| | | |

WEDNESDAY AUGUST 04 1999

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

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PANIC IN THE YEAR ZERO Y2K may swamp disaster relief Potential disruptions could be too numerous to handle

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

By David M. Bresnahan ) 1999 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Potential Y2K disruptions may be so numerous that federal agencies and the military may not be able to respond to all the problems. Recently obtained government documents and interviews with federal officials confirm that emergency planners are worried that too many simultaneous problems could overtax the system.

"By themselves, such disruptions are manageable. But the unique challenge the Y2K problem presents us with is the potential of numerous disruptions happening all at once, which will place additional burdens on the most well-equipped emergency response mechanisms," said John Koskinen, Chairman of the President's Council on the Year 2000 Conversion to an internal FEMA workshop for federal agencies and private sector business leaders.

"We're good at responding to individual challenges. We need to be just as good about responding to multiple challenges. We need to be thinking about how to best respond to the possibility of failures in a number of community systems that operate communications, emergency services, health care, public works and utilities, and transportation," Koskinen added.

The federal government has been actively engaged in planning a system to coordinate responses to Y2K disruptions from federal and local government agencies. The system is headed up by FEMA and the Department of Defense.

Presidential and Department of Defense directives combine to give authority to the military to assist civil agencies in times of national emergency. The Y2K computer bug may cause so many problems that the ability of the military to respond to national defense threats could be compromised.

The Department of Defense claims to be prepared for Y2K problems, "however past DOD responses typically have been applied to localized acute situations, most of which have not been simultaneous. By contrast, the Y2K problem has the potential to involve a large number of events that occur over broad geographic areas, within a short time frame," according to a DOD memorandum issued by John J. Hamre to all military department secretaries.

Hamre expressed grave concern that there would be so many Y2K problems that the military could not provide assistance to all civil agencies requesting help. He gave specific guidelines for local commanders to establish priorities before responding to requests for help from civil agencies. He authorized local commanders to take action as needed without approval from higher officials under certain conditions.

"Within the United States, local commanders may undertake immediate, unilateral, emergency response actions that involve measures to save lives, prevent human suffering, or mitigate great property damage, only when time does not permit approval by higher headquarters. Overseas, immediate response may be undertaken when time is of the essence and humanitarian considerations require action," described Hamre in the memorandum.

Requests for military assistance to civil agencies must be submitted through FEMA or the Department of State. The National Guard will respond to requests from state governors or through an executive order from the president.

The priorities established in the memorandum provide for the maintenance of national security followed by protection of domestic issues.

Priority 1. The military will not divert resources that could compromise operational readiness. This includes direct support to the National Command Authority, conduct of ongoing or imminent military or intelligence operations, conduct of nuclear command and control and maintenance of defense and commercial infrastructures.

Priority 2. Resources in military units and combat support organizations, to include the Reserve Components, assigned to support standing operations plans must be monitored closely, particularly if they fall within early execution (first 60 days) of Timed Phased Force and Deployment Data.

Priority 3. Maintenance of domestic public health and safety through maintenance of emergency services to include fire, ambulance, police, hospitals, and related communications. This also includes maintenance of air traffic, rail, port, and ship navigation systems, as well as food distribution centers, and public information dissemination through press, television, and radio.

Priority 4. Maintenance of the economy and the nation's quality of life.

Hamre designated FEMA as the agency which would handle requests from civil agencies for military assistance. One FEMA official is concerned that the potential exists that there could be more Y2K problems than what they can handle at one time.

FEMA recently held a meeting of federal agency and private sector infrastructure officials to discuss contingency plans for possible Y2K problems. Very few of those who attended would admit any problems would take place. Despite this, FEMA is planning for problems and is concerned the number of challenges could quickly get beyond their ability to respond.

