I would have thought it is a certainty that all those carriers are in port due to the uncertainty of their massively complex software/operating systems onboard that no one knows for certain how they will all behave for the rollover.

But here is a question that I have not seen asked, but that I'm sure the locals (those living within say 25 miles of any of these carriers)have contemplated: What is the point of tying up these ships in ports at major metropolises, exposing millions to a potential nuclear hazard at rollover or beyond, when, if they were at sea, at least there would be limited casualties if one ore more of them goes up?

There is no way in hell that the Navy has any intention of using them as emergency "shelters", as some have said, strictly due to the horrific security problems that involves. Not to mention the fact that a carrier has a normal crew complement of about 6000--most of the interior space is for equipment/gear/food, etc.

As for the idea that they are there to provide the cities with emergency power in Case of grid blackouts, then tell me what the requirement/coincidence is that ALL those tied up are NUCLEAR.

I am well aware that nuke carriers are more powerful than oil-fired ones, and as such have a higher flank speed, but even with this supposed higher electrical buss output, I can't see that warranting making them sitting ducks for the Clinton Commie Crony Crowd.

If I were a resident of any of the seaboard cities where these are now parked, I'd be asking the mayor or military or my Congressman some VERY pointed questions, and if no satisfactory explanation is forthcoming, I'd be packing a bug-out bag by the 27th.

BTW, I said that given the fact that the two lonely carriers left at sea are oil-fired, the US Navy had better have MANY fully-laden fleet oilers/tankers scattered all over the oceans.

Of what use is a carrier if its planes cannot fly due to no av fuel? Think the Chinese haven't got this angle figured out? Think they're not itching to try out their new toys the Russkies have just given them(guided-missile class ships)? No need to take out the carriers;just ensure they never get refueled.

-- profit of doom (doom@helltopay.ca), December 25, 1999

Answers

Profit, Looks to me like Clinton is rolling over and assuming the sumissive dog posture to the Russians. Exposing our throat in the hopes the commies will only piss on us and not rip out our jugular. What an idiot. This moron just a few days ago was STILL talking about ASSIMILATING Russia and China into the new global order. Can somebody please give this guy a clue? What do you call it when with one nuke you get five aircraft carriers, a couple dozen assorted subs and support ships, a naval base, a weapons depot, a major city, and about a dozen admirals? I can't decide if it is the deal of the century or an offer you can't refuse.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 25, 1999.

I think you have reason be be concerned about the safety of the carriers power-plants but that, IMHO, is a very low risk. I think what people should really be concerned for is that we are severly compromised in this time of intense tension between the superpowers.

A little history about WWII. Almost all of our entire Pacific Fleet was tied up in Pearl Harbor on the morning of December 7, 1941. The carriers were supposed to be there also (by Japanese intel) but were, by the grace of God, kept at sea.

In essence, we were sitting ducks for the suprise raid by the Japanese task force. All the ships sitting like ducks in nice, neat, tidy rows and in such fashion that even a rookie dive bomber pilot was bound to hit something on his first run.

What is suprising about this tidbit of history is that we were in a very tense situation with Japan already; regarding trade, etc. But we were not prepared. Japan was already engaged in aggression in the far East and was showing no signs of slowing.

Sunday morning, December 7, 1941 the American sailors and military men and women station at Pearl were asleep. Some were up getting ready for church, skeleton crews on board ships performing general maintenance duties and sailors sleeping off their hangovers from Saturday night.

Never in the minds of ANY of these slumbering, typical American folks did they dream they would be jarred into the sickening reality of the falling bombs and torpedos and the rattling of Japanese AC machine guns as they were strafing the decks of these massive, powerful, but vulnerable ships. Never would they have dreamed that the aircraft that were lined up so pretty on the airfield would be completely destroyed by an enemy that was thousands of miles away. They didn't even know who was attacking them, much less why.

My friend, be concerned about this terrible time of tension between the goliaths of the military world. With the status of our early warning systems in a compromising state due to hardware failure (possibility), we should ask ourselves, "should we rest at ease and tempt fate, again ?" Should we trust that the nerves of those nations, that have a proven track record of oppression and aggression, will not wain in this time of trouble ?

