, natural gas, fuel pumps -- we're going to be fine.

HARRIS: All right, Secretary Richardson. Have a happy holiday, and we hope you can stay cool -- you and all the rest of us, too.

RICHARDSON: Thank you.

======

What I find "interesting" about this...

First - the poll and the way it was done. Who pays for these polls anyway? And I saw the poll results announced on CNN. He used the word "transference" also. It was not a poll designed to find out "things people were worried about", but was designed to show a SHIFT or TRANSFERENCE from worries about Y2K to worries about terrorism. Sure had the feel of a marketing survey - good job Rendon Group - it worked, they bought the terrorism thingy.

Second - Harris was clearly leading Richardson to make a comment REINFORCING the Gallup poll. But Richardson didn't quite take get it and give an appropriate answer. He talked about Y2K instead. The interview ended quickly after that.

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), December 24, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

There may be a simpler explanation why so many seem to be focusing on terrorism and shying away from Y2K, if not consciously avoiding thinking about Y2K altogether.

~ Terrorist threats can focus the mind, just as the cold war tended to focus our collective minds.

~ The unknowns associated with Y2K and embedded systems can easily overwhelm the mind and usher in uncertainties in all aspects of one's life.

~ Terrorist threats and isolated terrorist actions may, in a way, be easier psychologically for some people to deal with.

"Transference" does not strike me as being the appropriate word here. It is not as if a majority of public officials or the public had already fully confronted the mindboggling implications of the potential disruptions that could occur as a result of a convergency of Y2K and embedded systems-related problems. People who have never consciously confronted such concerns may simply find it easier to focus their attention on threats that are far more tangible and easier in a way to define; threats that both merit as well as capture their attention.

There are some terms in existential psychiatry and psychoanalysis that might be useful here. These terms, "ontological guilt" and "rigid moralism", have been defined in a book entitled "Existence: A New Dimension in Psychiatry and Psychology" (Rollo May, et al, eds., Basic Books: New York, 1958). I don't have the book any more, but I think that Ernst Binswanger, an existential psychoanalyst, may have been the contributor to the book who offered these concepts. The concepts were introduced in a discussion of some of the possible root causes and manifestations of schizophrenia.

The behavior of a person who fails to come to terms with a sense of meaning and purpose in life can be said to be characterized by "ontological guilt". Such an individual may throw him or herself into activity (e.g, a "workacoholic" or a zealot) as a means of avoiding coming to terms with fundamental questions of meaning and purpose in life. The actions of such a person can be said to be characterized by "rigid moralism". Avoidance and denial can, of course, have a major role in such a pattern of behavior.

I have always thought it interesting that those whom I know who have tended to "get" Y2K the quickest are those who appear to have grappled with questions of meaning and purpose in life; indeed most of these individuals have confronted issues involving loss and death over the course of their lives. In other words, they have dealt with major existential issues. Those who have not addressed basic questions involving the meaning of life or their sense of purpose in life, can be thrown into an absolute tailspin when circumstances conspire to force them to face such questions.

Focusing concerns on terrorist threats, while daunting, is at least more tangible than focusing on Y2K related concerns. The options for action can be much clearer regarding terrorism.

While it is quite true that there is a chance that one's personal life will be disrupted in some way, either directly or indirectly by terrorist threats or actions; it is not typically the case that everyone perceives that their life will necessarily be affected or affected in an all encompassing way by such threats or actions.

The threats and challenges associated with Y2K and embedded systems are in important way much farther reaching than terrorist threats and actions. These farther reaching impacts can be regional, national, and global. They can include infrastructure disruptions, technological disasters, complex emergencies similar to wartime, faltering economies, civil unrest and the potential for the unravelling of the social fabric. (I discuss these in Part 1 of my White Paper at http://www.gwu.edu/~keypeople/gordon .)

With the Y2K and embedded systems crisis, there is the unsettling chance that everyone throughout the world could be affected by such impacts to a greater or lesser degree. They could be affected in ways that would be disruptive, injurious, and destructive.

This message might not seem at all appropriate for the date and season. I am sending it along in the hope that it might perhaps help people understand why so many of their loved ones, friends, and associates ~ indeed, their public officials and political leaders ~ may be having such difficulty in acknowledging the situation that we are all in.

-- Paula Gordon (pgordon@erols.com), December 25, 1999.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 25, 1999.

I don't think there will be more than maybe 2 or 3 minor terrorist incidents in the U.S. between now and mid-January. Total death toll probably under 100. The goddam news is more terrorist than anything. I am getting fed up with hearing about these warnings EVERY single time I pick up the paper, listen to the radio, or watch TV for the last couple of weeks. More people are going to die from the stress caused by the media than anything that real terrorists do.

You're right Andy. The kind of overkill they are giving us clearly indicates that they are up to something not good. If they really cared about the people they would just shut the f*ck up and do their jobs. The odds of being one of the unlucky ones are slim, and I would prefer just to accept whatever comes without having it drilled into me all day long. I think it is time someone started making some terrorist threats to the Bilderberg meetings and see how they like it!

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 25, 1999.

I don't know Hawk - I suspect some *big* plays are to be made. Groundwork is being laid down here...

After TWA800, KAL007, even Egypt Air 990 - no or very little mention of terrorism. Same after the Kennedy downing. Same goes for the World Trade Centre and OKC bombings - absolutely nothing fromthe Admin until quite some time after the fact and then those found may not be the real perpetrators.

This is not the normal modus operandi here.

However it is classic for a problem/reaction/solution gambit...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 25, 1999.