"One by one they said they've spent millions and they've tested things and they're checking things over," explained Jerry Connolly of FEMA. "There was discussion of international impact. No one there felt that this was going to be the crisis of all crises. But at the same time they're concerned about sporadic problems throughout the states and the extent that numerous sporadic problems may result in situations that are beyond the states' capability of responding, and therefore the states may come in to the federal government and request assistance. That's where we fit in. That's why we have our emergency support team up."

Connolly is the assistant to the director for FEMA's office of Response and Recovery. His job will involve coordinating response to Y2K problems and restoring things to normal. He believes he may have his hands full.

"We have to be up and alert just in case the 'what if' situations occur. We're prepared and the federal agencies we're involved with are prepared as well," he said in a phone interview.

"I'll tell ya. I've responded to disasters over 25 years. I've probably never planned for anything as significant, substantially prepared like this," he commented. He added that FEMA is just being prudent to make the many preparations that are under way.

A recent internal memorandum from FEMA director James L. Witt was made available to WorldNetDaily. That document reveals plans to place all FEMA offices and employees on high alert for the Y2K rollover period.

Connolly explained that the alert applies to the national and regional offices of FEMA. He said they are normally equipped to handle 10 to 15 simultaneous disasters.

"The idea of handling 50 or more is definitely a challenge," Connolly admitted. "We've come up with at least an approach to handling those. What we plan on doing is, once the president declares an emergency declaration, that would allow us to do anything. Any measure to save lives and protect property.

"Probably in reality we'll end up paying for a lot of police and fire overtime. We may end up paying for shelter expenses if the Red Cross couldn't handle it. For the most part, any what we call reconstitution of the various sectors that are affected by computer problems, that would be up to the computer owners and the utilities and what have you to fix. We wouldn't get involved in fixing the utility electrical grids or whatever. We'd be addressing the people problems that resulted from it," Connolly explained of the plans to restore order.

If communications are out, or just difficult, FEMA officials will have difficulty getting orders from above and may wait for approvals. To ease the problem, each of the 10 regional FEMA directors has been designated as a federal coordinating officer, giving them power and authority to make all their own decisions without orders from above.

"So we'll have pre-designated who's in charge of the region, and who would be the deputy for each of the states, and that deputy in turn would almost be the person in charge for that particular state reporting to their boss back in the capital city," explained Connolly.

In an effort to make it even easier to handle multiple Y2K problems, the 2,500 FEMA regular employees will be supplemented by 4,000 disaster reservists.

"On top of that we have all the various federal agencies. And we have what we call our federal response plan. It's signed by 26 federal agencies and the Red Cross. Those 26 agencies and the Red Cross are available to augment all of our locations as well," explained Connolly, hopeful that the plan will be adequate enough to cover all the potential problems.

The Department of Defense has designated the period of Sept. 1, 1999, through March 31, 2000, as the Y2K transition period. FEMA has similar plans and will put all of its people on high alert from Dec. 28 until Jan. 4.

"At our level in Washington, and in the 10 regions they would also have what we call the emergency support function agency. (Other federal) Agency's staff there as well so we would have the federal agencies staffed in Washington. We would have all the federal agencies staffed in our 10 regional cities, and we would have our people on site at each state getting ready in case there's a problem, and if there was we would dispatch teams to those states. There's a lot of people to go around. If we would have 50 emergency declarations, I won't kid you, it would be a challenge, but we're prepared at least with that skeleton out there," stated Connolly.

He agreed that the American public always comes through in a time of disaster. People fill sandbags, dig trapped victims out of holes, and do what they have to do without panic and disorder.

"That's true. No question about that," Connolly agreed.

So then why doesn't the federal government tell the public the true potential for Y2K problems? Why not give the public an opportunity to be better prepared within their own homes rather than rely on federal shelters?

"John Koskinen (chairman of the President's Council on the Year 2000 Conversion) just the other day said (in a meeting Connolly attended) -- and he was saying it to the private sector primarily, but I'm sure he meant it to the general public as well -- he was saying 'Don't expect,' and he was speaking for the president at this point. He said, 'Don't expect government to solve all your problems. Especially if we have 50 different states that are all overwhelmed by certain activity.' He made a point of saying that people have to be self-reliant," explained Connolly.

