Y2K problem is being exaggerated in great proportion! please stop it! nothing is going to happen, everything will be just fine! y2k related business is booming such as food storage, survival items, etc. because of you are all hyping y2k! you're taking advantage of the situation to sell your business, scaring the people out of their wits! it's not gonna be the end of the world as you know it! STOP THE HYPE! CEASE THE RHETORIC! DOOMSAYERS! OPPORTUNISTS!

-- william casey (billysucks@aol.com), November 21, 1998

Answers

That's us. Care to join in? If not, do you want the URL for a forum of people who think like you do? We'll be happy to tell you where to go. :-)

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), November 21, 1998.

C,mon Willy, get your head outa your butt.....wake up and smell the coffee....get with the program...

-- Alive in 2001 (sarmstro@seidata.com), November 21, 1998.

Sorry folks, this was actually one of my own posts from 6 months ago that just now showed up. I wonder where its been all this time? Hmmm, musta been a software glitch. I don't know what happened but I do apologize. Really.

Seems our words always come back to haunt us at the least opportune moments.

-Arnie

"Even God couldn't sink this ship" (From one of my earliest posts)

-- Arnie Rimmer (Arnie_Rimmer@usa.net), November 21, 1998.

"If you're not paranoid, you haven't been reading."

Lurker

-- Lurker (nubee@theschool.com), November 21, 1998.

Blimey - sure you're name isn't Patel? - switched on (sort of) but no bleedin' diction..., but no, the Patels of this world (no offence intended) - "y2k related business is booming" ... PATELCO rules!

"I will be giving you the water in a while, please be stopping the moaning and wailing and gnashing of teeth"...

-- Andy (andy_rowland@msn.com), November 21, 1998.

-- Ned (entaylor@cloudnet.com), November 21, 1998.

William,

If you're trying to preach to the masses you shouldn't bother. Most of the posters and lurkers here have been in deep study of the POSSIBLE ramifications of y2k for a long while. Your post is nothing new and you certainly do not provide us with any new information.

On the other hand, I would like to point you to http://www.gao.gov/y2kr.htm.

That is the link to the General Accounting Office of the United States government. Look at their testimony before congress.

Also, while your surfing I suggest you check out the Center for Strategic and International Studies whose Y2k Task Force is chaired by Senator Sam Nunn. CSIS, as it is known, is a well respected "think tank" which consults on numerous issues including recently the crisis with Iraq and international terrorism. You can find their site at www.csis.org

Neither of these entities makes money from y2k.

There are many government sites with quite a substantial amount of information. You should consider looking into this before forming an opinion one way or the other.

While the actual disruptions and failures that occur on the roll over are all still up in the air there is no doubt that they will occur. In fact, our own government has already acknowledged this.

I am not trying to help you form an opinion based upon the available evidence.

I am, however, asking you to do research into the matter and make an informed decision before you subject us to the kind of post you have made here. Many here can give you specific quotes, testimony, Fortune 500 quarterly report data etc. which is factual and in the public record. You, on the other hand, have given us a subjective opinion based on no facts what so ever.

Regarding people profiting from y2k. I'm not. I'm a self employed graphic designer on a Macintosh which is completely compliant.

What got me worried about y2k? My biggest client is an association with a global membership which represents huge worldwide corporations that are reliant on technology. In other words, it's a supply chain problem, a domino problem and if those dominos fall then so do I.

Think macro economic and socio political. The y2k problem is much bigger than computer code or dehydrated food.

I hope you're right but my insurance is growing daily. My best to you.

Mike ==============================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), November 21, 1998.

AOL users for the most part are the ones thining the herd. Both in regards to Y2K, and the fact that they're somewhat contained on that BBS/ISP and not totally loose on the net. It was a sad day for net users when AOL opened the gate to the internet.

-- . (.@...), November 21, 1998.

William Casey, former head of the CIA? back from the dead, maybe?

I sure hope you're right, sir. But, in the mean time I gotta spend my money somewhere, (good for the economy, you know) so I may as well spend it on buckets of beans. They will come in handy in the long run, more than frivolous consumer electronics. In the best case, I can donate that stuff to the local food bank to feed the homeless.

Got aproblem with that?

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), November 21, 1998.

This man is reacting the same way we all did when we first heard it. DENIAL! (his is a rather forceful, attacking kind of denial, but still falls within the ball park what we have all had to go through.) He knows he is wrong and offers no proof to support his desperatly held hope that everything will be ok. It remains for him to accept the truth and then begin logically acting and preparing for what he knows is true.

-- Ann Fisher (zyax55b@prodigy.com), November 21, 1998.

I repeat again here...

Even the CIA in a publicly available article (Uncle Sam Wants Spooks by Arik Hesseldahl 4:00 a.m. 26.Oct.98.PST -- Copy of Wired News Article: http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/15816.html) admitted:

"We teach a concept called open source and public domain intelligence -- that is, taking what is in the public domain and creating new knowledge by analysis and interpretation," he said. "If you spend 20 percent of your intelligence budget on open source intelligence you'll be able to answer 70 percent of the boss's questions."

