Put on your tin foil hat for this one, but here goes...

[FormerRepublican]

I live in Utah, where having a bit of food set aside is a pretty normal thing. You tend to use it when the budget is a little tight this month, when you lose your job, etc. I've had two government officials here tell me to my face that in the event of a shortage of resources (including food), the government would come into my home by force and take what I have. This is after I told them that I would willingly give whatever I had available to emergency response personnel.

To say that I was enraged by this is an understatement. Considering the fact that I'm on Social Security Disability, it's absolutely ludicrous that the government would come into my home by force and take what little I have to feed myself. It also makes me realize that current plans in place in the event of resource shortages in the midst of a major pandemic would turn the US into a bloodbath. I can't imaging Joe Sixpack letting government troops break into his home against his will and take everything from his pantry. I told them that they're far better off limiting what they "take" to what Americans freely give them. I think my comments fell on deaf ears.

This does sound like King Bush, however. :scared: Perhaps their lack of plan for an effective government response is a plan to gain greater government power for Der Fuehrer?

If this really is the government contingency plan, how do you think it will play out? Has anyone else been hearing stuff this ridiculous from government officials?

And while this is a bit tinfoil, FEMA regs do give them legal status to do this. What absolutely appalls me is the idea that anyone would think it would actually work without killing a LOT of Americans defending their home from invasion.

[babylonsister]

1. What agency did those gov't officials come from, and how

did the topic arise? Downright creepy!

[FormerRepublican]

6. PM me and I'll tell you which agencies. It's got me a little creeped out

...and I'm reluctant to say who they were in a public forum. But they were both US government, not local or state.

[randr]

2. Who where the "officials"

and in what capacity do they operate?

[Catherine Vincent]

3. There would be a lot of dead Americans.

It does make sense. In a time of crisis they always say no hoarding. You figure how would they know you were hoarding if they didn't come in your home to check.

[DoYouEverWonder]

4. Let's just hope

we don't get to that point.

One good thing, keeping the wheels of commerce turning is all important to these folks. The system is huge and redundant. Even after 9-11, I still got my Am Ex bill on time.

[elehhhhna]

5. The Mepubs will take whatever they damnned please. Already do.

What you describe must be their contingency/after plan, which will go into effect after they've stolen and borrowed every US dollar.

[TreasonousBastard]

7. Why haven't we been hearing from the militia types...

and the libertarians about this sort of thing. Seems to me they were all het up and ready to stand off the Feds at every turn, but now they're quiet as mice.

I guess Ruby Ridge wasn't such a big deal after all.

[John Q. Citizen]

13. I've noticed that they quit talking about Ruby Ridge when

someone points out it was done under bush 1. For some reason they assume it was a Clinton operation...

And none of those guys ever talks about the Move house aerial fire bombing in Philadelphia. They were fire bombed for not paying the power bill and for annoying neighbors with a bull horn loud speaker. 200 homes burned down as a result of that brilliant move. Of course that happened to black people so I guess they don't see it as an injustice.

[nashville_brook]

8. what sort of event do these 'officials' anticipate?

can you give a hint without revealing too much?

are they concerned about a 'pandemic' ... i guess what i'm wondering is how does this come up in conversation in an 'official' capacity.

[FormerRepublican]

10. It was after having conversations with folks about pandemic flu prep.

In one case it was after we'd talked about the resveratrol in red wine that might be useful "medicine" if medical care was overwhelmed in the midst of a bird flu pandemic.

In another case, it was after talking about the same subject in a different context.

I get the VERY solid idea that the plan of the government in the event of shortages in a bird flu pandemic is to come into people's homes and take whatever they need. I think they prefer this to the government actually stockpiling anything.

The impression I get is that Bush's plan is to not have a plan, except to take whatever is needed from anyone and redistribute it as they see fit. And you know who would get all your stuff, since they weren't interested in Emergency personnel - Halliburton, rich corporate pals, politicians, etc. :puke:

Listening to them talk about their pandemic "plan" made me want to hurl.

[HeeBGBz]

16. They did that after Katrina

This guy brought a semi-trailer full of supplies for his family and friends in the Biloxi area. Not only did they stop him and not allow him to go further south than Hattiesburg, the National Guard took all his shit and distributed it to the Hattiesburg area. This guy was calling in to the radio station talking about it when I was leaving town.

[alfredo]

31. The first thing they will do is look for the cans of tuna

under your bed.

[leftstreet]

36. 'Chicken of the Sea' = bird flu? :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat

:rofl:

[alfredo]

37. Jessica Simpson has cases of it under her bed.

[nashville_brook]

46. stockpiles vs confiscating (it might be a plan, but...)

a plan for what?

i'm no procurement specialist, but i would think that going door to door for tuna would be a mighty inefficient procurement plan. my point is, the POINT wouldn't be procurement, per se -- it would have a psychological effect on average people that would communicate two things: hopelessness that 'authorities' will help them (as if there's any question post-Katrina), AND that it's 'everyone-for-themselves.'

let the little ones fight it out. the big dogs will be taken care of. that leaves your local 'law enforcement' patrols (whoever has the most firepower?) to do whatever they want.

i guess, my point is -- going door-to-door for tuna would benefit only a one-to-one exchange. the person who had the tuna looses it -- the person who took it has it. are they going to put your tuna in a huge tuna pile for Rumsfeld to gather up for the elite. i think not. are they going to stop at tuna? why not just confiscate your house?

