Did You Have To Pinch Yourself?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Just watched... in disbelief... the CNN World Today so-called "coverage" of the Y2K vulnerability of our nuclear stockpiles. Of special interest to me was the eerie ommision of the fact that the Pentagon, so secure in its confidence that they would have plenty of time to fix everything in the 13 months ahead... yet, wasn't it just this past week that the Defense dept got one of the lowest grades on the now-infamous "report card"???!

How can CNN let only ONE side of the story air? How can they end with the Pentagon's evaluation of their own progress as the final word? What ever happened to Watergate-type reporting?

-- Sara Nealy (saran@ptd.net), November 27, 1998

Answers

I would submit that the liberal mindset - the one that claims that human society is constantly advancing and evolving find it impossible to grasp a true TEOTWAWKI result (or even a 5+ result) due to y2k...therefore from their perspective they weren't ignoring anything, but rather simply not discussing something that wouldn't happen anyway, and which might encourage independent action (always bad for the social collective, don't you know...).

Arlin Adams

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), November 27, 1998.


Arlin,

I think you've got the situation pegged to a tee.

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), November 27, 1998.


Sara, send 'em an e-mail with your assessment of their Y2K reporting.

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 27, 1998.

That's exactly what my husband and I discussed tonight, Diane. I will.

-- Sara Nealy (saran@ptd.net), November 27, 1998.

BTW,

Here's the CNN story, from their website.

Is it being "objective" of CNN to not question the Pentagon's evaluation of this situation???

http://cnn.com/US/9811/27/pentagon.y2k/index.html

-- Sara Nealy (saran@ptd.net), November 28, 1998.



Actually, when I meet others who do not and will not get it no matter what, I pinch them.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), November 28, 1998.

Sara:

Stories like the one discussed make it very difficult to get others involved with preparations.

I told my wife to "hurry in" to see the story. Thought it would validate my concerns. Well the story ended with "the military is compliant". Did you catch this or is it just me.

Disinformation, lies or is it the truth? Surely our kind and understanding government would never, never decieve the sheep. Look at how we mistreated poor President Clinton. Everything is OK! Go back to sleep now. Oh, I almost forgot, never, never never think on your own!

ww

-- WAYNE WITCHER (WWITCHER@MVTEL.NET), November 28, 1998.


**I would submit that the liberal mindset - the one that claims that human society is constantly advancing and evolving find it impossible to grasp a true TEOTWAWKI,...**

So then are you saying, Arlin,that the military types are liberal too, since they seem in no hurry to get their Y2K house in order? 'Splain to me how labels such as liberal apply to a person's ability or inability to grasp the implications of potential TEOTWAWKI? Inquiring minds want to know.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), November 28, 1998.


Donna--

Donna-- seems to me that the word "liberal" has been seriously redefined by Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan, Bob Novak and a few others--- and a few preachers have had a go at it too. (Not to mention Gary North.) And anymore "conservative" means whatever the current speaker says it means.

We'd better leave the old categories behind, and find some other way of mediating disagreements. Lot of room for social creativity coming up soon.

Arlin -- if I read your post right -- you haven't noticed that just as much denial is present among people nobody would ever call "liberal".

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), November 28, 1998.


Come to think on it, Arlin --

We'll get to know the true meaning of "social collective" if (or when) military law is established to deal with Y2K consequences.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), November 28, 1998.



# # # 19981128

"We'll get to know the true meaning of "social collective" if (or when) military law is established to deal with Y2K consequences."

Hrrrumph! Not if resistance to such UNCONSTITUTIONAL action is audible and backed by actions. With military and government forces at their lowest manpower levels, there is no way of enforcing the draconian scenario of UNCONSTITUTIONAL MARTIAL LAW! ... Except by strategic genocide ( i.e., NBC [ portable nukes, anthrax, ... ] ). ( Who -- in their freedom loving mind -- would want to live in such a state, anyway? )

How many old men can be shuttled into space today, BTW? "They" would be untouchable! ... ( Where's Stanley Kubrick when you need him? )

What next?! ...

Regards, Bob Mangus E-mail: "I'm a computer 'Y2K-bomb' technician. If you see me running, try to keep up." RMangus "Sometimes a majority simply means that all of the fools are of one mind." Author Unknown

Year 2000 Citizen Action Group [Y2KCAG] (Oakland County, Michigan - USA) E-mail: Year 2000 Techno-Ambush Public Awareness Org Cassandra Proj: http://www.millennia-bcs.com/ Gary North: http://www.garynorth.com Sharefin's Gold: http://www.cairns.net.au/~sharefin/Markets/Home.htm *==================================================================* # # #

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@mail.netquest.com), November 28, 1998.


What CNN is propagating is the administration's view - they are going to _continue_ to do nothing that will show the administration (not military only, but DOD and everybody else) can do nothing wrong.

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), November 29, 1998.

Robert, I'm confident that will change. "They" can't keep the lid on a boiling pot forever.

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 29, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