SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ken Salaets who wrote (3705)2/6/1999 3:10:00 AM
From: John Mansfield  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 9818
 
'I'm one of the MMP participants (it's why I'm booked on so many radio
shows) -- I received this today from the booking project director
which I'm sure the list would like to also read -- it is addressed to
a wide public. (That which I'm reprinting here; the part "snipped"
has nothing to do with the subject matter at hand--it only dealt with
radio booking issues.)

--Roleigh

Dear Mainstream Media Project Campaign Participants,

Michael Kraig, a participant in the Y2K campaign, is doing some
important research on the problems of preparing the world's nuclear
infrastructure for the new millennium. Enclosed is a letter from him
asking for assistance from any of you who may have useful contacts or
information to offer.

[snip]

Mark Sommer
Director

**********

A Letter from Michael Kraig, Scoville Fellow, BASIC

I am heading a project on Y2K and nuclear weapons arsenals at the British
American Security Information Council (BASIC) in Washington, DC, and
London, United Kingdom. We just released a first report on the nature of
the "Millennium Bug," or "Y2K Problem," as it relates to the Department of
Defense and nuclear operations. The report summarizes the generic computer
problem, the state of existing DoD Y2K remediation programs (including
their many management deficiencies and failures), and possible Y2K
vulnerabilities for nuclear weapons and associated nuclear operations,
including especially Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence
(C3I) systems (i.e., warning satellites, radar arrays, data storage and
correlation centers, communications nodes, and so on). It also outlines
some general policy alternatives in the conclusion, such as the reduction
of our alert rates from "launch on warning" to a lower state of readiness
(also known as the "de-alerting" of nuclear forces). The entire text
(including endnotes) can be found on BASIC's web page, www.basicint.org.

I have sent the report to the key staffers of all house members and
senators with nuclear warhead storage or deployment in their own backyard,
as well as majority and minority staffers on the Armed Services Committee
in the Senate. Reports have also gone to some key committee staffers (for
instance, one person on Stephen Horn's Y2K subcommittee in the House, which
has given "D" grades to the DoD on their Y2K repair progress), and all
members of the Senate's Special Committee on the Year 2000 Problem. To
support these mailings, we have had several meetings with the offices of
Senators Jeff Bingaman, Robert Kerrey, John Kerry, Daniel Patrick Moynihan,
Pete Dominici, Tom Harkin, Joseph Lieberman, and Christopher Dodd. Our
hope is that senators such as Bob Kerry of Nebraska and Tom Daschle of SD
-both of whom are recommending "de-alerting" of the arsenals and unilateral
cutbacks- will add Y2K to their agenda, or possibly use it to gain
leverage with US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) in Omaha, Nebraska. In the
past several years, both STRATCOM and civilian nuclear planners in the
Office of Secretary of Defense have scuttled any attempts to consider
de-alerting options.

Helen Caldicott, currently head of the STAR Foundation (Standing for Truth
about Radiation) and former head and founder of the Physicians for Social
Responsibility, is putting together a symposium jointly with BASIC and the
Nuclear Information Resource Service (NIRS) in March with Bruce Blair, Ted
Taylor, myself, and multiple experts on the domestic, or energy, side of
nuclear power. Our policy goal is twofold: to get Congress to 1) charge
the DoD Inspector General to do a series of highly specific reports on
individual "high risk" nuclear systems, including nuclear C3I, and 2) to
move ahead on de-alerting (or at the very least, consider it as a realistic
policy option).

The General Accounting Office (GAO) has done, and is doing, reports on DoD
procedures, test data, contingency planning, and so on for its remediation
program, but no one at the GAO is preparing narrowly focused reports on
critical nuclear systems. In other words, the activity at this point is at
least one step removed from the actual sources of potential trouble.

If you are interested in this program or have your own suggestions for
action, please contact me at (202) 785-1266 or mkrai-@basicint.org. John
Pike of the Federation of American Scientists has suggested, for instance,
that CPSR get 40 to 50 top computer scientists to write a letter to
congress containing clearly defined goals and policy alternatives,
including the tasking of Inspector General reports as well as more
technical advice from the field.

