Subject:	Why Governments Will Not Tell The Truth
Date:	1999/09/19
Author:	Paul Milne <fedinfo@halifax.com>
	Posting History

September 17, 12:37 pm Eastern Time   Venezuela ready for Y2K bug - president Chavez   CARACAS, Sept 17 (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez ruled out any major problems due to year 2000 computer problems and said the country's massive oil industry was 100 percent updated to counter the so-called Y2K bug.   ``There won't be any large problems in Venezuela because we are taking preventive measures,'' Chavez said during his twice- monthly television program ``Face to Face with the President'' on Thursday evening.   Venezuelan government officials had warned earlier this year that the country was well behind on adjusting its computer systems to counter a programming shortcut which prevents some computers from distinguishing 2000 from 1900.   But Chavez said the oil sector in the world's third largest oil exporter was totally updated and the banking sector was almost ready to handle the year 2000 date change without problems.   ``We want to guarantee the Venezuelan people that we are minimizing the risk of the year 2000 effect,'' he said.   ==========   It was not two months ago when Venezuela announced that they needed over ONE BBBBILLION dolars to finish remediation. ONE BBBBILLLION dollars. At approximately the same time, Iran made an identical claim. It needed the same ONE BBBBILLION dollars. Now, less that 60 days later the president (laugh) announces there will be no 'major' problems.   Does he think that his population is a pack of imbeciles? Apparently.   We know for a fact, that statistically, there MUST be countries that , literally, go bellly up due to their total remediation failure.   Name ONE that has made this admission. Not one. Not even one of the DooDoo- kaKaStans. If they are 'third worlders', they claim they do not have enough reliance to be affected. If they are 'first worlders', they claim that they were on top of it. Amazing. All manner of conditions and ALL will be relatively unaffected globally.   And every president, premier, prime minister claims the same thing.   You really have to laugh at this just on its face.   Just use plain common sense. There are only three reasons that the Big Tamale from any country would say, that things will be OK. Becuase they ARE OK, or becuase he is  deceived and saying that they are OK, or he is lying.   Look at Chavez. Is Venezuela ready? LOL LOL LOL LOL. Is he deceived?  I think thta he could be. is he lying? I think , categorically, that he is. If he were deceived about their level of preparations then you would have to think that Chavez is one of the most gullible and stupid persons to have ever walked the earth.   He CAN NOT come out and say that they are screwed, either, can he? And this is the same in ANY country. The Head Honcho CAN NOT come out and say that they are screwed. And since that is the case, one can place NO reliance in ANY government statement that they are OK since they are precluded from saying otherwise.   Including the USA.   The third world countries that say they have a lower degree of technology ALL have a higher dependence upon the little that they have. Instead of having twenty companies in a particularly critical industry they may have only ONE company. All their eggs in ONE basket. When it came out about china this week that most of its population would be unaffected, I roared with laughter. Is their population dressed in animal skins? No. Are the countless millions and millions and millions of people in their cities fed ONLY by manually picked rice? The population of China is FOUR times that of the US. FOUR TIMES. But they are not reliant upon technology. At least not with their 90% pirated software.   And Russia.  Don't make me laugh. Indonesia with the FOURTH largest population on earth. Oh, they're close to ready now. LOL LOL  Pakistan and Brazil. BWAHAHAHAHAHA! two more of the seven most populated nations on earth. Not to mention India with a crumbling electric system as we speak. Not that Chicago is any beter off than India judging by the way Comed has been functioning recently.   The bottom line is this...   When NOT one leader of ANY nation will say that they are in deep trouble, you can not trust the comments of any of them at all. Period. But, you don't understand that do you? i'll try one more time. Suppose your stockbroker could ONLY tell you that the stock market looked good.  Would his word be even nominally trustworthy? no, it would not.   Same here. The word of John Koskinen is so much garbage. The word of Greenspan is so much garbage. The word of the govenor of any state is so much garbage.   If only ONE of them had come out and told the truth, it would be FAR easier to believe the other ones. As it is , you can not place the safety of your family on the statements of any governing authority.   http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/990917/vn.html- Paul Milne "If you live within 5 miles of a 7-11, you're toast"

-- a (a@a.a), September 19, 1999

Answers

for the unbelievers:

read "Atlas Shrugged" (again).

then look at the calendar.

Perry

-- Perry Arnett (pjarnett@pdqnet.net), September 19, 1999.

Yawn. If any leader admits being in trouble, that's proof we're in trouble. On the other hand, "When NOT one leader of ANY nation will say that they are in deep trouble, you can not trust the comments of any of them at all." Heads I win, tails you lose.

