He's putting more and more non-credentialed, anonymous "reports" up, the "this just arrived by Email from a 'oil-industry expert'" kind. IMHO he's not really a useful source of information anymore, except to click-through when there -is- actually a source document. But be careful of confusing the actual source material with his hype.

-- Mike Childs (MChilds@hotbot.com), September 01, 1999

Answers

I agree it seems like Gary is trying more to scare now than before. Its like he is running out of things to say so he goes back and digs up stuff or posts anonymous stuff.

Y2knewswire was starting to look like a joke with their anonymous reports but the appear to have removed them.

Did anyone see the special report about someone who blew the whistle on the USPS but then suddenly y2knewswire removed the story and didnt make a references as to why.

-- garywatch (garywatch@watchinggary.com), September 01, 1999.

I agree on the Y2KNewswire as well - just valuable as a click-through mainly. The hype seems to be ramping up in this late hour. It's very frustrating because it's getting harder and harder to find unbiased, simple information.

-- Mike Childs (MChilds@hotbot.com), September 01, 1999.

Agreed. I don't mind second hand stories per se, I just want them clearly labeled as such, as well as some idea of how trustworthy they are considered to be.

Not "believing" much of anything these days, good or bad, that can't be verified.

The IBM OS/390 issue seems to fall into that category. Be it a large or a small issue, it is serious to those whom it affects.

-- Jon Williamson (jwilliamson003@sprintmail.com), September 01, 1999.

Yes. Except that to me the OS390 story leans more toward the fact category based on the idea that when you witness what it actually takes to rememdiate, it seems to the layman be a whole lot messier than the mainstream press leads us to believe.

-- Mike Childs (MChilds@hotbot.com), September 01, 1999.

Hey, don't shoot the messenger. The people you are trashing are a Godsend in the providing of "the other side of the story". If I had only had input from the Govt and press I wouldnt have made the personal and financial provisions that allow me to sleep at night. Yes, there will be some misinformation. There is too much coming down the pipeline to thoroughly research each piece of info. We can review the info and do our own research or review. My hat is off to North and Y2Knewswire for a great job. It takes a lot of energy - mental and physical to keep up with this monster day after day. I thank them for their service.

-- RickE (vrevans@bigfoot.com), September 01, 1999.

DON'T DISCOUNT EVERYTHING GARY NORTH HAS TO SAY .... This is from a friend of mine who does NOT like Gary North.

From: Ron Reece Tuesday, Aug 31 1999 9:26AM SILICON INVESTOR Reply #479 of 484

I was unable to find where Fielder actually stated that the Japanese had been unaware of Y2K related PC problems.

It seems to have been a comment inserted by Gary North and not a direct, documentable, quote by Fielder.

I sent Mr. Fielder an email trying to confirm that North quoted him correctly. If so, it is VERY important information (and not encouraging).

I'll let the thread know when I get a response.

Or if you found where Fielder actually stated that they [Japan] had been unaware of Y2K related PC problems before, could you please provide the link? I couldn't find the Year2000 "forum" that GN was referring to.

If this is correct, I need to have the information so I can forward the data to someone I know who is dealing with the Japanese on Y2K. It may be valuable in "smoking out" any denial on their part.

======================================================================

From: Ron Reece Wednesday, Sep 1 1999 12:05AM ET SILICON INVESTOR Respond to Post # 482 of 483

Response from Karl Fielder:

Ron,

The quotes attributed to me are accurate.

I have just finished a hard tour of Japan and have even more information.

I would agree that many companies are not telling the truth - but this is mostly from ignorance rather than a deliberate policy. However, having told an untruth, they must confess if they subsequently wish to change their tune - and THAT results in a loss of face.

Karl Fielder

Promised I would share this when I got a response. Looks like Gary North was properly quoting Mr. Fielder's comments.

Not comforting if you live in Japan. ======================================================================

Full details here:

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

-- Cheryl (Transplant@Oregon.com), September 01, 1999.

Has anything changed? I think Uncle Gary has always been, shall we say eccentric? I think accuracy has always been sacrificed for dramatics.

However his website was the first thing I started to read, and despite his drama queen style, I still listened.

The next thing I did was to look for more reliable information, but if it wasn't for ol' Uncle Gary, I might still be DGI.

-- Mabel Dodge (cynical@me.net), September 01, 1999.

He's putting more and more non-credentialed, anonymous "reports" up, the "this just arrived by Email from a 'oil-industry expert'" kind.

It doesn't seem to me that this is the case. That is, it doesn't seem to me that he's doing it more, or less, now than he always has. You got any statistical analysis?

-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), September 01, 1999.

Yes - I agree wholeheartedly. Gary and Y2KNW have been the outlets for a LOT of good information. And I'm very grateful to them both for all I've learned from various reliable sources they've tracked down.

I just hope that people who've come to count on them as the "Gospel" continue to be able to separate the good source info from the unfounded speculation/nonsense.

That y2K NW intentionally hides information unless you pay convinces me that the free part of the site is mainly to lure readers to pay to see the other stuff. It's a commercial venture.

