An Open Letter to John Koskinen and his Reply : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

This was posted on the Community Conversations list.

Dear Mr. Koskinen:

Thank you for participating in yesterday's teleconference. I know we all appreciate both your input and listening. I am writing because I believe we still have a giant gulf between us which is difficult for me to understand. I would like to take the liberty of asking you a question which I hope may bridge that gap for me and for others. (Note: I am not speaking for the group. I am doing this as a personal initiative.)

I would like to ask you the following: How is it, that we can all read the same information about the Year 2000 Conversion and yet come up with very different (ie optimistic/pessimistic) projections for the future? How do you account for this difference?

To help in answering this, it is important to convince us that your optimistic perspective is based on the reality of the situation, and not on hopeful thinking! Could you list your principal reasons (and sources) for such an optimistic outlook? Such information would help all of us understand your position better-- and perhaps even change our own perspective!

To help you understand our position, the following is a list of some of the main reasons why, I believe, Y2K presents a grave threat to the safety and welfare of the American people-- and the world at large. It would be helpful if you could respond to each of these points, explaining if you agree or disagree with these statements. If you agree, please explain why you still adhere to your perspective of optimism in that case. Then, if you take all these points cumulatively, do you still honestly believe-- in your gut-- that "interruptions are expected to be short-lived, like temporary problems in service caused by storms, and while inconvenient, are not expected to cause long-term problems" as you are telling the American public? (From Y2K Preparedness Checklist)

Reasons for grave concern: 1) We are inextricably interconnected to the global economy (eg banking, communication, trade). To say that everything is ok in our country is like saying: "We don't have leaks on our side of the boat". Our economy and wellbeing cannot be seen in isolation from the rest of the world.

2) As for the other side of the boat: most third world countries and many developed countries will not be ready. These countries supply us with critical raw materials, spare parts, oil and other essential goods and services. (See Senate Reports for more details.)

3) The shipping industry, affecting international trade, is also lagging way behind. (See Senate Reports)

4) No one knows what effect faulty embedded chips (especially those that are inaccessible) will have on critical systems until the date change. (See Senate Reports)

5) Most companies have concentrated on remediating their mission critical systems. There is a lack of information on the readiness of their non-critical systems which constitute from 5 to 10 times the number of critical systems. "The collective confusion of tens of thousands of secondary systems failing could be catastrophic." (House Majority Leader, Dick Armey)

6) "Some problems will be missed; new problems will be inadvertently introduced via the remediation process; even the best test programs may not detect all potential errors; uncertainty will remain up to and after January first. In other words, it is inevitable there will be Y2K disruption, although it's not possible to predict how serious or widespread this disruption will be." (From report of Bank for International Settlements, Basel, Switzerland)

7) Many of us have grave concerns regarding the safety of nuclear plants, not only in terms of computer problems, but also if power is disrupted, especially for extended periods. This is not just an issue involving the United States, but worldwide-- Russia in particular because we know they are not ready. The potential fallout could have devastating consequences for life on this planet.

8) It is generally acknowledged that the Year 2000 Conversion may be used as a window for cyber-terrorists to bring down critical systems (eg power stations, State Dept) in the United States and elsewhere through computer viruses. Even if a system claims to be compliant, it is still vulnerable to viruses. (The remediation process has been the perfect opportunity to plant them.)

9) Locally, reports state that these areas will not be ready by January first. The following information is from a recent analysis by Warren Bone: Year 2000 Facts, Forecasts, and Areas of Concern (October 28, 1999). I have included references (note: 7 are from your office).

--40% of small businesses (1) 15 million to 24 million small businesses in the U.S (6) They generate more than half the nation's Gross Domestic Product. (5)28% plan to do nothing at all (2)Potentially 8,000,000 or more may be forced to close (50% of the private workforce).(4)

--48% of large businesses (10) 81% are still not ready.(9) 92% rank the need for independent Y2K verification/validation as high.(11) Half the large companies do not have a contingency plan.(13)

--25% of counties (also don't have Year 2000 plans) (14) 63% of "911" call centers (mostly run by local governments) will not be ready.(15)

--60% of healthcare providers (including doctors) (16) 15% of healthcare providers have done nothing.(17)

--70% of schools and colleges (18)

--87% of small to medium sized chemical companies

--The federal government (including SS, IRS, Medicaid, Medicare) (19)

--75% chance of a major deflationary recession worldwide (43).

In trying to understand this problem of perspective, I wonder if it is not so much a matter of selecting facts to back up our positions, than the lens through which we see them. For instance, most government strategy is based on traditional thinking which, in this case, focuses on short-term, compartmentalized and isolated compliance/disruption possibilities-- tending to create a more optimistic outlook. (As an example, the rosy statement that all the major electrical utilities are ready-- but what about their sources of power, like oil and gas? And the effect of failure of smaller utilities?) If instead one focused on the long term and broader, interconnected consequences of disruptions, the outlook is far less rosy. (As an example of the broken link on the chain, the lack of one spare part can shut down the operations of a whole company eg GM.)

Furthermore, we all know the influence of corporations on government policy. I would hate to think that, in this situation, the government is more concerned about protecting the welfare of corporations than the welfare of the American people.

Finally, the government also tends to be reactive, using "fix-on-fail" strategies, which, when unexpected disruptions occur, will create the panic that the government has so desperately wanted to forestall. If the United States government truly cares about the wellbeing of the American people, it will have based its action plans on the worst-case scenarios-- in order to_prevent_ (vs react to) disasters and hardships, if not loss of life.

As the Y2K leader of the United States, you must bear the enormous responsibility and burden for the welfare of all American citizens if serious disruptions occur and they are not prepared. I do not envy your position. I know you are trying to do the job that you have been asked to do, to the best of your ability.

