This is from the CANADIAN Y2K web site:

[reproduced for educational and discussion purposes only]

***************************************************************

Webmaster's Comment:

This is from csy2k. It appears that while Koskinen is telling us to prepare for a "bump in the road", he is telling industries to get ready for a *3 week* outage! Can anyone tell that this guy works for Clinton?

***************************************************************

Ko-skin-em has been telling industry insiders to prepare for _3 weeks_ of power outages!!! What has he been telling the public?

They aren't just liars, they are shit eating liars. And you have been feeding and clothing them and paying for their kids to go to swanky elite universities so that they can continue fleecing you for generations to come. You who work and produce and pay taxes, taxes from which 100% of their income derives, you to whom they literally owe their lives.

And they are not even sufficiently afraid of you to conjure up believable lies. If you and your family are to have any hope for a liveable future you must take charge of that future personally. you must do it now. while you still can.

NEWS from NIRS NUCLEAR INFORMATION & RESOURCE SERVICE 1424 16th St. NW Suite 404 Washington, DC 20036 202-328-0002 fax 202-462-2183 www.nirs.org nirsnet@nirs.org

August 25, 1999 For Immediate Release Contact: Mary Olson 202-328-0002

U.S. Federal Regulator Rejects Y2K Compliance as Standard for 103 U.S. Power Reactors

NRC Allows Potentially Untested Y2K "Fixes" in Nuclear Safety Related Systems

Will Rely on Chronically Unreliable Back-Up Power Systems With only 7 Days Back-Up Fuel

NRC Will Not Require Industry-wide Year 2000 Drill

Relying on narrow and confusing definitions, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has officially asserted its decision to exempt the nation's 103 large nuclear power reactors from a Y2K compliance standard. Y2K readiness is the NRC's choice which allows for work-arounds and other short cuts. Testing of systems to show Y2K readiness is suggested, but not required.

The agency goes further to assert that specific regulation for Y2K readiness is also not required.

At the heart of this move is the definition of safety. Although NRC is by law charged with providing "reasonable assurance of adequate public health and safety," when talking about nuclear reactors, they use the word 'safety' as a term of art. In this context NRC means specifically only the parts of the reactor that stop the nuclear chain reaction and put the reactor on stand-by. These systems are for the most part not computerized.

"The problem is that both Chernobyl and Three Mile Island are cases of events that happened with the reactor on-line, not during shut down. Taking TMI off line did not stop the nuclear fuel from melting. Some systems that were installed in U.S. reactors after Three Mile Island to increase the margin of safety have been shown to be susceptible to Y2K malfunctions," said Mary Olson, NIRS Nuclear Y2K Project Coordinator. "Our petitions would have required that all systems "relevant to safety" be assessed, remediated, and tested to show Y2K compliance. Aren't these systems more important than an automated teller machine?"

These moves came via a mismanaged release of information over the past week (August 17- 23). The Nuclear Regulatory Commission officially denied NIRS petitions for the establishment of new regulations to specifically address nuclear safety in the context of Y2K-related computer failures submitted last December.

NRC also struck down any requirement for an industry-wide Y2K drill to build worker and management readiness to cope with challenges which the roll-over to 2000 might bring. A limited drill is being planned by NRC and a handful of utilities.

"Perhaps most disturbing is the official rejection of our call to increase back-up power reliability at the nation's nuclear sites. Nuclear reactors depend on another source of electricity to insure that vital monitoring and cooling systems operate. These systems are essential, even if the reactor is off-line. Our research shows that back-up diesel generators are just not as reliable as people have a right to expect, given that Y2K failures may cause local and regional power outages," said Paul Gunter, Director of the NIRS Nuclear Reactor Watch Dog Project. "Diesel generators have mechanical failures, fuel problems, are prone to overheating, and in some cases, vulnerable to the Y2K Bug itself!"

"John Koskinen, Head of the President's White House Council on Year 2000 Transition, has been telling state officials that they should assume an electrical outage of three weeks duration as part of their contingency planning. While Koskinen is not asserting that such an outage will occur, shouldn't the nation's nuclear reactor operators also take this as the baseline for their contingency planning?" Said Mary Olson, NIRS Nuclear Y2K Project Coordinator. "Loss of off-site power and loss of back-up power, also called Station Blackout, is the single largest contributor of risk to reactor operation, according to NRC. What makes January 1, 2000 unique is that every reactor system in the country, and indeed, the world will be challenged on the same day."

