[Fwd: Y2K: 39 Unanswered Questions (asked to the American media)]

December 8, 1999

My personal plea:

Please have at least 3 gallons of drinking water (6 liters) on hand for

each person. If you use city water, drink only this bottled drinking

water for the first three days of January -- so you don't become ill in

case the Y2K roll-over incapacitates municipal water-treatment germ

detection. (Within 3 days, if there is no outbreak of disease in your

city, you can switch back to regular water.)

Please make some arrangements for how you will go to the bathroom if you

are not allowed or not able to use a flush toilet. (Bucket with tight

lid, garbage bags, toilet paper or extra water for hygiene.) Sewage

treatment plants are typically operated by local governments, and local

governments are much less prepared than large utilities and state

governments. Hence, a greater chance of sewage failure.

If you live in a rough neighborhood in a urban area, give some thought

to relocating mothers and children to rural areas or other safer

locations before December 25.

Food, batteries, heat, blankets, fuel, disposable diapers, medicine,

etc. Contacts with friends. Think about these things.

What if only 10% of you need this information? Better safe than sorry.

your servant,

Hare Krsna dasi

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

Content-Type: message/rfc822

Return-Path: <Kaunteya.JPS (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

Received: from mail.bbt.se ([193.15.19.5]) by kineo.bowdoin.edu

(Netscape Messaging Server 3.6) with SMTP id AAA8BC

for <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 13:03:39 -0500

Received: by mail2.bbt.se (COM 3.67.2); Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:00:05 +0100

Wed, 8 Dec 99 18:49 +0100

"COM: Kaunteya (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN)" <Kaunteya.JPS (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

Sender: Kaunteya.JPS (AT) bbt (DOT) se

Kaunteya.JPS (AT) bbt (DOT) se,

Apocalypse.1999?@bbt.se

"COM: Apocalypse 1999? (Are you ready?)" <Apocalypse.1999?@bbt.se>

Y2K: 39 Unanswered Questions (asked to the American media)

X-Mailer: COM 3.67.2

X-Com-Textno: COM2841794

X-Com-Flags: LETTER

Message-Id: <COM2841794 (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

[Text 2841794 from COM]

This is from www.sightings.com.

These questions seem to reveal a systematic, deliberate cover-up by the

media about Y2K-related risks.

Twenty-two days to go and still we can't say for sure what will happen and

how bad it would be, but better safe than sorry.

Your servant, Kaunteya das

------

SIGHTINGS

------

Y2K - Thirty-Nine

Seriously Unanswered

Questions - READ

>From NewsHawk Inc. <hawkeye (AT) saber (DOT) net>

1999 NewsHawkz inc.

12-7-99

1. Why is there not a single Fortune 1000 firm that has said, in its 10-Q

SEC statement, that it is fully, unequivocally Y2K- compliant?

2. How can an entire industry be deemed "Y2K ready" if no members of that

industry are claiming full Y2K compliance?

3. Why is it politically correct for pharmaceutical companies to stockpile

life-saving medications but not for a family to do the same thing?

4. How can the U.S. economy not be impacted by major infrastructure failures

in countries with which America trades goods and services?

5. Why did the April 9, 1999 and September 9, 1999 power industry drills

held by the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) not test

power generation or power distribution equipment? And why did NERC say, in a

document found on its web site, "Do not make the drill too complex. We want

to have a successful and meaningful story for publication." Source: Y2K

Newswire: http://www.y2knewswire.com/archives/power/NERCdrill.pdf

6. Were you aware that our nation's political leaders made a conscious

decision to downplay preparedness advice out of the fear it might threaten

banks and the stock market? Isn't this a strategy that essentially says the

stock market is more important than the safety of Americans? Source: WIRED

News, February 18, 1999:

http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/17986.html

7. Why was the FAA unable to produce documentation backing up their claims

of an independent audit declaring 100% Y2K compliance? More importantly, why

did no publication in this country even attempt to track down these

independent audit documents before repeating the FAA's claims as fact?