How trustworthy is OUR non-aggression pact with China and Russia ? Can we afford to put it to the test in this manner ? My answer is simply NO. My answer is that we cannot afford to give ANYONE something to shoot at, especially after Ivan has already informed the world that they "have lowered their threshold for nuclear response". My answer is that we should be deployed and ready to answer ANY question that may come to the minds of these people. We cannot, and should not, be at home, tucked in our cozy ports, lined up neatly in military fashion while we recover from our hangovers from that Friday night, as we were on December 7, 1941 at 0700 hrs.

Well, now that I have gone off with my little dissertation I would imagine it is about time to climb down from the soapbox and let someone else rely. Thanks for listening.

-- Rob (maxovrdrv51@hotmail.com), December 25, 1999.

Date: Fri Dec 24 1999 10:16

RFMG (On U.S.Carriers in port.) ID#413218:

Copyright ) 1999 RFMG/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved

The U.S.S. Kitty Hawk and the U.S.S. John F. Kennedy are older ships. They are oil-fired. So is the U.S.S. Constellation. The other nine carriers are nuclear. They and the Constellation are in U.S. ports.

But . . . the new home port since 1998 for the Kitty Hawk is Yokosuka, Japan.

KITTY HAWK departed San Diego on July 6, 1998 to assume new duties as America's only permanently forward-deployed aircraft carrier from USS INDEPENDENCE ( CV 62 ) . Hawk also welcomed aboard Carrier Air Wing FIVE, operating from Atsugi, Japan. KITTY HAWK arrived at her new homeport of Yokosuka, Japan, on Aug. 11, 1998. So, it may be that this ship is in port, too. The Navy says it is "forward deployed" to Yokosuka. This does not say where the ship is.

The question is: Why are over 80% of our capital ships -- carriers and submarines -- in U.S. ports? I have four possible answers:

1. Navy scientists are not sure if nuclear ships will still be operational on January 1. If they are not, the brass wanted them in port, where they can be repaired ( ? ) , or at least not become floating targets. To have our capital ships visibly adrift is to lose naval superiority overnight: no more "forward presence." Of course, if word gets out that they are in full repair status, we will lose our superiority for a time, no matter what.

2. The President had to cut a deal with the Russians to get them to cooperate in the joint y2k observation project: we pull our capital ships out of service as a sign of our peaceful intentions.

3. The Navy has been asked to have its nuclear ships in port because they are floating power-generating plants. They can be used to re- boot shut-down power plants on land.

4. It's just one of those things -- just one of those crazy things.

This week, the Russians delivered the first of two new destroyers to China, according to the WASHINGTON TIMES ( Dec. 23 ) . It will have cruise missiles and the capacity to sink our ships.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

. . . A Sovremenny-class guided missile destroyer will be delivered to the Chinese navy at a shipyard in St. Petersburg on Saturday  Christmas Day  and will depart for its home port in China two days later, Russia's official Itar-Tass news agency announced on Monday.

A christening ceremony involving the hoisting of a Chinese flag on the ship will take place at the shipyard ceremony Saturday and the ships "will become Chinese property," the news agency said.

The Pentagon's main worry is that the destroyers will be equipped with advanced anti-ship cruise missiles that are part of China's expanding military role in the region, according to defense officials and private analysts. . . .

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

Sitting ducks my ass! Have you ever been on one of these puppies? One may not survive a direct hit, but the other four will keep on truckin. Lock and load boys!

Weren't the Saratoga and Forrestal the last oil burning carriers, now decommissioned?

Power for cities? No way, they are each cities unto themselves, and now FEMA headquarters has with these carriers the single most awesome and indestructible "command centers" and back-up generators the world has ever seen.

Norfolk is the largest naval base on the planet, and now it's got an unlimited energy supply.

If you want something to worry about then might I suggest instead focusing on our boys being sent to Russia to try to save their nuke sub graveyard from going critical.

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

Rob, sorry to 'piss" on one of your presidents, but here goes.(No, this time it's NOT Crinton.)

Perhaps the last and longest-lasting lies and fallacies Americans have is that FDR was a great president. Firstly, he forced under an E.O. the confiscation, CLEARLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL, of private property, to whit gold/certificates, forcing citizens under penalty of 10 years prison, to be delivered to "a Federal Reserve Bank".

That is a PRIVATE company. Doesn't have a damn thing to do with the US government.

Some of his policies under the NEW DEAL were well-intentioned at the time, but have grown into the tentacled monsters of bureaucracy that we are saddled with today.

I could go on and on; there was a documentary on History or TLC just a short while ago that documented all the evidence that FDR knew EVERYTHING about the Japanese plan to hit Pearl Harbour, but purposely let it come because he needed an enormous, emotional shift of America's isolationist attitude at the time to get the people onside for a declaration of war.