However, that doesn't mean the information there is invalid. It just ups the level of skepticism with which "opinion" pieces on that site should be viewed. The more "earth-shattering" they are, the more money he stands to make. And I'm sure that's exactly the point.

-- Mike Childs (MChilds@hotbot.com), September 01, 1999.

Lane -

Well you're probably more on top of doing statistical analyses of y2k web site info than I am.

But it's the timing that's important. We're entering the end game where we all desperately need facts. Now that these sites have their readers roped in and hooked, it's the time for them to make their partisan plays, if any. And it's easy to misrepresent opinion as fact, especially if people have gotten used to believing what you say. But now, as we close in on DDay, it's more important than ever to know the difference.

-- Mike Childs (MChilds@hotbot.com), September 01, 1999.

Black-White

Day-Night

Alive-Dead

Positive-Negative

proton-electron

For everything there is an opposite. If GN is "scary", isn't kosky "spinny"? By the same logic, if your a fool for taking GN's advice, what would you be for listening to Kosky? The truth usually lies inbetween (5)

Sorry, I was feeling philsophical. Feeling's gone now, I think it was just gas:)

-- CygnusXI (noburnt@toast.net), September 01, 1999.

I don't see any real difference between what Gary use to put on on his site and what's there now. There has always been a certain amount of anonymous source material on the site but this is to be expected since the person blowing the whistle stands to lose his job if it becomes known that he's the one telling the truth about a company's or an industry's Y2K problems.

The way to judge the likely validity of the material is to read it carefully and note how thorough it is and whether the author appears to have a really full grasp of his subject. In the vast majority of cases, only a knowledgeable person would take the time to develop a comprehensive analysis of, say, the oil industry or the banking industry or whatever. A liar or someone doing a hoax would seldom have the incentive to work really hard at it, particularly when there is no reward.

I think most of the anonymous reports I see on Gary's website are believable. Take the current analysis of the oil industry, which he got from Ed Yourdon's discussion board, I think. It's so comprehensive and detailed that I find it very credible. Few people would take the time to do all that if he were not personally confident that the information is accurate.

-- cody varian (cody@y2ksurvive.com), September 01, 1999.

Gary N. is not a man I would particularly want to encounter in my personal life. His politico-religious views and mine are oceans apart. That said, God Bless Gary for the most thorough and consistent y2k-info website going. He's also a great writer.

-- a grateful North reader (thanksgary@igetit.now), September 01, 1999.

Mike--there's some posters here that post "e-mails" from people they know regarding Y2K and Diane Squire is one of them. Can we verify what she is saying is correct? I read the posts, think about them, and keep on going. I have no idea whether they are true or false, it's information only and do what you will with it. I think as we get closer to January 1, we're going to hear so much stuff that it really will not matter to me one way or another whether it's true or false. What the hell do I care? Being prepared is all that matters, and let whatever happens happens. Now excuse me while I go buy some more bullets.

-- Rasty (Rasty@bulldogg.com), September 01, 1999.

Yes and six years ago there were a lot of "anonymous reports" that the fire in Waco was caused by government agents.

-- History (repeats@itself.), September 01, 1999.

Re: DOCTOR Gary North....

I have read the books and the ICE newsletter by Gary North for 23 years.

I also know and often visit his father-in-law at the Chalcedon Institute here in California.

Because of this, when I see this drivel posted about how Gary would set up some kind of religious dictatorship, it angers me down to the toes.

That is simply repeating a psywar term that was initiated by those who would do harm to a man who dares to tell the truth.

Like me, Gary has been in the fight to restore Constitutional government for most of his life. Like me, that means over 30 years of study and activism. When you are so much more well informed about the true intent of those who actually control the Federal Government, you tend to postulate a much shorter time-frame for the final collapse of civilization.

This is not new. If you browse through the writings of Cicero, you will see that he was convinced that Rome could not last more than a few years. It lasted much much longer than that, but it did collapse.

When those of us who have dedicated our lives to awakening others to the true threat to their country, their way of life, and their life itself do so, it is with an immense amount of knowledge and personal experience behind it. Therefore, those who are new to the subject cannot fathom the seriousness of a situation and it is impossible to "bring them up to speed" in a short time.

Therefore, those who so dedicate themselves find that they have to endure the "slings and arrows" of the detractors into their own bodies and souls......said detractors being the very people that are the ones whose lives and whose country the dedicated person seeks to save.

Twas ever thus, history shows us.

Gary simply has such an incredible edge over most people who are new to this that he views y2k in the light of what has always been the planned goal of the conspirators who have taken over the Federal Government: The total elimination of the Constitution and the institution of a socialist dictatorship.

In seeking out information, he, like everyone else, will have not only a bias, but a duty to avoid making references to "alternative" information that , to an experienced person, is simply spin material and would not provide a "both sides" viewpoint, but would just make it more difficult for new people. It is his site, after all.

The day will come when many thousands of people will thank Gary for his monumental efforts. Thousands are doing that right now as they have made a change in their lifestyle that is already benefiting them physically and mentally.