GET REAL, "William" and check it out on the internet. "Your" own group does.

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 21, 1998.

I saw a link to a site earlier today at Gary North's that reminds me of the above Mr. Casey (extreme denial).

I agree with Gary North. This site has to be seen to be believed...

http://members.aol.com/chittum/y2kbull.html

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), November 21, 1998.

Ah, William, I wish, if for only your own sake, you would have read more here before you posted this thread. As has been said already...there are sites for people who expect no problems...You might join the folks there and feel more at home. Don't waste your time here. You know the old saying: "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."

Thanks for trying to calm us though...thoughtful of you.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), November 21, 1998.

Arnie

Are you having as great a time as I am with the quasi literati here??? This is hilarious!!!!

Folks, before you get to flaming, either me for my current comments or BILLY CASEY, go read Arnie's post!!!

ROFL

MY SIDES HURT!!! snork snork!! ROFL Chuck

-- Chuck a Night Driver (rienzoo@en.com), November 21, 1998.

Sounds like a rather passive-aggressive jab, Chuck,... but I could be wrong. Who are you backhandedly calling quasi-literati? Could you give us all a definition of the term?

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), November 21, 1998.

Little Willie has now posted another thread almost exactly like this one. I posted on that thread and will now post to this one also: obviously this person seeks only to gain attention. If this was a true desire to debate the subject, he would be responding to your posts and asking other questions. My suggestion is to totally ignore his posts and not to respond.

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), November 21, 1998.

Great day for me! As an IT professional and an AOL subscriber (I utililize a cable modem ISP with a link to AOL via TCP/IP), I get to disagree with bill casey (aka billy sucks) AND @.

Billy, good luck to you in the months to come.

@, I also drive a pickup truck , am a gun owner, and live in the south but that doesn't make me a redneck either.

Rednecks (my definition) are intolerant, narrow minded, and exihibit a singular subjective view of their environment.

It would seem as though @ and Billy belong to the same fraternity.

-- MVI (vtoc@aol.com), November 21, 1998.

billysucks, are you a Democrat?

-- . (.@...), November 21, 1998.

A "quasi literati" is a Mad Reader who can't spell.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), November 21, 1998.

<>

I am one of those "totally loose on the internet AOL users" that you fear so much. It is only one of two ISP accounts that I use.

You are, at the least, arrogant in your assumptions about AOL users. The most intelligent, Y2k prepared person I have met was through AOL. MBA Harvard graduate class of '68. He was totally prepared for Y2K in 1997. He no longer has to work for a living. Do you?

And I would further venture to state that his 425 acre refuge would put yours to shame. Not only is he totally off-grid but he has prepared for everyone in his family to survive several years. A total of 20 people. Can you claim as much?

I know dozens of others from AOL that are just as prepared as Leigh and myself. It is silly to think that you are better than someone else because of an ISP. I find it similar to equating your self-worth with the type of car you drive. But maybe you do that also.

Best regards,

Anna

-- Anna McKay Ginn (annaginn@aol.com), November 22, 1998.

To the one that used the last @, are you a republican? Nothing to be proud of, belonging to either party.

Anna, notice I said "most" AOL users. If you feel so defensive about it, must be that you agree with me.

-- . (.@...), November 22, 1998.

Not necessarily Republican, but I have noticed that Democrats are almost religiously trusting of their government - wanting it to envelop them in soft cocooning layers of bureacratic haze and goobledegook that will give them endless security (at the price of responsibility and freedom - boy they hate those words with a passion!) and no choices.

There are other Democrats who passionately want government to expand to be the mother of us all. Others who want a socialistic - communism - national socialist or international socialistic - anti-capitalistic community.

No "labeled" Republican wants any of those choices, at least not publically.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), November 22, 1998.

Of course, there are those who reject labels such as republican or democrat, and refuse to play that silly little game. And maybe there are just very ill-behaved human beings, and the rest in various stages of learning to be better-behaved. I wonder how those cohort groups correlate to Y2K prepardedness?

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), November 22, 1998.

The best form of government is one that keeps the peace and doesn't embark on any "progressive social programs". Free school education for all is a good idea, but not free college. Everything, even "immoral" things, should be legal unless their being legal prevents the freedom of other people (ie guns = crime, but if your morals prevent you from having an abortion then don't, but you have NO right to prevent others from doing something that in their morality is fine.)

--Leo

-- Leo (leo_champion@hotmail.com), November 22, 1998.

To Bill Casey - get a grip please. Yes like Robert I do equate the Democratic or more extreme the British Labour Party point of view with more state control, in the current scenario international control over the destiny of the UK. Unlike the US, the conservative opposition is seriously weakened. Labour have now announced the end of Grammar Schools, or rather the end of education.

-- Richard Dale (rdale@figroup.co.uk), November 23, 1998.