Diane, This is a question I hope you can answer because of your e-mail conversations with C4I a few months back.

As I recall from the threads and your comments, C4I would contact another party (publisher) with additional info about the military's opinions of what to expect when Y2K gets here.

Have you had any contact with C4I lately and do you see any connection with what C4I stated in his posting or e-mails to you that might add/subtract to/from the information at Jim Lord's site ???

Also, I tried to find the old C4I treads to no avail. Help Anyone ?

-- Connections? (Down@southwway.com), August 19, 1999

Answers

No, c4i hasn't recontacted me. FM or Leska & Ashton might have a different experience.

I think they did show up again referenced to a WND article last month. (Which thread was THAT on... Humm).

Anyway, the key threads are/were...

Thread #1...

Why Paul Milne is a Polly

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 000w5S

Thread #2...

Weak Link

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 000wIA

Thread #3...

WHY I THINK c4i IS A DOOMER TROLL

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 000wKw

Thread #4...

c4i, how might you wish us best respond to your disclosures?

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 000wOI

Now, as Ive said before (without getting into specifics)... the real c4i posted on the first thread and came in on a verified dot mil ISP. Then on the second thread a fake c4i starts posting... NOT coming from a dot mil ISP. On the the forth thread the real c4i posts once to FM coming back in on that verified dot mil ISP.

Several of us received e-mail from said c4i. The publisher they requested we take the story to, responded that they ONLY follow their own verifiable leads and sources. (Publisher Hint: World Net Daily).

Read it... and ALL the responses... and figure it out yourself.

To paraphrase someone... they sure came down the fire poles fast on this one!

And let me also say, that I would "know" how to recognize c4i again. But, I suspect we won't hear from them.

Take it with your our band of salt, and do your homework.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), August 19, 1999.

C4I could very well have been a DoD insider who just couldn't stand the sharade anymore and vented here. He had to have been lurking here a while, from his knowledge of some posters here in his last paragraph. Military personel are people too. In light of the Jim Lord threads, the War College's scenarios, and the Media conference to calm the public last spring, I am not overly skeptical that C4I is for real.

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), August 19, 1999.

We knew about the report. We didn't leak it. All hell is breaking loose here.

-- c4i (c4ixxx@hotmail.com), August 19, 1999.

The above will be easy ... do a trace. c4i could be coming in 2 ways that would match the last time.

As to the question on title, c4i is most definitely not Jim Lord. Just ask Jim.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), August 19, 1999.

Thank you, Diane, I have rereaded all four threads. I was first surprised that the threads were only two months ago, seemed a lot longer. Too little time to read what is posted and rarely go back to read old post but these four threads were very interesting and my opinion of some of the posters has change after reading their post to c4i. When I get online and check this thread , there is a post by c4i.

Do you think this is a 'real' response ????

Thank you again, Diane.

-- Connections? (Down@southwway.com), August 19, 1999.

W-e-l-l, I wouldn't expect the "real" c4i to come in at the same dot mil location, but THAT is certainly a "plausible" ISP.

And, c4i can e-mail me again. We did agree on a reference so I'd know it was "them."

Curiouser... and curiouser... again.

Diane (feeling like we're beyond the looking glass... again too)

*Sigh*

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), August 19, 1999.

C4I,

Can you tell us, is .GOV *EVER* going to go public and admit serious problems await, or are they going to try and cover it up to the very end???

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), August 19, 1999.

"All hell is breaking loose here." (c4i)

Maybe someone (perhaps even c4i) can spell out for dumbsters (such as I) just what concerns underlie 'all hell breaking loose.' It's in no way a rare event when some classified doc hits the street, whether accidentally or deliberately. Sometimes this indicates dissension among those who have access to the material. But regardless -- what are the specific elements of this flap? What's the fuss about?

Personally I think it very unlikely that any major media outlet will touch this Survey with a 10-ft. pole. Which means that most folks will never hear about it (Art Bell notwithstanding). And also that many who do will not trust it.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), August 19, 1999.

"We knew about the report. We didn't leak it. All hell is breaking loose here." c4i

Well howdy there again, c4i, nice to see you're still lurking.

Looks like even tho they tried to squelch you, there are still valiant concerned .mil men who try to pass the warnings along in "safe" unclassified ways. Sorry to hear this put the uncomfortable heat back on you. But not to worry -- they'll see it came from a different source.

Don't be shy now ;^)

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), August 19, 1999.

Tom, have you seen the New York Times and Washington Post articles?

-- Gayla (privacy@please.com), August 20, 1999.

After my post above, I saw another thread which quoted the Post article in preprint. We take the Times, but today's edition (this AM) had nothing on the Navy survey. Nor is it mentioned among today's articles on the Times website.

The question remains -- what's their problem? (at Ramstein, for instance). I can dream up any number of problems -- but I'm asking what their problem is.

Anyone?

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), August 20, 1999.

Diane?

Any interesting emails today?

I--for one--haven't heard a peep.

:)

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), August 20, 1999.

FM, we're using a loaner computer and so don't have access to our eMail. Aarrgghhh! Not that we expect c4i to be communicating -- sounds like he's gotten acquainted with the squishy squelchy cold wet blanket from higher-ups routine.

You just wouldn't believe the incompetence of the computer repair guys. Got our iMac back in much worse shape than we brought it in -- and while all this is breaking on the Forum and a bunch of eMails we really needed to answer.

So folks, if you don't hear from us for a long time, send mental lightbulb hopes to the dimwits tinkering with our iMac. Hope the remediators are smarter and more earnest with their jobs. Sheesh!

xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), August 20, 1999.

FM,

Not from c4i, but there was this "interesting" e-mail...

Subj: An Open Letter to Jim Lord (Sent By E-Mail From A Navy Dot Mil)

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001H8i

Um, is this an indicator of "all hell breaking loose?" That a dot mil would need to address Jim Lord in an Open Letter on this forum?

"Interesting."

Diane

;-( A & L

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), August 20, 1999.