Let's face it, if *everything* is proof of your position, then nothing is. This isn't thought, this is lunacy.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 19, 1999.

What leader would ever admit to their failures? Because you like to point out so many people's failures (in your eyes), I think this quote best describes you Flint:

"All the problems of the world could be settled easily, if men were only willing to THINK. The trouble is that men very often resort to all sorts of devices in order not to think, because thinking is such hard work." Thomas J. Watson (emphasis mine)

You're having a hard time thinking Flint.

-- Media Junkie (mediajunkie@mediajunkieee.com), September 19, 1999.

What would motivate any government to tell the truth, especially in DC? Given the situation we now have with a Commander in Chief who is an habitual liar, what on earth would motivate his underlings to tell the truth about Y2k to either their boss or to the sheeple out there?

After all, if the boss can lie under oath, why can't they? What gain could anyone have from telling the truth about Y2K?

Given this, why would anyone in their right mind believe anything coming out of DC? Spin is too nice a word for what we are getting. Try "lies" instead.

Smirker

-- Smirker (smirker@liarliarpantsonfire.com), September 19, 1999.

Media:

I guess I've been correct so far because I'm lucky, and Milne has been wildly incorrect about everything his whole life due to sheer bad luck, despite a whole lot of hard brilliant thinking. Fate can be so cruel, you know?

And while we're on the subject, it's nice that Milne has started ranting again (oops, "thinking"), so that 'a' will have something original to post for us (oops, so that 'a' can "think" about something).

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 19, 1999.

Gee, Flint, I thought that you would say something like, "Yes, Paul Milne is correct, governments lie-lie-lie all the time. Because they are amoral."

Oh, but I guess that was last week....

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), September 19, 1999.

KOS:

Look up the difference between immoral and amoral and think about it. Then think about it some more. Call me in the morning, I'm too tired to do your thinking for you again tonight.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 19, 1999.

LOL Kos, I hear you. I can.t help but picture Flint as one of those crazy ass suirrells that run out in front of your car and then dance back and forth trying to decide which way to dodge right up till you wheel pack them.

I think Paul is once again right on target and his logic is clear as a laser on a winter night.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), September 19, 1999.

Flint--there you go again, NOT THINKING. "Paul Milne has been wildly incorrect about everything his whole life...." You mean you have known him your whole life?!!!! He obviously was very successful in what he has done and what he is doing. He was very correct in getting his family out of harms way, he is a father of 3 children, are you Flint? What is bad luck for Paul? There's many of us who would give anything to be where Paul is at. For someone like you to keep flipping their lips with nonsense, you should quit while your ahead. Yes, fate can be cruel, I shudder to think what your is.

-- Media Junkie (mediajunkie@mediajunkieee.com), September 19, 1999.

Flint, get real. You are one sick puppy, that's for sure.

-- Get Real (noone@notsaying.com), September 20, 1999.

Flint, you just don't like Milne, that's all. You know he's telling the truth about governments lying all of the time about Y2K (and other things too). But you let your personal dislike of the man color your thinking and that kills what little credibility you have. I don't know what you have against Milne, you probably have never even met him. And I've noticed that your posting here are getting nastier and nastier. What's up with that? Are you getting a little scared as we get closer to 2000? If Y2K is not going to be a big deal, what's with all the hostility? You really need to get a grip, man.

-- Flint Has No Credibility (flintsucks@pollysrus.com), September 20, 1999.

Before the outbreak of WWII, Hilter 'suggested' to the jews that they could leave Germany with one suitcase and little bit of cash. Few left, and the rest is history.

Before the Challenger's last flight, some engineers warned NASA that it might not be such a good idea to launch a rocket ship that was coming apart at the seems. NASA launched the Challenger anyway, and rest is history.

Before Pickett's infamous change at Gettysbury, Stonewall Jackson warned...

Some people just don't believe shit stinks.

-- Cigarette Smoking Man (csm@smoke.com), September 20, 1999.

The Titanic sank on an ocean that was 99% free of icebergs....

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), September 20, 1999.

To Cigarette:

Stonewall Jackson made no such warning before Pickett's Charge. In fact, he was not there. Mainly becuase he died a year earlier. Pickett's Charge was fought on the last day of the Battle of Gettysburg in the first week of July 1864.

Stonewall Jackson died several days after the Battle of Chancellorsville on Sunday, May 10 1863 at 3:15 PM.

AP Hill was leading his former men at the Battle of Gettysburg a year later, if memory serves.

General Longstreet, DID , in fact, strenuously advise against the attack on the Union center on Cemetary Ridge.

-- Paul Milne (fedinfo@halifax.com), September 20, 1999.