Despite his response, Connolly then repeated the universal government recommendations to the public.

"FEMA's message has been, treat this as you would for a storm that you'd normally be prepared for. We never tell people that we'll be there before 72 hours. For the first 72 hours you need to plan to basically be on your own before we're able to bring in water, before we're able to bring in food, before we're able to bring in shelter or medical supplies or what have you. It takes that much time to mobilize. In a case like this, you can only spend so much money in pre-staging activities and things like that.

"I guess the answer is the public has to be prepared to be on their own, at least for a while. We're trying to get that message across," warned Connolly, even though he was not prepared to recommend having more than a 72-hour kit as part of that preparation.

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

David M. Bresnahan, a contributing editor for WorldNetDaily.com, is the author of a new report on Y2K, the book "Cover Up: The Art and Science of Political Deception," and offers a monthly newsletter "Talk USA Investigative Reports." He may be reached through email and also maintains an archive of his work.

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

CONTACT WND | GO TO PAGE ONE | SEARCH WND

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ) 1999 WorldNetDaily.com, Inc. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This page was last built 8/4/99; 1:47:21 AM Direct corrections and technical inquiries to webmaster@worldnetdaily.com

-- time to finish shopping (finish all@preps.now.com), August 04, 1999

Answers

"...once the President declares a national emergency...would allow us to do ANYTHING to prevent life or property loss." (emphasis mine) Sounds like James Witt expects Klinton to declare martial law. Is that drool coming down his chin?

-- Spidey (in@jam.commie), August 04, 1999.

Translation:

World Nut Daily isn't selling enough Y2K crap to the stooges of fear...

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), August 04, 1999.

Pro, sounds like now YOU need a tinfoil hat. It's all a WND conspiracy. LOL

-- CygnusXI (noburnt@toast.net), August 04, 1999.

I heard Koskinen talking to the National Press Club last night. He and others from NERC said all was well and that there will be no disruptions. They said 99% of all the Nuke Plants were ready to go.

This was a rebroadcast of an earlier C-Span program.

-- Anti-chainsaw (tree@hugger.com), August 04, 1999.

This article, which is based on, and consists of pretty much in- context quotes, should surprise no one who has followed the national debate on the severity of Y2K. Koskinen (Koreskin, LOL) has been quoted as pointing out, oh, 4-5 months ago, that the responses were going to be LOCAL and that the locallities MUST not expect the federal government to take care of them as they were NOT going to be able to run all over the country putting out local fires. (not in quotes as it is approximate).

Should be no surprise.

Chuck

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), August 04, 1999.

I agree chuck,

Nobody ever said it was gonna be easy. . . and in many cases, the impact of Y2K to individual local infrastructures could prove serious, albeit temporary. Hence, I have always suggested that some degree of personal preparation, along the lines of the FEMA/Red Cross advice, is wise.

But I also think that there is probably more than a hint of "politically-savvy fund-raising intent" in this latest output.

After all, saying "Its fine, we have it all under control, nothing else to do now" is a sure way to get the purse strings jerked shut, and for all its failings, DC does operate as a well-oiled machine for the distribution of vast amounts of public money to those most proficient in persuasion.

Its an angle which I believe we should, realistically, take into account.

Kind Regards

W

-- W0lv3r1n3 (W0lv3r1n3@yahoo.com), August 04, 1999.

Hey Wolv~ starting to sway a little ? Not joining the GI crowd anytime soon are we ? It's ok more will jump ship in the future.

-- kevin (innxxs@yahoo.com), August 04, 1999.