And beyond y2k, with the strong probability of nuclear war, they will be the ones who are best situated to survive it.

For over 30 years, since serving in an Asian War, I have done the same as Gary. Tried to awaken people. Like Gary, I have taken more hurts and crap from people whose knowledge on the subject was Nada to zilch. Looking back over those thiry years, not ONE event that I had predicted would take place....politically....has failed to come to pass. IT JUST TOOK LONGER. This did not mean that I was "gifted" in any way.....only that I could READ and learn and draw conclusions.

Inertia is a factor in civilizations as well, and this was something that we, when we were newbies to conspiracy, failed to grasp.

A long chain of events, which point inevitably to a conclusion, will take place. Timing is the variable.

"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can believe that WE PLANNED IT THAT WAY." ......Franklin Roosevelt

And timing is in the hands of GOD. If HE has determined that this nation is no longer fit to survive, we will not.

The solution is NOT political. I learned that the hard way.

The solution is spiritual, and II Chronicles 7:14 gives us the requirement for the spiritual resolution for a nation that has gone astray.

Y2k may be the "straw" that breaks the back. I don't know. I do know that living a daily "doomsday" scenario cost me many hundreds of thousands of dollars that would come in handy now. For a year, I did the same thing again with y2k "preps", etc.

It is difficult to do, but you must try to keep a "balance" in your life and business so that, if y2k does not produce the utter chaos that COULD be the case, you will still be "in business".

I hope that I can do that, and continue with life and not be sitting by my creek (don't have it yet) doin the washing.

I hope the same for each of you as well.

GOD bless you all.

bobby1776

-- bobby1776 (pville@usa.net), September 01, 1999.

Ok, now I -am- scared.

-- Mike Childs (MChilds@hotbot.com), September 01, 1999.

Bobby,

EXCELLENT POST !!! Thank You.

-- rob (rgt350@aol.com), September 01, 1999.

Thunderous clapping, heartfelt thanks, and true reverance for your contribution bobby1776.

Gary is uniquely positioned to get the truth out whether people want to hear it or not. Many people have him to thank for their vital preparations.

Other are FOOLS...

Constitutionally yours,

Paul Christy

-- PJC (paulchri@msn.com), September 01, 1999.

Iam glad that North is a historian and speaks a language we can understand and act on as opposed to geekspeak which I am sure puts most of us to sleep.Mike Childs brings to mind the folly of "casting pearls before swine"

-- Dai Wal (gandg@kwic.com), September 01, 1999.

I agree, Mike. But be glad there are only a few Northian lunatics out there like these boneheads. They're a waste of good protein.

-- Montel DiFulvio (monty22@aol.com), September 01, 1999.

nah - you KNOW they're all fat!

-- Paul (qwerbilzak@wongfaye.com), September 01, 1999.

The rules for evaluating North's material have always been very simple: Believe it or don't. I always disregard unsubstantiated accounts such as e-mail messages that he claims to have received. I always click on and verify the links that he supplies in the vast majority of instances, then make my own decision as to whether his commentary agrees with my own assessment.

Oh, and I never take into account any of North's religious beliefs, nor previous non-Y2K related end-of-the-world statements. They are irrelevant.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), September 01, 1999.

Exactly, KoS.

Evaluate the arguments and the supporting evidence. Anything else is specious.

-- Prometheus (fire@for.man), September 01, 1999.

Mike,

I used to know someone named Mike Childs. That was a long time ago. If by any chance you remember Tyler Park, you're the guy.

Please join us at Debunking the Y2K Hype.

Debunking the Y2K Hype

-- Peg (peg@debunkie.II), September 01, 1999.

Peg, I can see why you suggested to Mike to drop in, mighty lonely over there. What do you folks do while your waiting for someone to post??

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), September 01, 1999.

Ray,

Subject: Beware of nonsense on Gary North's site

He's putting more and more non-credentialed, anonymous "reports" up, the "this just arrived by Email from a 'oil-industry expert'" kind. IMHO he's not really a useful source of information anymore, except to click-through when there -is- actually a source document. But be careful of confusing the actual source material with his hype.

-- Mike Childs (MChilds@hotbot.com)

It's Debunking...GI

-- Peg (peg@debunkie.II), September 01, 1999.

Peg: Do you like to mudwrestle?

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), September 01, 1999.

Some expect Gary North to only post reliable information, but there is very little reliable information on y2k. I would perfer that he post the information even if it cannot be verified, as long as he atates where it came from.

Most of the information that we are getting from the government is not verified, so why complain about Gary North.

-- Dave (dannco@hotmail.com), September 01, 1999.

if it wasn't for gary north, i probably wouldn't have been paying attention in 1997.since then,there's been y2knewswire,mike hyatt,westergaard reports,and more and more every day.gary has a perspective on the world that is closer than most people care to admit. whenever i send one of his pages to a y2k sceptic i always send the link to the original source, which he generally provides. my family and i will always be indebted to gary north,and people who do not even know of him will be as well,if only for the wake-up call.

-- walter saul (saulymar@northrock.bm), September 02, 1999.