Not mentioned in that TV doc was a specific incident that not 1 in 10000 is aware of to this day, that cements the fact that Pearl Harbour was a purposeful collusion of FDR-Churchill to get England out of her dire straits by bringing the USA into the war:

There is a book out there, about 1996, called "OP JB", meaning operation James Bond. Written by Christopher Creighton. He was one of Churchill's TOP men, and had world-wide responsibility for the British Enigma code dissemination of decrypted messages to the 31 listed sites.

He mentions the story of a certain Dutch submarine(remember, this is AFTER Hitler had over-run the Lowlands, so the Dutch who escaped made base out of British ports) which CLEARLY spotted the Japanese carrier armada on/about December 3, 1941, and sent a CLEAR MESSAGE MOST URGENT to the British.What ensued? Well, this Creighton was tasked to deliver a "Christmas present" to the Dutch commander,as a token of the British gratitude, in a meeting in the middle of the ocean. At least, that was the guise of the gift. In reality, it was a timed poison-gas explosive, designed to go off when the sub hit a certain underwater pressure. Of course, being a Christmas present, there was no way it would be questioned or opened before then.

Sure enough, the sub was never heard from again. Reason being that no one else had spotted the fleet that is known, and so the Brits wanted the "surprise" attack to go off without a hitch.

Also, the one question which always bothered me about Pearl Harbour, before news of the US "Magic" decrytion became known, was how did the Americans get so lucky in having their carriers away from port that day? Question answered.

FDR knew that the CARRIERS were the key to any war, and since he had the knowledge of the Magic information flow, he KNEW the Americans would prevail.(Remember, this was a time when the US Navy was DWARFED by the Japanese Navy!)It was still one hell of a gamble.

-- profit of doom (doom@helltopay.ca), December 25, 1999.

PS--If you see our Wolf Class subs washing on shore like beached whales then you can worry. If there is a nuke exchange during the rollover, then these subs will be the ones that deliver. No way would I want our fly boys up and out when we've got sattelites dropping EMP's. Surface ships are easier targets for obvious reasons. These subs have all the bells and whistles, and are MORE than enough to handle any short term exchange.

These subs are nearly as big as air craft carriers, so if you have any landside sightings then there is no way you can mistake them, so by all means let me know.

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

Amen Prophet, No wonder Clinton thinks FDR should be "Man of the Century".Well,the century is not over until 1/1/2001 and he may actually be "Man of the Century" for similar,but more intrusive and damaging reasons.

-- Dragnet (just@the.facts), December 25, 1999.

Profit of Doom,

I appreciate your response to my post. I have always had that question in my mind about the carriers. Weren't they SUPPOSED to be there but in a last minute decision, diverted back to station at sea ? Anyway, that always struck me as funny why this happened. I know they should have been, but weren't. Hmm.

I do think that a carrier would not withstand a hit (near indirect) from a nuke and just think that being mobile would greatly reduce the chance of a direct hit (if that is possible). I know they are the bad boyz and all but just can't understand why that moron CIC is doing what he is. I can't believe we re-elected him myself but this isn't the thread or forum for that I guess.

Anyway, it sounds like terrible strategy to me under the present duress of the superpowers. If I was playing (probably good that I'm not ***grin***), I would be positioned to knock some friggin' teeth in.

Interesting thread and analysis of the sit. Just reminds me of my studies of WWII events. Thanks for responding !

-- Rob (maxovrdrv51@hotmail.com), December 25, 1999.

I'll go along with P.O'.Doom on that one. Historically, the surface navy of 1941 was about 30 years old by design. Yes, improvements and updates had happened, but no the less, you don't go into a war using thirty-year old designs against a modernized fleet. Lets face it. FDR wanted to bail out Churchill, needed to upgrade the surface fleet, and Get the public behind the war effort. (Remember the USS Maine?) He knew that Carriers were vital to the war, so they were sent out on 'Manuveurs.' Unfortunately all proof of this is going to be lost to history....

-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan101st@Aol.com), December 25, 1999.