Source: Y2K Newswire: http://www.y2knewswire.com/reports/Airfoiled-

Public.htm

8. Has anyone from your publication actually seen a single signed,

independent third-party audit that assigned 100% Y2K compliance to any

Fortune 1000 firm or federal agency?

9. If your publication only trusts and quotes "official sources" on Y2K

topics, and if those same official sources have political, professional or

financial reasons to understate the severity of the problem they're facing,

isn't it true that the information you're relying on for Y2K reporting may

be inaccurate?

10. Given that Y2K remediation costs have already exceeded the cost of the

entire Vietnam War, with some organizations spending over a billion dollars

on repairs, isn't Y2K already in the category of a huge, man-made crisis,

even if no problems occur on January 1? Y2K remediation costs dwarf Savings

& Loan bailouts, yet the S&L situation is, still today, called a "crisis" by

publications like USA Today and the Washington Post. But S&L bailouts pale

in comparison to the hundreds of billions already spent on Y2K. Why is a $6

billion mistake called a "crisis" but a $600 billion global mistake called

no big deal? Sources: USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/court/nscot010.htm Washington Post:

http://washingtonpost.com/wp- srv/politics/govt/fedguide/stories/fdic.htm

11. Why has no Fortune 1000 firm yet conducted full, end-to- end testing of

the Y2K compliance of their computer systems? Earlier this year, the

Pentagon held a test that John Koskinen called the largest test ever

conducted on Y2K. Yet this test only involved 2% of the Pentagon's total

systems. If this is truly the largest test ever conducted, doesn't this mean

most organizations have probably only tested 1% of their systems? And if so,

isn't this fact newsworthy?

12. Why, in early 1999, did the federal government drop over 3,200 computer

systems from "mission critical" lists? And what happens if these

previously-mission-critical systems are not fixed? Has your publication

explained to its readers the significance of this subtle redefinition

strategy and how it deceives the public by inflating "progress" statistics?

13. Why did NERC distribute a template "Y2K Ready Letter" with suggestive

phrases and claims that companies could send back to NERC as part of their

"independent" claims of Y2K readiness? Isn't this like giving out the

answers right before the test? Source: Y2K Newswire:

http://www.y2knewswire.com/archives/power/NercTemplate.pdf

14. If the IRS spent $4 billion over eleven years in a failed effort to

revamp their computers, how can it possibly solve Y2K in just two years? And

why hasn't the American press focused on the urgent issue of having a

contingency tax system (like the national retail sales tax) in place, ready

to roll, in case the IRS suffers critical problems?

15. Recently, NASA apparently lost yet another Mars probe due to unknown

reasons. The last Mars probe was apparently lost due to a unit conversion

error made by NASA personnel. If NASA scientists and programmers typically

operate at ten times the accuracy of "regular" programmers, and yet they

still manage to make mission-killing mistakes, why should the world believe

that industry Y2K programmers won't make any such mistakes? At one point in

1998, Y2K "no big deal" commentators appeared on national television,

explaining that the whole problem could be solved by recruiting welfare

recipients to learn COBOL. This was reported as a genuine, credible strategy

for solving the Y2K problem. Have you followed up on how many mission-

critical systems have actually been remediated by welfare programmers? And

if so, how likely are these systems to be error-free on January 1?

16. Auto manufacturers typically rely on well over ten thousand suppliers

for critical parts. If 99% of these ten thousand suppliers are

Y2K-compliant, doesn't that still mean one percent (one hundred suppliers),

on average, may suffer failures? How will auto manufacturers build cars with

only 99% of the parts? Why isn't this simple mathematical exercise being

described to Americans?

17. The power plant that serves Santa Fe, New Mexico, has now announced

there is a "high probability" that electricity will be cut off to the city

on January 1. The city apparently hasn't yet funded the installation of a

backup generator for the sewer system, either. What will happen to Santa Fe

residents if power cannot be restored for a week and the sewers don't work?

Is this a scenario for which citizens should continue to not prepare?