As a last note, I should say that BASIC is pretty much alone on this issue.
Most expert analysts currently have other well funded programs, and thus,
other responsibilities for the foreseeable future. Other than appearing in
the joint STAR-BASIC-NIRS symposium in March, or keeping an updated web
page, no one seems to be devoting time or resources to the topic. I have
been looking for ways to split the research pie, as I cannot possibly cover
all facets of DoD-STRATCOM nuclear operations. If you know of someone who
could help on nuclear weapons, either in terms of original research or as a
source of technical information for nuclear C3I and/or launch platform
support systems, I would be very grateful.

Sincerely,
Michael R. Kraig mkrai-@basicint.org
Scoville Fellow (202) 785-1266
BASIC
1900 L St. NW, Suite 401
Washington, DC 20036

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

Roleigh Martin ourworld.compuserve.com
( easy to remember alias is: webalias.com )
(A Web Site that focuses on Y2k threat to Utilities, Banks & more)
To subscribe to free e-letter, fill in the form at the bottom of the page:
ourworld.compuserve.com
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe" message to
roleigh_for_web-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Print out this Y2K brochure to give to your neighbors, friends & relatives:
ourworld.compuserve.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create an e-mail group for your college reunion. Help & Info




To: Ken Salaets who wrote (3705)2/6/1999 3:12:00 AM
From: John Mansfield  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 9818
 
'Another good posting at CBN News Y2K Insights...


cbn.org
CBN News Y2K Insights

February 5, 1999

Bruce Webster's Response To The Initial Report Of Secretary Glickman's Testimony On The Food Supply

(Bruce Webster-Washington DC Year 2000 Group)

After the first AP wire story came out this morning about Agriculture Secretary Glickman's testimony on Y2K and the food
supply, Bruce Webster, co-founder of the Washington DC Year 2000
Group sent out this e-mail. He gave me permission to reproduce it
here.

Drew Parkhill



An AP wire item this morning led with the following paragraph:
"Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman says it is unlikely the Year 2000 computer problem will cause widespread food shortages,
partly because few U.S. farmers use high-tech systems that might
be susceptible."

I would like to see Sec'y Glickman's entire testimony, but the nature of the article makes it appear that this is his major
focus. If so, then I am left with some concern about his grasp of
the problem for at least three reasons. First, the statistics
cited don't distinguish between the total # of farmers and which
farms (e.g., agribusiness) produce the majority of food (and
which are more likely to be automated). Second, the use of
high-tech systems by US farmers isn't a big concern anyway, since
many (if not most) will have a few months to get things fixed
before spring plantings occur. Third, the news item (which may
unfairly condense Sec'y Glickman's testimony) does little to
address the following areas of concern (cited in my book, pp.
216-217):

* Production and delivery of agricultural chemicals, including fertilizers and pesticides

* Production and delivery of hybrid seeds

* Production, delivery, and operation of farm equipment, including spare parts, fuel, and lubricants

* Computer and embedded systems control of irrigation systems and storage facilities

* Interruption of power, water, natural gas, phone, or other services to farms, food processing companies, warehousing firms,
and grocery stores

* Difficulty of farmers getting loans due to banks' own Y2K problems as well a general recession

* Interruptions and delays in transportation systems, especially trains

* The whole spectrum of Y2K problems within food processing firms, especially embedded systems within the food processing
equipment

* Y2K problems in transportation, communication, and storage in the food warehousing and grocery store network

This list alone should be enough to underscore that the possibility of Y2K-induced shortages and/or price hikes at the
local supermarket isn't far-fetched. We see such shortages and
price jumps now when bad weather or natural disasters impacts
crops, when food producers renegotiate prices, or when labor
disputes disrupt the normal grocery supply chain. There's no
reason why Y2K's impact should be any different.

Sec'y Glickman does appear to concede that Y2K problems outside the US (e.g., South America) could impact the availablity of
fresh fruits and vegetables during the winter months. What he
doesn't appear to address is the impact of those same
problems--in all the forms listed above--on global food
production and what the rest of the world will need to eat in
2000, and how that will impact the US as well.