What a crock . When I spent my 4+ years on the Eisenhower(CVN-69) The 2 reactors were analog in nature. We didn't use microprocessors for much of anything.These systems were designed when H. G. Rickover was the head of NR and everything was manual operated to minimize any mechanical error. Besides, these plants are not civilian plants and were designed to be in a military environment(combat). As far as the plants go they'll be fine. For the record I was in class 7701. I was an electrical operator. My NEC was 3384 (Surface ship Nuclear Power Plant Operator). I think maybe the fire control or comm or navigation systems might be at risk but not the plants. BTW we did have problems with shore power cables blowing due to the water in them flashing to steam on occasion.

As far as jet fuel goes the ship had as I recall somewhere in the area of 3.75 million gallons of JP4 but only about 2000 gallons of avgas in 2 1000 gallons blivits back aft.

The diesel carriers have a flank bell range of 5000 miles without refueling and 12000 miles at a 1/3 bell. If they had a full fuel load they would be able to go for a minimum of 6 weeks easy, with air wing ops.

The ships while in port don't have the air wing on board and ships company is about 3200. With the air wing off and the hanger bays open not to mention the berthing compartments the air wing leaves open you could easily put 10,000 people on board. You could feed those people for a month with the provisions on the ship.

BUT with all that said, I wonder why they are in port and at least some of them not underweigh.

-- nine (nine_fingers@hotmail.com), December 25, 1999.

Hokie. Was that a mistake saying wolf class instead of Ohio class? We have only one operational wolf class sub, and it carrries no ICBM's as the hull class is designed as a fast attck, hunter killer.

The Ohio class, more commonly known as Tridents, are the launch platforms for out nukes. We have eighteen of these, but no more than five are ever on station at one time. While these used to carry 20 missiles with ten warheads each, Clinton has cut them down to ten missiles with one warhead each, and removed their launch codes. In efffect he cut the total warhead deployment of the squadron of subs on duty from 1000 to 50. All five of those Tridents combined comprise only one quarter of the firepower a single Trident posessed prior to Clinton. These fifty warheads have to make it through between 10 and 12 THOUSAND nuclear tipped Russian ABMs. Of course you'd have to be pretty optimistic to assume that all five of the subs would get all their missiles away before being destroyed by the Russian Akula class subs which are stalking them, and outnumber them ten to one. If I were a Russian general, my best case scenario would be that I would probably take between five and ten hits in retalliation for destroying the United States. My worst case would be 25. Almost all of these would be directed at military targets and not population centers. It aint ever going to get any cheaper to rule the planet.

From the U.S. Navy fact page

General Characteristics, Seawolf class Builders: General Dynamics Electric Boat Division. Power Plant: One nuclear reactor, one shaft Length: 353 feet (107.60 meters) Draft: 35 feet (10.67 meters) Beam: 40 feet (12.19 meters) Displacement: 8,060 long tons (8,189.35 metric tons) surfaced; 9,150 tons (9,296.84 metric tons) submerged Speed: 25+ knots (28.77+ miles per hour, 46.30+ kph) Cost: about $2.1 billion each Ships: USS Seawolf (SSN-21), Groton, Ct. USS Connecticut (SSN-22), Groton, Ct. Jimmy Carter (SSN-23), (under construction) Crew: 13 Officers; 121 Enlisted Armament: Tomahawk missiles, MK-48 torpedoes, eight torpedo tubes.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 25, 1999.

Thanks Nikoli, that was my thought--Ohio, not Wolf, but my Christmas Company is a vet who argued that I had it wrong. Thanks for clearing that up. I will proceed to throttle the bastard now, heh.

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

So to sum up, we have about six theories so far - the ones that Andy posted (1 -4) plus the "indestructible command centers" (FEMA) with "unlimited energy supply" idea that Hokie posted, and also the idea of them acting as a place to shelter/feed people as indicated by nine.

Last I heard, five of the carriers were sitting in Norfolk, and I continue to wonder at this - still doesn't make much sense to me but then again not much does these days. And what ports are the other ones in - are they side by side also or spread out?

One thing that is interesting is the proximity of Norfolk to D.C.

-- Rob Michaels (sonofdust@wondering.too), December 25, 1999.

Yes, I think it's been an interesting thread, too, profit. I've been reading it off and on while dealing with a family 'crisis'(these things do have a way of interrupting my reading time.) But I'm learning stuff. scary stuff. But hey...I wasn't planning on sleeping tonight anyway...

Take care all.

-- DB (tomG@h.com), December 25, 1999.

A little research will show that only ONE carrier is at sea.

The USS Kitty Hawk docked on 10 NOV 1999.

