"So, of course I want to see y2k bring down the system, all over the world. I have hoped for this all of my adult life."

-- Gary North

An interesting place for newly minted GIs to attend, BEFORE they start spending money on Y2K preperations...

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), March 27, 1999

Answers

Link

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), March 27, 1999.

Perspective! Perspective! Perspective!

-- This (isnot@garynorthforumisit.com), March 27, 1999.

How many thousands of times does this point about Gary North need to be made ?

-- Blue Himalayan (bh@k2.y), March 27, 1999.

It is my experience that "well adjusted citizens" think like everyone else (by definition) and can't point out things that are not common- knowledge. Essentually, I feel it takes a "nut" (or genius) to see that which is not obvious.

Gary North isn't the only one who would like to see the "system" crash. Many (myself included) feel that the "system" is moving towards World Socialism, with the virtual elimination of religion and strict population/resource control.

-- Anonymous99 (Anonymous99@Anonymous.com), March 27, 1999.

I have been watching "Gary" for a # of years. He obviously has an agenda here based on his misconceptions of certain Biblical prophecies.

However, I don't see how what he thinks of y2k has any bearing on whether it is real or not. I became a GI before I ever found his website.

Many people I disagree with philosophically believe that y2k is real. I don't see the point here.

-- linda (whocaresGary@hotmail.com), March 27, 1999.

As y2kpro's e-mail address states, he is pro-moron. If you live within 5 miles of y2kpro you are an idiot!

-- SCOTTY (BLehman202@aol.com), March 27, 1999.

Faulty logic here. Gary North doesn't control the speed of Y2K remdiation or the dates when remediation started.

You don't need to expect Y2K will be a 10 to know it's prudent to do some 'personal contingency planning.'

-- (logic@observer.com), March 27, 1999.

What's your point Y2K Pro? Hardly anybody here even knows what Gary's politics are, let alone agree with them. What we do care about are the FACTS he posts on his site, backed-up with links.

This goes hand-in-hand with your "cult" view of this forum. I suggest that you seek professional help. You need a grip on reality. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), March 27, 1999.

They always kill the messenger.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), March 27, 1999.

Y2K Pro's my name, goading people's my game.

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), March 27, 1999.

Pro,

The issue of religion is of course, totally irrelevant, because I am not at all religous, and I have the same desires as Gary North. His statement indicates to me that he is an extremely intelligent human being. He operates on a level of awareness that I can only hope the rest of humanity will someday attain (though this appears doubtful). So there you go Lurkers, the Pro is right. This statement IS indicative of the "truth about Gary North", and how you perceive a statement such as this could ultimately determine the fate of humanity.

-- @ (@@@.@), March 27, 1999.

If it means the elimination of religion and strict population control, I'm For IT.

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), March 27, 1999.

Sysman,

You wrote: What's your point Y2K Pro? Hardly anybody here even knows what Gary's politics are, let alone agree with them. What we do care about are the FACTS he posts on his site, backed-up with links. This goes hand-in-hand with your "cult" view of this forum. I suggest that you seek professional help. You need a grip on reality. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), March 27, 1999.

Hi, Gary's FACTS are nothing but his "COMMENTS" (PERSONAL OPINION) backed up by snips of articles with links. You claim to care about his facts, his facts ARE HIS OPINION. GI He is extremely biased. He has his own agenda;

"So, of course I want to see y2k bring down the system, all over the world. I have hoped for this all of my adult life." -- Gary North

-- don't like gn (gn@no.good), March 27, 1999.

Anon 99,

You are a very small part of this forum. You are one of the people that give it a BAD NAME. NWO CULTIST.

-- YUK (peddle@somewhere.else), March 27, 1999.

I do not share Gary North's religion nor politics. I do believe that he is much closer to the truth about Y2K that the likes of Clinton, Ko-skin-en, Federal Reserve Governor Edward Kelley, and thousands of CEOs who are saying everything will be OK.

-- Incredulous (ytt000@aol.com), March 27, 1999.

Gilda, you said "If it means the elimination of religion and strict population control, I'm For IT."

In your case, making birth control retroactive would get my vote.

-- whodat (messin@my.religion), March 27, 1999.

and there goes sissyman again, feuding wit the 'trolls'. YOU BAD! YOU DA MAN! (..... all 285 lardy pounds of ya.....)

-- BigBadTrolls (GNBFI@GNBFI.com), March 27, 1999.

Never wrestle with a pig. You'll both get dirty and the pig will love it.

-- (old@macdonald.farm), March 28, 1999.

don't like gn - I take Gary's comments with a grain of salt. I use his site for information, the same as I do with this site, Sanger's, euy2k and a half-dozen others, including Yahoo.

And to whoever thinks I'm the JavaScript fiend, forget it, it's not my style. I've never posted here as anyone other than Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com). Kinda wish I did this one though... Ha ha ha ha haaaa as Mutha would say! <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), March 28, 1999.

Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

-- Dilbert (got@it.gov), March 28, 1999.

"If you've read all 70,000+ messages on this forum and concluded that, to the best of your knowledge and experience, Y2K is going to be a non-event (aka bump in the road, winter-snowstorm, or whatever the phrase du jour happens to be), then it seems to me that you might as well say to yourself, "Well, I may be wrong, and I may rue the decision a few months from now, but I've decided that I don't have to pay attention to Y2K." And at that point, it seems to me that you should bid adieu to the forum and go back to whatever you were doing beforethe ongoing arguments about whether Y2K is going to be a "0" versus a "10" on the scale are getting pretty boring at this point" Ed Yourdon

-- Wanda (lonevoice@mailexcite.com), March 28, 1999.