NRC's rejection of NIRS petition on back-up power states that only 7 day's supply of diesel fuel is required to be at each reactor site.

An NRC press release announcing their action was posted prior to effective notification of NIRS or publication in the Federal Register. Coincidence or calculation timed this long-coming official rejection during NIRS well-publicized Nuclear Free Great Lakes and Northeast Action Camps when all NIRS Program staff were away.

Text of the original NIRS petitions is posted on http://nirs.org and the NRC response is available at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=1999_re http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=1999_register&docid=99-21751-filed gister&docid=99-21750-filed http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=1999_register&docid=99-21752-filed

. Citizens living near nuclear power stations around the world are mobilizing attention to these, forming the Y2K World Atomic Safety Holiday (WASH) Campaign. Leaders are reaching out to the 34 nations where the world's 433 nuclear power reactors operate. A Y2K WASH presence will be in Berlin during the G-8 meeting on Y2K contingency planning on September 21. A forum sponsored by Y2K WASH and the Nobel Prize winning International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War will address Y2K challenges to both nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons systems.

--NIRS--

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a37c4ac4d2b64.htm

Source: Nuclear Information & Resource Service Published: 8/25/1999 Author: Mary Olson, NIRS Nuclear Y2K Project Coordinator Posted on 08/25/1999 19:54:05 PDT by bryedge --

Nunja Biznec

"When the governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

Thomas Jefferson

Walter Lippmann wrote, "Millions will listen to, and prefer to believe, those who tell them that they need not rouse themselves, and that all will be well if only they continue to do all the pleasant and profitable and comfortable things they would like to do best."

"It is a disgrace that gets worse with every day that passes. And there's not a sound from anyone. Everyone's keeping his head down." - 1933 Victor Klemperer

" [T]he purpose of government is to rein in the rights of the people" -US President Bill Clinton, during an interview on MTV in 1993.

[ENDS]

For a huge collection of additional excerpts and quotes on Y2K, go to

the 'New World Order Intelligence Update' Y2K QUOTES page

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), November 09, 1999

Answers

More proof that not all the kooks live in the US. A one man site that hasn't been updated in two months - You Tinfoils must be getting deperate...

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), November 09, 1999.

Don't you just love bombasts who airily dismiss what they evidently haven't even read :)?

If you actually put yourself to the trouble of reading the intro page to that site, y2k pro, you'll note that the site owner says, quite reasonably, that he's done enough to help others at this point, that he's going to concentrate now on his own family and its needs, and that he's leaving the existing material online for others to utilize.

Or, as in the case of y2k pro, to mindlessly mock :).

The post wasn't about the site, but about Koskinen's warning [big clue, here, y2k pro, offered in compassion to the evidently clueless :)]

'Deperate'? That's a new one on me. Did you just make that word up yourself as an emergency stuffer to increase your post's nonsensical 'content' :)'?

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), November 09, 1999.

Y2K Pro is not a Y2k Pro.

He is a misinformed malcontent.

He spews meaningless and untrustworthy misinformation.

I sincerely hope he puts himself in close proximity to a nuclear power plant soon and stays there as an act of volition that proves he means what he says.

But he wont do that because he likes to TALK big,

but has NO COURAGE, FORTITUDE OR BRAVERY.

He would mislead others, lie to others and laugh.

His actions are despicable and disgraceful.

-- YouKnowWho (you@are.you.worm), November 09, 1999.

Well originally I heard this several places... including from Rep. Grindley in Atlanta, GA.

3 weeks... for the dot gov and civil service types. (At the least).

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 09, 1999.

Ignore the Pro-stitute. He is nothing more than a schill for Koski and his cronies. His death knell will ring shortly, have no fear.

More importantly, this thread should be read and analysed more for the shocking raelity of the two-facedness (Real word? ehh screw it!) of the current Administration and the puppets in it. Not as a Pro-Flame zone...Ever notice the important informational pieces that dissect and rip the heart out of the spin are ALWAYS used as a polly-Y2KPro-OK-Corral free-fire zone? All the shills wants to do is provoke a nasty response and destroy the integrity of the original posting...typical of the .gov. Wouldn't doubt in the least if the Pro was given a slot in the shelters after this happens....What was the price? 30 pieces of silver there Pro-Boy?

-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan@Yahoo.com), November 09, 1999.