Source: http://www.abqjournal.com/news/23news12- 02-99.htm

18. If Y2K is a non-event, why did our federal government spend $50,000,000

on a Y2K command bunker? Why are cities like Boulder, Colorado deploying

armed SWAT teams and "prisoner transport teams" on New Years Eve? Source:

Sunday Camera, November 28, 1999, www.bouldernews.com

19. Throughout 1998, nearly every company claimed it would be Y2K compliant

by December 31, 1998, "with a full year for testing." Can you name a single

Fortune 1000 firm that achieved and announced full Y2K compliance on that

day? What happened to the full year for testing? Is this an important missed

deadline, or were all those companies lying when they said they needed a

full year for testing?

20. If Venezuela, one of our nation's chief suppliers of imported oil, was

100% non-compliant in March, how can it be 100% Y2K-compliant today? How did

this small nation apparently accomplish in ten months what has taken the

Social Security Administration ten years to achieve? What will happen to our

economy if Venezuela cannot export oil for thirty days?

21. We keep reading stories of little old ladies who were robbed after they

withdrew cash from their banks. Can your publication produce a single police

report that details such a robbery?

22. The Y2K compliance claims of the United States sound just like the

claims from other countries: Italy, China, Russia, South Africa, even

Jamaica. Every country says it is fine. Ilya Klebanov, for example, Russia's

deputy prime minister, says, "We will pass quietly through 2000 just like we

have every other year. ...I think it's best not to scare the little children

of Russia." How have you, as a journalist, determined where to draw the line

between "countries that are lying" and "countries that are telling the

truth?"

23. If the world's oil production is not at all threatened by Y2K, why has

the International Energy Agency (IEA) drawn up plans for global rationing of

oil reserves? Source: Reuters (London), November 30, 1999.

24. What will happen to our technology industry and dot-com stocks if

computer parts shipments from Asia are disrupted because of Y2K problems

there?

25. The White House says that all federal systems will work just fine, but

smaller, local systems will experience problems. Yet we know, from

experience, that the opposite is true: larger, more complex systems usually

take longer to fix and have more post-remediation problems than smaller

systems. Why hasn't your publication publicly questioned the contradiction

in this official explanation?

26. As organizations in the United States purchased new equipment for Y2K,

they sold much of the older, non-Y2K- compliant equipment to after-market

importers in less-wealthy nations. This includes medical and

telecommunications equipment. By doing this, isn't America actually

exporting a Y2K crisis to nations that can least afford one? And won't this

result in widespread international blame when people die in those countries

as a result of, for example, failed medical devices? Doesn't this make Y2K

an important foreign policy issue that should be addressed by the national

media?

27. The White House says any Y2K problems that occur will be due to

"overreaction by the people." Isn't this really an attempt to blame the

public for a problem originally caused by the federal government's

establishing the two-digit year standard in the first place?

28. If prepared people are less afraid, and only non-prepared people are

likely to panic during a disruption, why has the federal government

generally discouraged adequate Y2K preparedness? Isn't this ultimately

contributing to the potential for panic? Why does the White House tell

Americans to have half a tank of gas and not a full tank?

29. The Federal Reserve promises to pump nearly $200 billion in currency

into the banking system in an effort to make sure banks don't run out of

cash. There is more than enough to go around, we're told, so it's fine if

people want to take out a few weeks' cash. If this is true, why are banks

targeting the elderly, using fear tactics (stories of muggings) to prevent

them from taking out their cash? If an elderly person remembers the crash of

1929 and the subsequent bank failures, isn't she acting rationally by

protecting her life savings? And isn't it true that her actions don't

threaten the system anyway because the Fed has delivered all this extra

cash? Shouldn't banks try to make customers feel comfortable instead of

fearful?

30. Why is it socially acceptable to buy fire insurance, car insurance and

life insurance but not "food insurance" by having some extra food stored

away? Through what mechanism did the Boy Scout motto, "Be prepared" become

politically incorrect? Will Boy Scouts now be called extremists? Or will

they be forced to change their motto to, "Be prepared, except for Y2K."

31. Why are Californians urged to have a two-week stockpile of supplies for

earthquake preparedness, but only a three-day stockpile for Y2K? Should

Californians throw out eleven days of supplies to be politically correct for

Y2K?