[Joanne98]

9. I've been getting a bad feeling lately! It would be nice if we

could get more info from within the agencies. It feels like something's up. Of course it could just be despair over the up and coming hurricane season. I don't know why Utah would be worried about that though. Wall Street doesn't like Americans storing necessities BTW, it gives them too much power over market forces.

[shadowknows69]

11. Any americans they would have to kill

would clearly be terroist sympathizers so it's all good.

[Minnesota Libra]

12. I've heard this kind of thing a number of times and I too........

.....am worried just as much as it worries you. I learned early on in my life, the wisdom of having "a rainy day stash" and boy did it come in handy a few times too. On that one issue the Mormons could teach America a thing or two. I was only too willing to share what I had - not by force - but by the person/s simply asking.

Anyway, I think the government (FEMA and HLS) would spark something of another civil war if they insist on forcibly taking everyone's "rainy day supplies". I certainly wouldn't give up mine without a major fight. If there is another agency involved in this please let me know because I for one don't think you have on the :tinfoilhat: at all.

If you ask me this kind of thing sounds very similar to the results of the 1917 Russian Revolution. If you think about it - the communists took everything and divided it up among everyone. What is the difference between that and what is proposed here??

[shadowknows69]

15. I highly doubt the resources would be divide up

among everyone. It would be hoarded for the privledged and the lower of the herd culled.

[Minnesota Libra]

17. That part goes without saying because even in the.............

.....1917 Russian Revolution many had nothing and a few had everything. It was dividing what was left among the "common person" that was the problem because there wasn't much left to divide. It will be the same in the event of an "emergency" in this country too.

[HeeBGBz]

18. I would suggest burying it somewhere if you have property

Keep a stash that they can't easily find.

[Jigarotta]

28. or have a fake front of pretzel bags in your pantry. n/t

[Minnesota Libra]

42. Hey, not a bad idea - I live in an apartment building so..............

......burying my supplies is not an option. But fake fronts could be. Thanks!!:pals:

[ldf]

14. i think the "pandemic"

as i don my :tinfoilhat:

i think the pandemic will occur when they really need it.

like right before the 2008 election, so the country will be in chaos, and people will be more worried about death, than the election.

i would imagine that our labs are working on the "mutant crossover" avian virus, as we speak, IF they have not already created it.

i do. not. trust. them. PERIOD!

:scared:

[savemefromdumbya]

21. think they have already

[truth2power]

22. Mutant crossover avian virus...

I'm still trying to figure out about all those dead scientists (microbiologist and otherwise). I started a thread asking about that about 6 months ago, and it got stuffed in the 911 forum. Guess that means it was too tin-foil.

V for Vendetta is fiction, of course. But that whole thing was predicated on some govt. medical experiemnts gone wrong. Just sayin'...

[earth mom]

24. I feel the exact same way.

Especially since lord hissypants decided he was above the law.

Can ya say 'King George"? Like for forever? :puke:

[sheelz]

19. Are those government officials

Mormons?

[FormerRepublican]

20. 1 yes, 1 no.

[sheelz]

23. Interesting...

As you already know, food storage is part of their faith. The next question is, why now? Could it be fearmongering to gather more food? The Mormon food program has been in practice for more than 60 years and I'm sure the government wouldn't hesitate taking it away. Food storage would help Mormon survival-- but eventually-- it could bring death and destruction. :scared:

[leftstreet]

25. Oh please

Is this the same "government" that couldn't take a few thousand people to safety in New Orleans?

:eyes:

Our "government" can't do shit.

We, the people, are the REAL government. But I guess the only way to keep us from accepting it and acting on it is to talk about how "scary" the "government" is.

[FormerRepublican]

26. ????

This is the same government who lied about sniper attacks in New Orleans to cover up their failure to act, and who wanted to nationalize the LA national guard and take military control in violation of posse commitatus. Not to mention the fact that they were more than happy to let a large number of Americans die.

What makes you think they'd stop at breaking into your house to steal stuff for Bush pals who think they're above the "little people?"

[sheelz]

27. Oh please.yourself....

They weren't interested in the safety of the people in New Orleans. Their idea of safety is Blackwater.

[Cleita]

30. They are very efficient when it comes to grabbing for themselves

as they have with the Katrina funds meant for disaster relief.

[Cleita]

29. If they have decided that they can legally break into your

home for food, I don't think it's going to stop there. You should stash your important papers and your valuables somewhere on your property if you can. If you have a gun safe that's a good place. Build a wall in your closet to hide it. My son-in-law does this as he has a lot of antique guns and if they were ever burglarized no one would know that there is a hidden cache there.

As for your food, Chinese peasants used to hide much of their food storage in a bin under the floor boards of their homes, which they covered with a rug and furniture. This way when maurading bands of warlords and their soldiers came through taking all the food in their wake, they had something left. Be sure you leave some food out for them to take.