Chuck: True, no surprises for this crowd, but I wonder just what the threshold is for the President to declare a national emergency? How many regional power/water failures or hazmat accidents will trigger this? It would be interesting to know what ball-park the Feds are in: Will a national emergency be declared if more than ten 100,000 communities lose water? Or is it more than 50? It is a matter of some importance to the citizenry, and shouldn't be a matter of national security, although the power-avid National Security minions will always and forever raise the bogeyman of terrorism to rationalize their Orwellian secrecy and double-talk. So it goes in the land of the fee and the home of the knave.

-- Spidey (in@jam.commie), August 04, 1999.

Twenty minutes I wasted backtracking that document to find out what the original came from. All it says is that FEMA will be on alert during the rollover period, vacations are cancelled over Christmas, and that they are getting ready in case Y2K is worse than expected.

GEE MOMMY, the govt. is taking Y2K seriously. And you guys claim pollys spin things.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), August 04, 1999.

Simply put, the Federal Government has a PLAN. This PLAN does not include accepting any BLAME for y2k. The Blame will be shifted to state and local governments, cyber-terrorism, biological and chemical terrorism, corporations etc. Wouldn't it be amazing if cyber-terrorists hacked the Medicare system and it resulted in a total unrecoverable system failure!!

Anyone that believes the Federal Governmet and all of it's massive bureaucracy are ready for y2k has buried their head rather deeply in the sand.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 04, 1999.

There is some new news in that article. 50 problems, 50 states, LOL. At least they're thinking ahead, but still stuffed tight in that 3-day box. Don't depend on the govt -- you gotta survive 3 whole days on your own before we can rescue you! Uh, Y2K may change this mind-set. Learning experience, indeed.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), August 04, 1999.

Kevin

Sorry, but I can't get motivated to engage you in yet ANOTHER "us versus them" exchange.

Part of what I've been saying for the last month or so on this forum is that the attitude which tries to drag us all into opposing "camps" so that we can throw mud at each other SIMPLY IS NOT PRODUCTIVE. It gets us nowhere.

To answer your question, no, I haven't experience some kind of "conversion on the road to Damascus". I feel broadly the same way about Y2K now as I did weeks, or even months ago.

I believe that personal preparation is wise and prudent, if done to a scale which reflects local differences, and when planned on the basis of sound information. I also believe (broadly speaking) that life as we know it will return to normal after Y2K, whether it takes days, weeks, or even months, I believe it will happen. Does that make me a polly or a doomer or what in your book ?

I wish we could get past this adversorial phase and just utilise the huge breadth of experience and diversity which we have in this forum to work together to try to understand these complex issues a little better. Is that a bad thing to wish for ?

Kind Regards

W

-- W0lv3r1n3 (W0lv3r1n3@yahoo.com), August 04, 1999.

W commented:

"I believe that personal preparation is wise and prudent, if done to a scale which reflects local differences, and when planned on the basis of sound information."

W, where do you get your SOUND information from????

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), August 04, 1999.

Ray

I believe that it is up to each individual to decide which information to absorb, and to what extent. Personally I try to make my own decisions based on . .

1) The persuasiveness of the case put forward.

2) Corroborative evidence and expert input.

3) The nature of the source, and their past performance where available.

4) The strength of the counter-argument.

5) My own experience.

In the same way that a jury hears evidence (often totally conflicting), and has to decide what they believe to be the truth, I think we all operate on a similar basis. I understand that in most cases, people will come to different conclusions when faced with the same "evidence", but thats not unique to Y2K.

Fundamentally, I think that if you restrict yourself to a single source of information, or censor whatever information you recieve based on an underlying premise or assumption (for example a profound, arguably healthy, distrust of authority or government) that will colour your decisions accordingly.

However, having said that, I believe that it is every individual's right to do just that if they choose to, and the subsequent opinions which come from such a position are just as interesting to me as any other.

I hope that answered your question.

Kind Regards

W

-- W0lv3r1n3 (W0lv3r1n3@yahoo.com), August 04, 1999.

W, where do you get your SOUND information from????

Why, from the Debunky forum, of course. He'll probably get kicked out, though, for turning towards the Doomer side. LOL.