32. If stock prices are based on rational, justifiable earnings per share,

why is the NASDAQ exchange planning on running year-end advertisements that

urge shareholders not to sell their stocks? If a company did this, wouldn't

it be in violation of SEC regulations?

33. Why is virtually no member of the press asking Presidential candidates

for their views on the Year 2000 problem?

34. If the banking industry is rock-solid, why does it seem to be terrified

of radio and TV advertisements that poke fun at Y2K? Are we to believe that

a humorous television advertisement can threaten our entire financial

system? And if so, how strong a system is that to begin with?

35. If your publication is funded by advertisements from companies that

would be financially harmed if you reported they were non-compliant, don't

you have a clear-cut conflict of interest that prevents you from

investigating their compliance? Have you explained this conflict of interest

to your readers when you publish stories about Y2K?

36. Most publications in the United States rely on news wires from AP and

Reuters. When you publish Y2K-related stories borrowed from these wire

services, what percentage of the statements from AP and Reuters do you

actually verify? For what percentage of the stories do you conduct your own

investigations and add additional facts?

37. Many Year 2000 contingency plans rely on manual operations in case

computer systems fail. Isn't there a gaping contradiction in the idea that

everybody has been made more efficient by technology, but then we don't

really need these computers because we can do it all by hand anyway?

Furthermore, how will U.S. railroads go back to manual operations if the

actual hand-thrown track switches have been removed? How will the IRS

hand-write checks to million of taxpayers, as they have suggested they might

do, if the refund database remains lost inside the crashed computers?

38. CCD Online Systems, a Y2K solutions provider, has offered to donate

$50,000 to schools in the name of any of fourteen organizations on their

"challenge list" that can pass an independent Y2K compliance test. If

everyone is already Y2K compliant, as the public has been told, why has no

organization on this list answered the challenge? Aren't they acting

socially irresponsible by denying tens of thousands of dollars to our

nation's children? Source: http://www.ccdonline.com/en/News/t_press16_e.html

39. Finally, the American public has been told to expect -- and base their

preparations on -- the best-case outcome; the "no big deal" outcome or

"three day snowstorm" scenario. When, in your entire life, have you ever

seen the federal government take on a highly-complex, multi-billion-dollar

project and get it right on time, the first time?

Bonus question, just added on December 7, 1999: Social Security has been

widely touted as being 100% Y2K- compliant after having spent ten years on

the project. Nearly a year ago, President Clinton declared Social Security

to be 100% compliant. Yet last week, thousands of Social Security notices

containing mixed-up numbers were apparently mailed to senior citizens who

were shocked to find their Social Security numbers scrambled. If Social

Security is fully Y2K-compliant, why is it still experiencing glitches in

1999? More importantly, if this is the result of ten years of Y2K

remediation, what outcome is likely for federal agencies that have only

spent two years, not ten, fixing Y2K bugs? Source:

http://www.tri-cityherald.com

_____

This list of questions provided by Y2K Newswire during its week-long Y2K

Internet Rally. For details, visit http://www.y2knewswire.com. Y2K Newswire

accepts no advertisements or commissions, and does not sell any Y2K-related

products, despite what has been (mis)reported in some publications.

These questions are meant to intellectually challenge, not to annoy, members

of the media in the United States of America. However, it is possible that

you may receive multiple copies of this message if multiple members of the

public choose to contact you. No e-mails originate from Y2K Newswire

servers, and we encourage participants in this Internet Rally to send no

more than one e-mail to any single publication. Y2K Newswire's choice to

include your publication on our contact suggestion list does not reflect our

assessment of the quality of your Y2K-related reporting. We have included

contact information both from reporters who do an excellent job covering Y2K

and those who don't.

To those who wish to report on real Y2K issues in the remaining few days,

Y2K Newswire is ready to help. The site is making available through December

31, to all publications, free reprint rights of professionally-illustrated

Y2K political cartoons. For details: http://www.y2knewswire.com/cartoons.htm

for any person or organization to reprint, republish, post, e-mail, copy and

otherwise distribute this document.