I hope our lives don't get to the point where we have to do things that are this drastic.

[benEzra]

32. That'd be absolutely idiotic...not to mention counterproductive...

IF these authorities' idea of responding to a disaster is to start a literal civil war (the shooting kind), then that might be a rational approach. Otherwise, such a policy would be idiotic beyond words.

Besides, there's this little thing called the Constitution, which has a portion called the Bill of Rights, which includes this pesky little paragraph called the Fourth Amendment. Last time I looked, there was no "national emergency" exception to the Fourth Amendment--and unless it's a crime to have food in your cupboards, they'd have no grounds for a search warrant.

Actually, the authorities DID try something this stupid in post-Katrina New Orleans (kicking in the doors of high-and-dry houses without search warrants, cuffing the homeowners, and ransacking their houses looking for lawfully-owned guns).

New Orleans ABC affiliate video of door-to-door confiscations

Thankfully, that idiocy was stopped almost immediately, before any police/National Guard were shot, but the precedent was scary. Law-abiding homeowners who had done nothing wrong, handcuffed and sitting on the sidewalk while troops with machine guns ransack their house without a warrant...that's NOT the kind of America any of us are fighting for.




BTW, why are they going around telling people this? Is their concept of pre-disaster preparation to go around discouraging people from being prepared ahead of time? THAT will help things in the event of a disaster, I'm sure...

[Jigarotta]

33. and it's getting littler each day.

""Besides, there's this little thing called the Constitution, ..."""

[onenote]

34. why won't you say what agency the officials were from?

[FormerRepublican]

35. I've been telling people privately via PM.

Why? Because they've got me a little spooked.

[AnnInLa]

38. Not saying you were dreaming, but this is hard to

credit.

[FormerRepublican]

40. Read HeeBGBz's post number 16 above. Then think on it.

[AnnInLa]

44. I have thought about it....

and read all of the posts. I didn't change my mind.

[AnnInLa]

45. But call me if the government comes and takes

all of your supplies. I'll send you some crawfish and boudin.

[porphyrian]

39. In Florida, they could be shot legally now.

"I couldn't tell they were real officers..."

New law.

[FormerRepublican]

41. ???

What's the new law?

[porphyrian]

43. You can shoot people on your property with greater ease now.

Apparently, you just have to feel threatened to shoot, or something like that.

[Lorien]

52. The "shoot first ask questions later" law.

I'm in Florida, and yes, you only have to feel threatened to kill someone on your property or from your car. It's nuts.

[Mr.Green93]

47. What of 'the Greater Good'?

Hoarding in a time of need is wrong.

[gkhouston]

49. so, if we

put tuna and powdered milk under our beds are we being obedient citizens or hoarders? Where's the line? The OP clearly stated that the "break into your home and take it by force" remarks were made after he'd expressed a willingness to share his supply in a time of need. I agree with other posters that scavenging food from individual houses will be incredibily ineffecient and that knowledge of this tactic is a disincentive to personal preparedness. Why put anything aside if it's going to be taken from me at gunpoint?

[noonwitch]

48. Don't worry too much, look how long it took them to get to NO

By the time they get to your stash, you'll be gone.

[Radio_Guy]

50. Bush I did that

In 1988 by executive order, the first Bush allowed FEMA to "tell the states, national guard, military forces, or whomever, to confiscate extra hoarded food or medical supplies"

[Lorien]

51. It seems like the most inefficient plan possible

first there's the danger factor; barging into someone's home in a gun crazed nation doesn't seem very sensible. Then there's the payoff; in my small home they would come away with some pasta and rice, a jar of pesto, olives, and some cat food. What a haul. Maybe they would try to take over public gardens and small farms, but individual pantries just seems silly.

[gkhouston]

55. actually, the more I think about it, the dumber it is.

If the base assumption is that you're taking by force because people aren't voluntarily sharing, then "the officials" wouldn't be taking anyone's word for it as to how much food they've got in the house. That means you've got to ransack everyone. That's a lot of risk, work, and disruption for what may well be a very small payoff -- and you'd need a lot of manpower to make it happen. Wouldn't it make more sense to use that manpower to getting the trucks rolling again, if a shortage of drivers is the issue? Or to cultivating/processing the food, if that's the problem?

[Lorien]

57. And imagine if it started because of a pandemic

that manpower would be exposed to homes where people might be sick! Nah, just isn't logical.

[LeaveIraqNow]

53. Who authorized them to be able to do this?

[patcox2]

54. Sounds like you live in Idaho among the whackos.

Thats just typical "government is evil" urban rumor crap you are hearing. Sure, the government in an emergency would have the authority to confiscate (to be reimbursed later) private food stockpiles and institute an orderly distribution process, but that doesn't mean they ever would. Anywhere but Utah it just wouldn't be worthwhile, anyway, they'd expend enormous resources collecting squat.

Government workers traffic in bullshit rumors, too.

[proud patriot]

56. I don't like it one bit

I know people who would freak if they heard about it .