The USS John F Kennedy is in the Red Sea. Interestingly, if one visits the ship's website - one learns that even though they are in the Red Sea, they are currently standing down and in the midst of maintenance and repair duties. From what the web-site says they are reworking at least one catapult ... no aircraft launches happening on THAT line, hence a 25% reduction in launch capability!

From their website:

"For Kennedy Sailors, it's just another 'no fly day,' as Big John passes through The Red Sea

A Sailor from the Waist Cats shows the product of his labors as Sailors take advantage of a little down time to make repairs and do maintenance on one of the ship's four aircraft catapults. (Photos courtesy of Combat Camera Atlantic)" See this Link

click thru the "Where in the world is USS John F. Kennedy (CV67)? button on left hand side of screen.

General Information:

Navy Fact File: Aircraft Carriers

Norfolk, Va:

USS Nimitz (CVN-68),

USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69),

USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71),

USS George Washington (CVN 73),

USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75),

USS Enterprise (CVN 65),

Bremerton, Wash:

USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70),

Everett, Wash:

USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72),

San Diego, Calif: USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74), USS Constellation (CV-64),

Yokosuka, Japan

USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63)

Underway:

USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67); Mayport, Fla.

Under Construction:

Ronald Reagan (CVN-76)

-- hiding in plain (sight@edge. of no-where), December 26, 1999.

Good points from the Nuke Sailor above. I also served on a surface nuke. Every Navy system has at least 3 backups. Our nuclear power plant was always critical, with a "steaming watch" set even when the ship was in port.

If the Captains of those ships are anything like my old Captain, they might have something up their sleave.

As the other sailor pointed out, there is plenty of room on an Aircraft carrier, if the planes and flight crews are not onboard.

What if the ships are warmed up, ready to go. Something comes down through the "good old boy" network. Those carriers could have the wives and kids onboard and be 100 miles out to sea in less than 5 hours.

-- old salt (old salt@navy.mil), December 26, 1999.

In researching the public web-sites for each of the US carriers, the following information was found:

In Shipyard:

Ronald Reagan (CVN-76) - Under Construction ( location not given )

Norfolk, Va:

USS Nimitz (CVN-68) - Left drydock on 6 Nov - will be undergoing overhaul until Sep-Oct 2000

USS Enterprise (CVN 65) - returned from latest cruise on 6 May 1999, currently undergoing a 6 month ESRA (?) period (unknown start or end date).

Bremerton, Wash:

USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) - Currently in drydock, will not return to fleet status until Summer 2000

Conducting Fleet Carrier Qualifications off Virginia coast

Norfolk, Va:

USS George Washington (CVN 73)

Assigned to Fleet duty but in port:

Norfolk, Va:

USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) - Completed latest Retrofit in Jun 1999.

USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71) - Docked from latest cruise on 24 Sep 1999.

USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) - Completed Fleet Carrier Qualifications on 3 Nov 1999.

Everett, Wash:

USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) - status not specified on the ship's webpage.

San Diego, Calif:

USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74) - status not specified on the ship's webpage.

USS Constellation (CV-64) - Docked from latest cruise on 17 Dec 1999.

Yokosuka, Japan

USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) - Docked from latest cruise on 10 Nov 1999.

UNDERWAY:

USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67)- Currently deployed in the Red Sea. Interestingly, if one visits the ship's website - one learns that even though they are forward deployed, they are currently standing down and in the midst of maintenance and repair duties. From what the web-site says they are reworking at least one catapult out of four ... no aircraft launches happening on THAT line, hence a 25% reduction in launch capability! (no indication of when will return to full capability was given!)

Summary:

1 under construction

4 out of service

5 active, but in port

2 no status given

1 deployed (but standing down with a 25% loss in operational capabilities for unknown length of time)

One point that intrigued me ... every one of these ships is either undergoing or has, within last year, undergone a MAJOR retrofit of EVERYTHING aboard. My guestimate - something major is brewing ... These ladies are, or are being, loaded for bear. (pun definitely intended :-)

-- hiding in plain (sight@edge. of no-where), December 26, 1999.

Have you not heard the rumor that Bill wants to run for a third term, and WW111 is the ticket? WW111 is a small price to one of his mentality.

-- Notforlong (Fsur439@aol.com), December 26, 1999.

Speaking of third terms, what was the deal with FDR?

First term- 1932-1936

Second term- 1936-1940

Third term- 1940-1944

Fourth term- 1944-1945 (when he died).