December 9, 1999

Hare Krishna,

Thanks for the good info. By the way 3 gallons = 11.35 liters. There are

roughly 4 liters in one gallon, a liter being very close to a quart.

Your servant,

Sri Rama das

[srirama (AT) bbt (DOT) se], or

[srirama (AT) jps (DOT) net] < PLEASE NOTE THIS NEW EMAIL ADDRESS

TECH TIP OF THE WEEK -- Absolutely free, no strings attached, anti-virus

software from CA/Innoculan: http://antivirus.cai.com/.

>

> Hare.Krsna.dasi (AT) bbt (DOT) se [Hare.Krsna.dasi (AT) bbt (DOT) se]

> Wednesday, December 08, 1999 2:06 PM

> COM: Varnasrama development

> [Fwd: Y2K: 39 Unanswered Questions (asked to the American

> media)]

>

> [Text 2842395 from COM]

>

> My personal plea:

>

> Please have at least 3 gallons of drinking water (6 liters) on hand for

> each person. If you use city water, drink only this bottled drinking

> water for the first three days of January -- so you don't become ill in

> case the Y2K roll-over incapacitates municipal water-treatment germ

> detection. (Within 3 days, if there is no outbreak of disease in your

> city, you can switch back to regular water.)

>

> Please make some arrangements for how you will go to the bathroom if you

> are not allowed or not able to use a flush toilet. (Bucket with tight

> lid, garbage bags, toilet paper or extra water for hygiene.) Sewage

> treatment plants are typically operated by local governments, and local

> governments are much less prepared than large utilities and state

> governments. Hence, a greater chance of sewage failure.

>

> If you live in a rough neighborhood in a urban area, give some thought

> to relocating mothers and children to rural areas or other safer

> locations before December 25.

>

> Food, batteries, heat, blankets, fuel, disposable diapers, medicine,

> etc. Contacts with friends. Think about these things.

>

> What if only 10% of you need this information? Better safe than sorry.

>

> your servant,

>

> Hare Krsna dasi

>

> ------------------------------

> Content-Type: message/rfc822

>

> Return-Path: <Kaunteya.JPS (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

> Received: from mail.bbt.se ([193.15.19.5]) by kineo.bowdoin.edu

> (Netscape Messaging Server 3.6) with SMTP id AAA8BC

> for <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 13:03:39 -0500

> Received: by mail2.bbt.se (COM 3.67.2); Wed, 08 Dec 1999 19:00:05 +0100

> Wed, 8 Dec 99 18:49 +0100

> "COM: Kaunteya (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN)" <Kaunteya.JPS (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

> Sender: Kaunteya.JPS (AT) bbt (DOT) se

> Kaunteya.JPS (AT) bbt (DOT) se,

> Apocalypse.1999?@bbt.se

> To:

> "COM: Apocalypse 1999? (Are you ready?)" <Apocalypse.1999?@bbt.se>

> Y2K: 39 Unanswered Questions (asked to the American media)

> X-Mailer: COM 3.67.2

> X-Com-Textno: COM2841794

> X-Com-Flags: LETTER

> Message-Id: <COM2841794 (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

> MIME-Version: 1.0

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

>

> [Text 2841794 from COM]

>

> This is from www.sightings.com.

>

> These questions seem to reveal a systematic, deliberate cover-up by the

> media about Y2K-related risks.

>

> Twenty-two days to go and still we can't say for sure what will happen and

> how bad it would be, but better safe than sorry.

>

> Your servant, Kaunteya das

>

> ------

> SIGHTINGS

> ------

>

> Y2K - Thirty-Nine

> Seriously Unanswered

> Questions - READ

> >From NewsHawk Inc. <hawkeye (AT) saber (DOT) net>

>

> 1999 NewsHawkz inc.

>

> 12-7-99

>

> 1. Why is there not a single Fortune 1000 firm that has said, in its 10-Q

> SEC statement, that it is fully, unequivocally Y2K- compliant?

>

> 2. How can an entire industry be deemed "Y2K ready" if no members of that

> industry are claiming full Y2K compliance?

>

> 3. Why is it politically correct for pharmaceutical companies to stockpile

> life-saving medications but not for a family to do the same thing?