My personal opinion is that food shortages within the US will not be serious and will probably be somewhat random. My concern with
Sec'y Glickman's testimony is that he apparently focuses on a
relatively minor and irrelevant aspect (how many farmers use
computer systems) and does not seriously address the broad
spectrum of more likely and serious Y2K issues with domestic and
global food production. This suggests that he either doesn't
understand them or is avoiding them.

I also find it interesting to see the quote about "needless and frivolous stockpiling of supplies" in light of recommendations
from FEMA and the Red Cross about Y2K emergency preparedness,
including food storage. As someone who personally has had to live
off of "stockpiled supplies" both due to natural disasters (the
Loma Prieta quake in 1989) and extended underemployment while
shifting careers (back in 1988-89), I find nothing needless or
frivolous about it as a standing approach to personal and family
preparedness, much less when facing some of the unaddressed
uncertainties about Y2K. It just makes sense. ..bruce..

[Bruce F. Webster is Co-chair of the Washington D.C. Year 2000 Group and has testified three times before Congress on the Y2K
issue. His testimony and the list of Y2K food issues above can be
found in _The Y2K Survival Guide: Getting To, Getting Through,
and Getting Past the Year 2000 Problems_ (Prentice-Hall, 1999,
ISBN 0-13-021496-5). Webster is Chief Technical Officer of Object
Systems Group and is based out of Dallas, TX.]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roleigh Martin ourworld.compuserve.com
( easy to remember alias is: webalias.com )
(A Web Site that focuses on Y2k threat to Utilities, Banks & more)
To subscribe to free e-letter, fill in the form at the bottom of the page: ourworld.compuserve.com
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe" message to
roleigh_for_web-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Print out this Y2K brochure to give to your neighbors, friends & relatives:
ourworld.compuserve.com





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create an e-mail group for your dormitory. Help & Info




To: Ken Salaets who wrote (3705)2/6/1999 3:15:00 AM
From: John Mansfield  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 9818
 
'This is slightly old but I wanted to make sure I have this piece known to readers of my web site. I remember reading it
earlier but I don't think I made a pointer to it at the time. What is significant about this piece are the quotes by the President's Y2K Czar and Senator Bennett. Koskinen's quote
provides "philosophical agreement" backing to the assertion in the World Net Daily's piece that in the event of a neighboring region/state loosing electricity that the government would enforce rationing of electricity to the successful area to
share with the downed area. Actually, I think this philosophy
is totally and morally justifiable and I basically support it but what bothers me is that they're going about it in a back- handed way. I think it is best to be forthright about it so
that businesses and individuals realize that they're not really "home scott free" unless all critical infrastructure elements in a multi-state neighboring region have their act together other- wise rationing will take place. It will be less hard on home
owners than businesses, if there is the situation of four hours on, four hours off, etc., for one's home won't freeze in four hours. (I'm just making up these four hour intervals, I have no
idea how the rationing would be time-intervaled but I bet it's so that homes don't freeze in the interim.)

--Roleigh


wired.com
wired.com

Wired News

Bankers: Prepared for a Panic?
by Declan McCullagh

4:50 p.m. 3.Dec.98.PST

[snip]

Koskinen said the government would be moving from contingency planning to a crisis-management phase.

Responding to a question about electrical-power failures, Koskinen said, "In a crisis and emergency situation, the free
market may not be the best way to distribute resources.... If
there's a point in time where we have to take resources and make
a judgement on an emergency basis, we will be prepared to do
that."

Other trends could make the outlook more dismal. Companies like General Motors -- whose chief information officer has called Y2K
"catastrophic" -- are likely to stockpile supplies and "set us up
for a classic inventory recession," Bennett predicted.

The "urge to stockpile just to be safe is going to hit everyone, " he said, citing the fact that people keep asking him what his
own Y2K plans are. "If I dig up my backyard and put in a propane
tank, that won't look very good. I have a nephew who is doing
that, by the way."

[snip]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roleigh Martin ourworld.compuserve.com
( easy to remember alias is: webalias.com )
(A Web Site that focuses on Y2k threat to Utilities, Banks & more)
To subscribe to free e-letter, fill in the form at the bottom of the page: ourworld.compuserve.com
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe" message to
roleigh_for_web-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Print out this Y2K brochure to give to your neighbors, friends & relatives:
ourworld.compuserve.com





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Create an e-mail group for your class. Help & Info