-- (its@coming.soon), August 04, 1999.

Its@coming

Great . . do you feel that you scored a "point" for your "team" ?

Super. Well done.

Now that you've achieved your goal, would you mind if those of us who want to discuss this without the testosterone-fuelled sense of competition carry on doing just that ?

With your kind permission.

Thanks

W

-- W0lv3r1n3 (W0lv3r1n3@yahoo.com), August 04, 1999.

First of all I would not rely on government to help me in an emergency. The problem with government is they think they're all smarter than us and that we're all idiots. They think they know what's best for us - we're just a herd that needs to be managed. They would rather re-act to the situation then act and practice some prevention that might mitigate potential problems involving Y2k.

Secondly, I don't like "...once the president delares an emergency declaration,that would allow us to do anything." Granted this is taken out of context but by itself it has a scary tone. Time for this guy to gather up momma, the dog and (of course) the books and getta out Dodge - Wyatt Earp is starting to scare me. BTW does reading by candle light hurt your eyes?

Bookworm

-- Bookworm (bookworm_2@hotmail.com), August 04, 1999.

Spidey asked "True, no surprises for this crowd, but I wonder just what the threshold is for the President to declare a national emergency?" Well, since the feds have been telling everyone to prepare for three days for YEARS NOW, it would seem reasonable to conclude that the threshold is any problems which will last more than three days. Chew on that for a while.

-- smfdoc (smfdoc@aol.com), August 04, 1999.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_bresnahan/1999080 4_xex_y2k_may_swam.shtml

-- link (link@link.link), August 04, 1999.

W0lv3rln3. " I also believe ( broadly speaking ) that life as we know it will return to normal after Y2k, whether it takes days, weeks, or months I believe it will happen."

I hope for what you believe in !

My apologies for creating another adversorial twist to an important issue. As for polly or doomer ? I doubt either one of us fit in to either camp 100%. Kind Regards as well. kevin

-- kevin (innxxs@yahoo.com), August 04, 1999.

Notice in this report that the officials of FEMA and the military do not mention working with states and getting the word out to the people at the local level who may "be on their own" for a few hours/days (I think longer, but that is how FEMA characterized it). All the emergency responders I know, both professional and volunteer make jokes about Y2K being a big hype, and I expect that no word and contingency planning coming down from above contributes to this thinking. Check with your LOCAL providers and ask them if they are having meetings and making preps and contingency plans of their own, or merely prohibiting vacations for the rollover period. My spouse is one of those providers, heavily committed to serving his community and protecting his loved ones, but he says I am the ONLY person (which makes me the NUT) he knows who is worried about Y2K. I am going to try to get him to read this posting, because I think it will be the first hint he might get that FEMA or the military are giving it even a passing thought. Perhaps if we all call out local amb/fire stations, and police/sheriff offices, we will discover that they are not forming the contingency plans we assume they are, and an enquiring public might at least get them talking and thinking that maybe they should be.

I'm not a doomer or polly. I just assume that the grownups in charge are pretty representative of the rest of us, and we shouldn't assume that their good intentions make them any more or less fallible than the rest of us. We can all make a mistake because we don't take into account what we don't know; in regards to Y2K, I don't think any one can know for sure what to expect, so that I see preps as no more crazy than paying insurance premiums.

I just wish local responders were being included in some brainstorming and planning sessions, now while it is easy to communicate. Nothing FEMA, the military, the state officials or the local responders here are saying, indicates that this is happening. Most people WILL try to do their best when unforseen problems strike, but they will do better if they don't have to make it up as they go along, and have some game plan in their heads and hands. Your local responders have alot to bring to contingency planning, but I don't think anyone is even suggesting to them that things could be difficult and that they need to do some contingency preps just in case. I'd like to hear if you have info to the contrary.

-- Kristi (KsaintA@aol.com), August 04, 1999.