>

> 4. How can the U.S. economy not be impacted by major

> infrastructure failures

> in countries with which America trades goods and services?

>

> 5. Why did the April 9, 1999 and September 9, 1999 power industry drills

> held by the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) not test

> power generation or power distribution equipment? And why did

> NERC say, in a

> document found on its web site, "Do not make the drill too

> complex. We want

> to have a successful and meaningful story for publication." Source: Y2K

> Newswire: http://www.y2knewswire.com/archives/power/NERCdrill.pdf

>

> 6. Were you aware that our nation's political leaders made a conscious

> decision to downplay preparedness advice out of the fear it might threaten

> banks and the stock market? Isn't this a strategy that

> essentially says the

> stock market is more important than the safety of Americans? Source: WIRED

> News, February 18, 1999:

> http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/17986.html

>

> 7. Why was the FAA unable to produce documentation backing up their claims

> of an independent audit declaring 100% Y2K compliance? More

> importantly, why

> did no publication in this country even attempt to track down these

> independent audit documents before repeating the FAA's claims as fact?

> Source: Y2K Newswire: http://www.y2knewswire.com/reports/Airfoiled-

> Public.htm

>

> 8. Has anyone from your publication actually seen a single signed,

> independent third-party audit that assigned 100% Y2K compliance to any

> Fortune 1000 firm or federal agency?

>

> 9. If your publication only trusts and quotes "official sources" on Y2K

> topics, and if those same official sources have political, professional or

> financial reasons to understate the severity of the problem

> they're facing,

> isn't it true that the information you're relying on for Y2K reporting may

> be inaccurate?

>

> 10. Given that Y2K remediation costs have already exceeded the cost of the

> entire Vietnam War, with some organizations spending over a

> billion dollars

> on repairs, isn't Y2K already in the category of a huge, man-made crisis,

> even if no problems occur on January 1? Y2K remediation costs

> dwarf Savings

> & Loan bailouts, yet the S&L situation is, still today, called a

> "crisis" by

> publications like USA Today and the Washington Post. But S&L bailouts pale

> in comparison to the hundreds of billions already spent on Y2K.

> Why is a $6

> billion mistake called a "crisis" but a $600 billion global mistake called

> no big deal? Sources: USA Today:

> http://www.usatoday.com/news/court/nscot010.htm Washington Post:

> http://washingtonpost.com/wp- srv/politics/govt/fedguide/stories/fdic.htm

>

> 11. Why has no Fortune 1000 firm yet conducted full, end-to- end

> testing of

> the Y2K compliance of their computer systems? Earlier this year, the

> Pentagon held a test that John Koskinen called the largest test ever

> conducted on Y2K. Yet this test only involved 2% of the Pentagon's total

> systems. If this is truly the largest test ever conducted,

> doesn't this mean

> most organizations have probably only tested 1% of their systems?

> And if so,

> isn't this fact newsworthy?

>

> 12. Why, in early 1999, did the federal government drop over

> 3,200 computer

> systems from "mission critical" lists? And what happens if these

> previously-mission-critical systems are not fixed? Has your publication

> explained to its readers the significance of this subtle redefinition

> strategy and how it deceives the public by inflating "progress"

> statistics?

>

> 13. Why did NERC distribute a template "Y2K Ready Letter" with suggestive

> phrases and claims that companies could send back to NERC as part of their

> "independent" claims of Y2K readiness? Isn't this like giving out the

> answers right before the test? Source: Y2K Newswire:

> http://www.y2knewswire.com/archives/power/NercTemplate.pdf

>

> 14. If the IRS spent $4 billion over eleven years in a failed effort to

> revamp their computers, how can it possibly solve Y2K in just two

> years? And

> why hasn't the American press focused on the urgent issue of having a

> contingency tax system (like the national retail sales tax) in

> place, ready

> to roll, in case the IRS suffers critical problems?