We could set here all night long and talk about the problems that face this country. Nothing will change, until the people really wake up and get totally pissed off. Will that happen, NO. We live in a strange time. Like the article stated, it is me and mine, as long as that is ok, leave me alone. The general people believe the lie. Its better for them. Very few will believe the unbelievable problems just around the corner. Greed, money and power. That is what people want. They do not want facts. Look at our schools. They turn out nothing but substandard kids. In a way I look forward to the problems that Y2K will create. Its time people are shocked back into reality. For America, I do not see a future. The writing is on the wall. Nothing in my life time can I think of, that has the propensity bring this country down like Y2K, and people will not or can not see it.

-- I give up. (real mad@mad.com), December 25, 1999.

Agreed. I remember when we pulled the Iraqi stunt. Militia is warning that they fear feds will nuke Norfolk next week. Not that I support or belong to any militia, but I listen to all sources. Anyway, the point I'm making is that the game still continues.

BTW, if anyone is following the Oklahoma bombing, the militia's current MO is that the building could not have been bombed with fertilizer as the feds report, cause that would have released a nitrous ? cloud which would have clung to the area for at least 2 hours, and such a cloud was not present. Anyone got insight into this theory? Anyway, that is the supposed fed precedence for blaming the militia as well for future terrorist acts? I don't know, but am asking if anyone has info on this story? I'm trying to follow the devel of arguments on both sides.

-- Hokie (nn@va.com), December 25, 1999.

I have pondered upon these facts and have posted several times about my skepticizm regarding our government's political actions only to be flamed and told to love this country or leave it. Gentlemen, I fear you are, "Casting pearls before the swine." Be careful, some swine have large tusks and long memories.

Cory Hamasaki often says that computers are little impressed by men with $1000.00 suits and good haircuts. I think their indifference can be extended to public relations firms and even the point of a gun. They are gonna work, or they are not gonna work. If the public believes that the disruptions are due to terrorists with towels on there heads or with hayseeds in their boots, look out, they will believe every other lie that they are told. I read somewhere that after the Lucitania (thats a good story that was omitted in your post) was sunk, Americans went into German neighborhoods and were hanging Dachhunds by there necks. How many good German-Americans decided it would be prudent to say they were Dutch in those days?

My parents fled to NYC from Mexico in 1917. All people knew about Mexicans was what they read about Pancho Villa and Persing's expedition to catch him. My parents had to identify themselves as French in order to rent an apartment. They continued to speak Spanish, they just told the landlord that they were speaking in French and that rice and beans was a Frech delecacy. Ignorance is the stuff from which power is made.

I don't think my folks could have pulled that one off today because the public is more sophisticated. I doubt however that the public will see beyond the spin that we will be subjected to in just a few short days. Perhaps programmers will have to say they were lumber jacks to get an apartment.

Bill in South Carolina

-- Bill Solorzano (notaclue@webtv.net), December 25, 1999.

Andy- such an incredibly interesting lesson in history! No wonder Clinton has chosen FDR to be man of the century!

-- Jo Ann (MaJo@Michiana.com), December 25, 1999.

Ah, not to be offencive or rude Andy, but we got the southwest from Mexico, when we defeated them and bought their land. When we defeated Spain in 1896 we got all of their island holdings. But the main points of what you said are completely accurate, and I agree with you 100%. Also, look at Kosovo, there was a contrived war if I ever saw one! We can see the truth, so why can't everyone else? Oh well, never mind, a Merry Christmas to you, Andy!

-- Crono (Crono@timesend.com), December 25, 1999.

cheers Bloke,

andrew A Merry Christmas to you and yours.

-- d----- (dciinc@aol.com), December 25, 1999.

interesting thread. Neighbors & I talking y2k, terrorism comes up as major topic - I contribute some of the points made in this thread. They listen but really would rather talk about terrorism rather than the implications raised if staged events were being spoon fed the public.

Perhaps it has changed now, but as of a couple days ago, the "terrorists" caught in Sacramento conspiring to blow up big propane were actually being charged with owning of a semi-automatic by a felon and having possession of amphetimines. Even the Sac Bee [newspaper] concluded the Fed's were suffering from a credibility gap, given the Fed's screaming conspiracy initially.

While there probably will be terrorist acts, I agree, there is one BIG propaganda campaign going on to distract people, one which could also be used [but which might not too, we don't know yet - sorta like y2k ;-) ] as in the further erosion of personal & states rights.

-- Mitchell Barnes (spanda@inreach.com), December 25, 1999.

Andy:

Thank you for posting this excellent article! And let me tell you, ANYONE who looks at the Presidential Executive Orders that have been issued over the past couple of years to provide for emergency powers in the event of "cyberterrorism" -- and does not see how this could easily provide a cover for Y2K induced disruptions -- is kidding themselves.

(Thanks especially for the part of the article on the "Remember the Maine" hoodwinking of 1898, whereby that portion of the southwest U.S. that should rightfully belong to Spain was stolen. I demand that it be returned forthwith, and look forward to establishing a female mudwrestling stadium in southern California.)

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), December 25, 1999.

If you want to know what has happened and is still happening to the children from that flight, read "The Biggest Secret" by David Icke. I would be willing to bet $1000.00 that Jesse Helms has been with those little girls all through their growing years. The luckiest children have already died by his hands. Jesse Helms is part of the Babylonian Brotherhood. He wanted to see them before the crash thats why he was one of the last people that those little girls saw on the mainland before the crash.

Order the book at 1-800-444-2524 or through Amazon.com.

-- I feel sorry for the world. (its@gettingcrazier.by the hour), December 25, 1999.

Andy - you have it. Watch for the act, to be blamed on the militia and patriots. Result? Gun confiscation and roundups.

Icke is an idiot.

-- abcs (a@b.c), December 25, 1999.

Except for the fact that the United States actually acquired the Southwest form Mexico fifty years before the blowing up of the Maine, this is a pretty good recap.

-- K. Stevens (kstevens@ It's ALL going away in four days.com), December 26, 1999.