W, I have relied exclusively on government and association sources for solid news on Y2K and things do NOT look good. I discount the potboiler legal disclaimers, "We are sorta going to be ready, but our suppliers might not be." I do not listen to Gsry North. I have listened solely to government sources like the US Naval War College, The Dept. of Commerce, the Dept. of State, the Federal Reserve or association such as IEEE, National Retail Association. etc. Hang on to your hats.

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), August 04, 1999.

Is 'Koreskin' like foreskin....excised for ideology? Or is it more like Koresh-skin, roasted and toasted ?

-- Forrest Covington (theforrest@mindspring.com), August 04, 1999.

Thomas Barnett (NWC) is calling for a BITR. He detailed it somewhere on a thread here.....

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), August 04, 1999.

W: be careful now, Flint has his niche on this forum carved out pretty well, and I'm not sure it's big enough to contain the both of you :)

-- a (a@a.a), August 04, 1999.

W, FWIW I like your take on this. We may not agree on the level of difficulties ahead but that doesn't mean we can't share information in an reasonable and courteous manner. I'm amazed at the craziness and child-like behavior I see here sometimes. However, there is still a core of commonsense running thru this forum. Ya just have to get a little shit on your hands getting to it. Good luck.

-- (rcarver@inacom.com), August 04, 1999.

W,

I'm with ya. Nobody knows what's going to happen (I know, I know, a tired cliche, yet still as true as ever) - so how can the pollys or doomers claim victory? I would consider myself closer to doomer, but when I see a thoughtful & insightful post towards the "polly" side I take notice.

Someone brought up a post about finding SOUND information. That's the problem. It doesn't exist. Not from the gov't, GN or anyone on the forum including me. Even if you aren't aware of having a hidden agenda, you still have one. Everyone puts a 'spin' on the information - based on their knowledge & experience. It's what makes us all different. But I think that's a reliable indicator of the quality of information -- what does that person/group have to gain from putting their spin on the info. With less than 5 months to go it's not going to get any better.

I feel were in for rough times, simply because of the magnitude of the problem and its fixes. Things will be overlooked or done wrong - it's simply human nature.

Last point: about the govt. or power-hungry 'Klinton' trying to use Y2K to their benefit - I just don't buy it. They're too stupid to even realize the ramifications of the problem, much less intelligently prepare themselves (i.e. govt computers), even further less to have the command and control to put it (Martial law) in action. Give me a break - these buffoons will be as helpless as the rest of us if things get bad. Remember, lack of electricity/funds/comm/fuel/water/food affect them just like everyone else, not to mention fire/disease/warfare/etc. They're in it just like everyone else.

-- Jim (x@x.x), August 04, 1999.

I would like to highlight the following quote:

"Despite his response, Connolly then repeated the universal government recommendations to the public.

"FEMA's message has been, treat this as you would for a storm that you'd normally be prepared for. We never tell people that we'll be there before 72 hours. For the first 72 hours you need to plan to basically be on your own before we're able to bring in water, before we're able to bring in food, before we're able to bring in shelter or medical supplies or what have you. It takes that much time to mobilize. In a case like this, you can only spend so much money in pre-staging activities and things like that.

"I guess the answer is the public has to be prepared to be on their own, at least for a while. We're trying to get that message across," warned Connolly, even though he was not prepared to recommend having more than a 72-hour kit as part of that preparation." ___________________________

This is definitely NOT saying that the problems will last for only 3 days - a 72 hour snowstorm. What this is saying is that it will take three days for FEMA/military/government to establish emergency shelters.

You are to stock for 3 days on your own, then you can be dependent upon FEMA/military/government for shelter, water and food. Of course, these will be centrally distributed so you either have to travel or shelter at that distribution point to get the handout. (In our areas, the shelter is generally the armory at the county fairgrounds.)

I imagine local agencies will make a sweep of the countryside at a later point to make sure that those who have remained in their homes on their own are ok. Can't wait too long, though, or they would likely be met with a bullet.