>

> 15. Recently, NASA apparently lost yet another Mars probe due to unknown

> reasons. The last Mars probe was apparently lost due to a unit conversion

> error made by NASA personnel. If NASA scientists and programmers typically

> operate at ten times the accuracy of "regular" programmers, and yet they

> still manage to make mission-killing mistakes, why should the

> world believe

> that industry Y2K programmers won't make any such mistakes? At

> one point in

> 1998, Y2K "no big deal" commentators appeared on national television,

> explaining that the whole problem could be solved by recruiting welfare

> recipients to learn COBOL. This was reported as a genuine,

> credible strategy

> for solving the Y2K problem. Have you followed up on how many mission-

> critical systems have actually been remediated by welfare programmers? And

> if so, how likely are these systems to be error-free on January 1?

>

> 16. Auto manufacturers typically rely on well over ten thousand suppliers

> for critical parts. If 99% of these ten thousand suppliers are

> Y2K-compliant, doesn't that still mean one percent (one hundred

> suppliers),

> on average, may suffer failures? How will auto manufacturers

> build cars with

> only 99% of the parts? Why isn't this simple mathematical exercise being

> described to Americans?

>

> 17. The power plant that serves Santa Fe, New Mexico, has now announced

> there is a "high probability" that electricity will be cut off to the city

> on January 1. The city apparently hasn't yet funded the installation of a

> backup generator for the sewer system, either. What will happen

> to Santa Fe

> residents if power cannot be restored for a week and the sewers

> don't work?

> Is this a scenario for which citizens should continue to not prepare?

> Source: http://www.abqjournal.com/news/23news12- 02-99.htm

>

> 18. If Y2K is a non-event, why did our federal government spend

> $50,000,000

> on a Y2K command bunker? Why are cities like Boulder, Colorado deploying

> armed SWAT teams and "prisoner transport teams" on New Years Eve? Source:

> Sunday Camera, November 28, 1999, www.bouldernews.com

>

> 19. Throughout 1998, nearly every company claimed it would be Y2K

> compliant

> by December 31, 1998, "with a full year for testing." Can you

> name a single

> Fortune 1000 firm that achieved and announced full Y2K compliance on that

> day? What happened to the full year for testing? Is this an

> important missed

> deadline, or were all those companies lying when they said they needed a

> full year for testing?

>

> 20. If Venezuela, one of our nation's chief suppliers of imported oil, was

> 100% non-compliant in March, how can it be 100% Y2K-compliant

> today? How did

> this small nation apparently accomplish in ten months what has taken the

> Social Security Administration ten years to achieve? What will

> happen to our

> economy if Venezuela cannot export oil for thirty days?

>

> 21. We keep reading stories of little old ladies who were robbed

> after they

> withdrew cash from their banks. Can your publication produce a

> single police

> report that details such a robbery?

>

> 22. The Y2K compliance claims of the United States sound just like the

> claims from other countries: Italy, China, Russia, South Africa, even

> Jamaica. Every country says it is fine. Ilya Klebanov, for

> example, Russia's

> deputy prime minister, says, "We will pass quietly through 2000

> just like we

> have every other year. ...I think it's best not to scare the

> little children

> of Russia." How have you, as a journalist, determined where to

> draw the line

> between "countries that are lying" and "countries that are telling the

> truth?"

>

> 23. If the world's oil production is not at all threatened by Y2K, why has

> the International Energy Agency (IEA) drawn up plans for global

> rationing of

> oil reserves? Source: Reuters (London), November 30, 1999.

>

> 24. What will happen to our technology industry and dot-com stocks if

> computer parts shipments from Asia are disrupted because of Y2K problems

> there?

>

> 25. The White House says that all federal systems will work just fine, but

> smaller, local systems will experience problems. Yet we know, from

> experience, that the opposite is true: larger, more complex

> systems usually

> take longer to fix and have more post-remediation problems than smaller

> systems. Why hasn't your publication publicly questioned the contradiction

> in this official explanation?

>

> 26. As organizations in the United States purchased new equipment for Y2K,

> they sold much of the older, non-Y2K- compliant equipment to after-market

> importers in less-wealthy nations. This includes medical and

> telecommunications equipment. By doing this, isn't America actually

> exporting a Y2K crisis to nations that can least afford one? And

> won't this

> result in widespread international blame when people die in those

> countries

> as a result of, for example, failed medical devices? Doesn't this make Y2K

> an important foreign policy issue that should be addressed by the national

> media?