Y2K Pro is so brain dead that he probably would deny that Kosky has been urging industry to stockpile several weeks of supplies while telling JQP 3 days. Try reading the paper moron.

-- a (a@a.a), November 09, 1999.

Dr. Polymorph says that Y2K Pro is a sexually frustrated hermaphrodite. I think he's right. Y2K Pro can't figure out how to get laid even when he has both parts right in front of him.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), November 09, 1999.

Hey mouth breather Whitley, "desperate" is a Tinfoil stooge excreting a spelling flame when he's caught with his pants down (again). Speaking of which, "bombasts" is not in my Oxford.

This guys site is based on one part rumor, two parts conjecture and one part hopeful TEOTWAWKI Tinfoil. Fart-catching crapola at its worst...

-- Y2K pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), November 09, 1999.

Ya know, Y2K Flo, if you'd get back to the avaiation remediation and quit jacking around here MAYBE Fedex, DHL, UPS etc would be able to deliver packages to Europe next January.

What say?

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), November 09, 1999.

Very revealing response, y2k pro. I've now just about managed to peg your IQ and maturity level [that's got to be a record LOW score for both!] in consequence.

And I actually thought that you were an ADULT...:)

Do all of your posts attain this high literary standard, or does the real you come out only like this when you're rattled?

['Bombasts' = plural of 'bombast' [one who exhibits bombastic behaviour]. Fits you to a 't', I'd say, but I try to avoid offending minors and the maturity-impaired.]

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), November 09, 1999.

Interesting for Yanks that CANADIAN sites and media have to be the ones reporting on a lot of this stuff.

Okay, now that THAT'S out of the way...

You know, Y2K Pro's momma is SO ugly.....

-- (Insert@punchline.here), November 09, 1999.

Whitley: You don't know when to give up do you? Let me rip another bunghole for you - Like most pompous twits who try to correct others on grammar usage, you have embarrassed yourself. Perhaps you meant bombast? Bombastically? Bombazine? I can assure you, there is no such word as "bombasts." Like your comprehension of Y2K, your understanding of the English language needs remediation. Why don't you scuttle off now and do whatever it is you're good at...

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), November 09, 1999.

Y2K Pro,

Why don't you embarass all these "doomers" and prove them wrong by pointing out why there is nothing wrong with Kosky saying BITR to the public while telling the business people to prepare for three weeks of power interruptions.

Show them you really are a PRO by not resorting to name calling or pointing out grammatical errors. I mean, if Klinton were to say tomorrow "Youse is all doomed" I don't think anyone would care about the grammatical error.

So show them all up. Let them know who the really intelligent, knowledgeable one is around here. Talk to us about Kosky's contradictory remarks. I mean, you're the man. You could do this easy, right? No sweat for a pro like you. Hey you go girl!

Really looking foward your making everyone else look silly.

(All flames to this signed Y2Kpro will be assumed to be imposters. He's too sharp to have to sink to that). Sic em Pro

-- thomas thatcher (jabawaki@erols.com), November 09, 1999.

yeah, right

-- thomas thatcher (jabawaki@erols.com), November 09, 1999.

Y2k pro:

Idiot! Check page 978 of Volume 1, A-O, of the Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary. Note the word "Bombast" in the top right hand corner of the page, then read the definition of it as the last entry on that page, It fits you exactly!

If you can claim that a perfectly sound and Oxford Dictionary-defined word doesn't even exist, what else are you capable of falsely claiming?

Do you lack integrity, or simple research skills? Or both?

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), November 09, 1999.

Dick breath:

There is no plural for bombast, is there? Case closed...

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), November 09, 1999.

Uh, Pro, bombast is a noun. I understand that some noun in some languages may be indeclinable, but in English, isn't it true that most nouns normally form the plural by adding 's'?

regards,

gene

-- gene (ekbaker@essex1.com), November 09, 1999.

Oh, by the way, I like you more in the chat room than I do on the boards.

gene

-- gene (ekbaker@essex1.com), November 09, 1999.

Note, y2k pro:

The is an entry under 'car' in the Oxford Dictionary.

There is, however, no entry for 'cars'.

According to your sadly deceptive 'reasoning', y2k pro, which I garher from other posters to this forum, characterises all of your comments, the word 'cars' does not therefore exist.

How unbelievably intellectually deficient you are :)! And in public, too!

It's usually a good rule of thumb that the mental incapacity of an individual can be measured in direct proportion to the coarseness of their epithets.