Our local y2k task force made some "mouthings" of inventorying the valley to find out who would need immediate assistance (elderly, poor, etc.) and who would be self-sufficient. Unfortunately, this fell through. No one wanted to be on an official list.

Anyway, this officially clarifies BITR. When the talking heads say "prepare as if," they are referring to level of private preparations before individuals can default to supposed government preps. and not to the total preps needed to weather the expected impact.

Our county recommends two months individual preparation (six months for remote areas.) I guess from the '97 floods they know we are a pretty stubborn and independent lot and are likely to weather things on our own or get blocked from outside emergency access by a lost bridge, landslide, man-caused defensive strategy or such.

-- marsh (armstrng@sisqtel.net), August 04, 1999.

Bookworm - just wondering here. Are you going to be one of those guys who gets killed in every flood, yelling at the COE people that they can't take him away from his house? They won't, they will just warn you, and come around in a boat later (if they have time) and offer a ride if you have managed to cling to the roof. Yes, they even have idiots turn them down when all that is left is the roof. You want to act like that, go right ahead. You aren't hurting anyone but yourself by refusing help (that you paid for with your own taxes) when it is offered.

And just a BTW - time it takes local agencies to commit all their resources in an emergency? TWO DAYS - then they yell for Federal help.

And since you don't seem to think the govt. should act to preserve human life in case of a natural disaster, just what do you think it should do? Wring its hands? Stand around looking stupid so you could rail at it some more? Count the dead?

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), August 04, 1999.

Jim -

The desire for and exercise of power does not require much intelligence or wisdom. It is a drive in and of itself, as is the protection of it.

The Feds have had plenty of time to prepare contingency plans for "failures" which threaten their current positions; these master plans will include a number of options based on severity of impacts. I've worked on contingency planning (we called "disaster recovery planning" or DRP) for an F500 IS organization, and it doesn't require a whole lot of intelligence (he said modestly), just serious commitment from management and a mess o' resources (read "people and money".) We've already heard enough about "Infrastructure Protection" initiatives to conclude that the Feds have Plan A, Plan B, and probably Plan Z in place (or nearly so.)

I'm quite certain that they will not be running around, waving their hands in the air and crying, "Mercy, mercy, whatever will we do now?", if things go sideways. It's a common mistake to underestimate your opponent, and it can be very costly.

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), August 04, 1999.

I should add that I have seen people in positions of responsibility do some of the most astonishly bone-headed things imagineable, but never when a real threat to their positions was involved. It is precisely for that reason that I am not optimistic about overall Y2K remediation: too many companies did not treat it as a serious threat until far too late in the game, and when they did, too many have acted like they can command that "the systems shall be fixed and lo, the systems were fixed!" Very different than commanding that chains of command will be maintained and secure communications and infrastructue be established, "just in case".

"You may depend upon it, sirrah. When a man is due to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully!" -- Dr. Johnson

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), August 04, 1999.

I attended the Y2K Community Conversation last month in Austin, TX. Koskinen was there. He said that 25% of all counties in the country were doing absolutely nothing in terms of y2k preparation, remediation, or contingency planning. He said that one thing we do know about y2k is that if you do nothing, you *will* have problems.

He went on to say that normally in an emergency situation, the local city handles it, if they need help they ask the county, if they need help they ask the state, if they need help they ask the National Guard and FEMA. That's normal operating procedure. He said if there were only a few localized problems, even 100, 200, that they could probably handle it. But that if there were 700, 1000 communities in trouble that there was no way FEMA had the staff to be able to respond to that.

I wondered and wondered about those numbers. Then later somewhere else I found there were around 3000 counties in the country. 25% of that is 750. So, using the math, it seems like we can expect at least 750 communities in trouble, which means there will not be enough federal staff available to help. Hope mine and yours are not among them. Especially mine LOL.

-- Mommacares (harringtondesignX@earthlink.net), August 04, 1999.