What happened in 1940 that allowed him to do this third term? (1944, I understand. There was a war going and an election would have been very inconvenient. Although as I recall, there was still an election anyway.)

Leo

-- Leo (lchampion@ozemail.com.au), December 26, 1999.

Third term? Possible. Ive been studying this situation for almost two years now, and have formed some theories, none of which are pretty. The short version of the most likely theory is that Clinton is using a combination of tactics designed to ensure that the United States will engage in a nuclear war with Russia and China before he leaves office. He has lowered our nuclear deterrence shield to the point of being nearly nonexistant, scattered our military all over the planet fighting brush fires, upgraded the nuclear forces of both Russia and China through technology transfers, depleted our stocks of cruise missiles and iron bombs to the lowest levels ever, reduced the operational capability of the air force to the point that entire wings are being cannibalized for spare parts, weeded out the command structure of all the service branches so that only political hacks remain, and raised tensions with Russia to the boiling point over the last three years. In short he simultaneously provoking a conflict and presenting the easiest possible target.

What could he hope to gain through these actions? Well you have to remember that Clinton is first and foremost a socialist and a one world government advocate. His policies almost exactly miror those of Adolph Hitler in his rise to power. I personally think he wants a nuclear exchange with the communist nations because he thinks we have enough top secret weaponry and technology to turn the balance in our favor, no matter how desperate the situation may look from a conventional standpoint. He will sacrafice huge segments of the American population, and the entire military to achieve his objectives

So what are these objectives? Bill Clinton wants to be the last president of the United States, and the first President of the World. Imagine the condition of the planet following such a war as we have described. Russia, China, and the United States are decimated, along with most likely Korea and Japan. Starvation, disease and radiation poisoning cover the planet. As nations struggle to survive a sense of mass indignation forms throughout the surviving population. "Never Again !!" will be the cry of the masses. And a savior will step forth to ensure it is so. In his low southern drawl the Savior will tell the world of the treachery of the communist in launching a nuclear attack on the peaceful west. He will bask in the heroes glow for having overcome, even at the cost so dearly paid. And he will magnanimously offer to lead the Earth out of these dark ages, as the head of a One World Government , outlawing national soverignity, national armies, and ownership of any type of weapon by the general population. A single world army under his command to ensure we all just get along. And they will buy it hook, line, and sinker. And since we are now global in nature, the use of currency is really obsolete. The new system will be a tatoo given at birth, encoded with all the information you will need to buy ,or work, or sell.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 26, 1999.

Nikoli, I agree one hundred percent with you in all you have stated, I wanted to say that, sure am glad I waited. You did such a much better job of it than I could have ever thought of doing. Wow- However you forgot one small minor detail. Our government has been working in tandom to produce the end product you have outlined. Your forgot to mention how Carter so graciously gave to the Red Chinese the Panama Canal, so that that could have a foot hold onto N. America. The system has worked together from the beginning. It matters not who is in office, they all have the same goal, and it is handed down from one to the next. However Bill wants to be the big cheese, and he is fully willing to sacrifice our nation to do it.

-- Notforlong (Fsur439@aol.com), December 26, 1999.

Notforlong, I agree that what we are witnessing currently is the culmination of a near century long bipartisan and international movement whose sole purpose has been to institute a socialist one world government under the leadership of the Old World Banking Families.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 26, 1999.

"What happened in 1940 that allowed him to do this third term?"

He won the election.

-- Ron Schwarz (rs@clubvb.com.delete.this), December 26, 1999.

The limit to 2 terms came after FDR.

-- Squid (ItsDark@down.here), December 27, 1999.

Ney Nine:

SSHHhhhhssshhhhhh. You never no who might be monitoring this. But without saying there power plants have no worries what so ever, but again my point is that unless there were problems with the Navigation, weapons, or fire controls systems why have them sitting in port for most of December. At best its ignorant foreign policy, if you act nice they will too, at worst its TREASON!!!!! So we have have dismantled are MAD policy on the word that the Russians did also. We have individuals who have told our intel that they have lied and cheated and we keep whistling in the dark. Spooky times we live in with spooky people calling the shots.

Word I got was that some would sail right after the date change. Why? Something is up and I am not sure anybody knows the whole picture.

Crossing my fingers, Note if there is a pre-emptive attack I will as a citizen count the CIC and the majors as Traitors of the first degree.

By the by did you get the carbon dust out of your hair yet.

-- Squid (ItsDark@down.here), December 27, 1999.