As also can, of course, the weakness of their arguments.

Weak head, weak argument. You finally got some balance in your life, y2k pro :). Congratulations! It's a start - not a big one, but a beginning, at least...

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), November 09, 1999.

Y2k Pro is a masochist. No other explanation for it.

-- (believer@itsclear.now), November 10, 1999.

Pro,

Nice try at attempting to prove your inherent moral superioriority. Too bad your natural repugnance got in the way, not to mention your lack of intelligence...

Coward.

-- Deb M. (vmcclell@columbus.rr.com), November 10, 1999.

Whitely: I'm sure you feel pleased that you have your entire Tinfoil retinue to provide you support, however, you (and they) are still wrong. Let me humiliate you further...

One car = car. Two or more are called cars.

Why? Cars are "things". Is "bombast" a thing? A person? A place? One behaves in a bombast fashion "bombastically" (meaning using extravagant language) precisely how does one behave in a "bombasts" fashion? It's meaningless - just like you

Next time you need a lesson in grammar or instruction on Y2k, call me. Next time I need advice on how to pull my head out of my ass, I'll give you a ring...twit... One behaves in a bombast fashion bombastically" (meaning using extravagant language) prescisely how does one behave in a "bombasts" fashion. It's meaningless. Not all nouns can be pluralised. Can they?

Next time you need a lesson in grammar or instruction on Y2k, call me. Next time I need advice on how to pull my head out of my ass, I'll call you...twit...

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), November 10, 1999.

Pro, I'm docking this week's pay $100.00

I pay you to debunk Y2K, NOT the English language.

What on earth was Jane smoking when she recommended you.... should've never listened to that twit.

-- J. Rendon (dude@with.contract), November 10, 1999.

And notice how the clever troll, Y2K Pro, has managed to completely steer the discussion AWAY from Koskinen's obvious two face act, and TO a discussion of irrelevant grammer.

Good work, Y2K Pro. You may yet replace double-Decker as this forum's cleverest troll.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), November 10, 1999.

My last post on the subject, y2k pro, since you seem too dense to absorb even the most obvious facts. I'll then leave the last word, no doubt a scatalogical as well as illogical one, to you :)

Let me give you a simple example, which just happens to come to mind fortuitously as I see your postings and watch your line of 'argument.' Take the word 'effeminate' or, as a completely separate example, 'queer'. One might term someone an 'effeminate individual'. Looking at your arguments and manner of expressing them, someone else for other reasons might term you a 'queer individual'.

It would then be a perfectly axcceptable usage in English to speak of an 'effeminate', or 'a gathering of effeminates'; or a 'queer', or 'a gathering of queers'; or even 'an effeminate queer.'

Don't take this personally, of course. It's purely illustrative :). Although I must say that some of your scatalogical references do make me wonder...

Anyway, back to the main side-issue. It is therefore perfectly legitimate to employ 'bombast' in precisely the same manner, and to render it in the plural if necessary. And to find it fitting you descriptively and exactly.

Okay, you can now have the last word. And don't forget that we'll be checking for bombastic [or 'effeminate', or 'queer', or whatever :)] scatalogical responses in your reply with particular interest now...

Everybody else: the 'Koskinen-warns-of-three-week-power-outages' thread resumes with these excellent links:

www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000Z4n

www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0011JW

www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0011fE

www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0013JO

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), November 10, 1999.

As Abraham Lincoln once said;"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt".That said pro,what do you think about discrepancies between Kosky's statements?

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), November 10, 1999.

hmmm....As Abraham Lincoln once said;"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt".That said pro,what do you think about discrepancies between Kosky's statements?

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), November 10, 1999.

Perfect solution to pollies. Zoobie, my hat is off to you. Imagine if everyone who ever responds to this guy again simply says "So you don't say? Gee, how about that? By the way what do you think of Kosky's contradicting statements? Constantly forced back to the point, my guess is he'd disappear pretty quick.

-- thomas thatcher (jabawaki@erols.com), November 11, 1999.

Hey PRO-

The URL below is a better and clearer example of the point I would like to make here.

I hope after reading it you will better understand how I and many others on this fourm feel. If you don't understand what it truly implies, I will be happy to explain it after you have read it.

I just skimed through it so I can't speek to any grammatical or spelling errors you may find there.

http://www.amishrakefight.org/gfy/

-- DOC (doc@...), November 11, 1999.