>

> 27. The White House says any Y2K problems that occur will be due to

> "overreaction by the people." Isn't this really an attempt to blame the

> public for a problem originally caused by the federal government's

> establishing the two-digit year standard in the first place?

>

> 28. If prepared people are less afraid, and only non-prepared people are

> likely to panic during a disruption, why has the federal government

> generally discouraged adequate Y2K preparedness? Isn't this ultimately

> contributing to the potential for panic? Why does the White House tell

> Americans to have half a tank of gas and not a full tank?

>

> 29. The Federal Reserve promises to pump nearly $200 billion in currency

> into the banking system in an effort to make sure banks don't run out of

> cash. There is more than enough to go around, we're told, so it's fine if

> people want to take out a few weeks' cash. If this is true, why are banks

> targeting the elderly, using fear tactics (stories of muggings) to prevent

> them from taking out their cash? If an elderly person remembers

> the crash of

> 1929 and the subsequent bank failures, isn't she acting rationally by

> protecting her life savings? And isn't it true that her actions don't

> threaten the system anyway because the Fed has delivered all this extra

> cash? Shouldn't banks try to make customers feel comfortable instead of

> fearful?

>

> 30. Why is it socially acceptable to buy fire insurance, car insurance and

> life insurance but not "food insurance" by having some extra food stored

> away? Through what mechanism did the Boy Scout motto, "Be prepared" become

> politically incorrect? Will Boy Scouts now be called extremists? Or will

> they be forced to change their motto to, "Be prepared, except for Y2K."

>

> 31. Why are Californians urged to have a two-week stockpile of

> supplies for

> earthquake preparedness, but only a three-day stockpile for Y2K? Should

> Californians throw out eleven days of supplies to be politically

> correct for

> Y2K?

>

> 32. If stock prices are based on rational, justifiable earnings per share,

> why is the NASDAQ exchange planning on running year-end

> advertisements that

> urge shareholders not to sell their stocks? If a company did

> this, wouldn't

> it be in violation of SEC regulations?

>

> 33. Why is virtually no member of the press asking Presidential candidates

> for their views on the Year 2000 problem?

>

> 34. If the banking industry is rock-solid, why does it seem to be

> terrified

> of radio and TV advertisements that poke fun at Y2K? Are we to

> believe that

> a humorous television advertisement can threaten our entire financial

> system? And if so, how strong a system is that to begin with?

>

> 35. If your publication is funded by advertisements from companies that

> would be financially harmed if you reported they were non-compliant, don't

> you have a clear-cut conflict of interest that prevents you from

> investigating their compliance? Have you explained this conflict

> of interest

> to your readers when you publish stories about Y2K?

>

> 36. Most publications in the United States rely on news wires from AP and

> Reuters. When you publish Y2K-related stories borrowed from these wire

> services, what percentage of the statements from AP and Reuters do you

> actually verify? For what percentage of the stories do you

> conduct your own

> investigations and add additional facts?

>

> 37. Many Year 2000 contingency plans rely on manual operations in case

> computer systems fail. Isn't there a gaping contradiction in the idea that

> everybody has been made more efficient by technology, but then we don't

> really need these computers because we can do it all by hand anyway?

> Furthermore, how will U.S. railroads go back to manual operations if the

> actual hand-thrown track switches have been removed? How will the IRS

> hand-write checks to million of taxpayers, as they have suggested

> they might

> do, if the refund database remains lost inside the crashed computers?

>

> 38. CCD Online Systems, a Y2K solutions provider, has offered to donate

> $50,000 to schools in the name of any of fourteen organizations on their

> "challenge list" that can pass an independent Y2K compliance test. If

> everyone is already Y2K compliant, as the public has been told, why has no

> organization on this list answered the challenge? Aren't they acting

> socially irresponsible by denying tens of thousands of dollars to our

> nation's children? Source:

http://www.ccdonline.com/en/News/t_press16_e.html