I would like to re-iterate a question that I asked on the teleconference: In view of the fact that the American public is not taking preparedness seriously, and that we all seem to be in agreement that this is a situation that needs immediate attention, what do you plan to do in addition to what you have already done (I think we can also agree that these past efforts have have failed their mission in this respect) so that Americans will take the Year 2000 Conversion seriously and start to prepare for at least a week or longer?

The issue of panic at this point is irrelevant. We are concerned here with the safety and wellbeing of the American people. I believe that nothing less than a public announcement in the form of a Fireside Chat by the President of the United States could begin to move Americans out of the complacency which the government is largely responsible for. Why not focus on the need to prepare for any type of emergency, not just Y2K? (Perhaps bringing in the factor of cyber-terrorists could be the necessary fulcrum of transition.)

Y2K will not be just a bump in the road. You know this, we know this. We look to you and our President for leadership and guidance, in trust that you will help bring us all safely through this impending crisis through courage, truth, foresight and wisdom. I ask that you hear my plea, and those of all the others who are gravely concerned about this urgent issue and are doing what they can, in the face of enormous odds, to help prepare their communities. Please act now, for the sake of all of us.


Lysa Leland Cape Ann Community Preparedness Project Gloucester MA

1. National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion, 100 Days to Y2K

2. Ibid.

4/5. David Myron, Y2K Looms Over Small Business (VARBusiness, September 27, 1999)

10/11. Cap Gemini America--September 22, 1999.

9/13. CIO Magazine News Bureau, Y2K Experts Poll Exposes Incompletion and Complacency (Press release, September 30, 1999.

14/15/16/17/18/19. President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion,

100 Days to Y2K: A Resource Guide for Small Organizations (

43. Dr. Edward Yardeni, Chief Economist & Global Investment Strategist, Deutsche Bank, Alarmist Shrugs (The Y2K Reporter, October 11, 1999. Also: Yardeni, Reassessing Y2K Recession Odds (February 22, 1999.

John Koskinen's Reply:

Mr. Koskinen does not receive messages posted to this list. As before, I have passed this along to him. His response follows.

Steve Davis


Dear Ms. Leland,

Since I am not a member of the list serve on which you posted your open letter to me, I appreciate Steve Davis's forwarding it on to me. I too enjoyed the discussion yesterday and the format which I think allowed the participants the opportunity to discuss their concerns in more detail.

With regard to your question about how can some of us come to such different conclusions on the basis of the same information, all I can tell you is that I've read all of the materials cited in your letter. I have also read every industry report for the past year, which are available to the public as well and which you did not cite, as well as all the government reports. I have also sat in on numerous working group meetings of the Council as well as a set of White House Roundtables focused with experts and members of the public on pharmaceutical, medical surgical and food supply systems, public safety, public transit, the internet, chemical manufacturing, higher education and elementary and secondary education.

On the basis of all that information, which we have shared with the public, we have issued a series of quarterly reports, the last of which will be released next week. Those reports, contrary to stated views of some, have never stated that there were no risks or problems to be addressed. We have consistently listed those concerns and will do so next week as well. The difference I seem to have with some of those on our conference call is with the fact that I have seen no information -- as opposed to speculation and assertions -- that demonstrates that the basic infrastructure of the United States will not function effectively as we move into the New Year. As I have noted as recently as my testimony yesterday, that does not mean that there won't be glitches along the way and it certainly doesn't mean that people shouldn't be prepared. I put into the hearing record yesterday our checklist and in my testimony stressed that people should be prepared -- and should be prepared early. If you would like, my testimony is on our web site as our last quarterly assessment will be next week.

With regard to the interconnected linkages within our economy and with the rest of the world, there is no doubt, as we have noted on many occasions, that failures should be expected abroad, especially in developing countries. However, contrary to Mr. Yardeni, who is a thoughtful and experienced economist, the overwhelming majority of economists do not see a noticeable negative effect on our economy from failures abroad, primarily because the bulk of our trade and travel are with developed countries who are doing very well. Several weeks ago I asked the Commerce Department to review all of the materials and their own economic information and models and report on their expectations in terms of the economic affects of the Y2K issue on the American economy. They expect to release that report -- which has been prepared independently -- in the next two weeks. We will relese it to the public and you and others will be able to consider its conclusions.

I appreciate the seriousness of purpose many of you have about the year 2000 issue but you have to understand that I view my responsibilities to the public just as seriously. As I have noted on many occasions, we are not managing just to get through December 31. We will all be here during the first quarter of next year and are prepared to be held accountable for our stewardship of the public trust.


John A. Koskinen


-- ExCop (, November 08, 1999


"We will all be here during the first quarter of next year and are prepared to be held accountable for our stewardship of the public trust. "

Does this mean slots are still open for being a member of the Firing Squad? Dibs on one slot!!!

-- Billy Boy (, November 08, 1999.

Here's my question to John Koskinen:

If you are wrong about your assessment of the seriousness of y2k and people die as a result of your negligence are you willing to stand in front of a court of law and if found guilty accept your punishment??

Steve Davis, would you be kind enough to forward this question to John Koskinen and post his answer here, thanks in advance.


-- Ray (, November 08, 1999.

Sorry, maybe I am looking at this and missing it, but can anyone tell me what are the dates for both letters? Obviously this is very recent.

-- (normally@ease.notnow), November 08, 1999.

"The difference I seem to have with some of those on our conference call is with the fact that I have seen no information -- as opposed to speculation and assertions -- that demonstrates that the basic infrastructure of the United States will not function effectively as we move into the New Year."

*Speculation and assertions*

It depends on whose speculations and assertions one decides to believe doesn't it?

He clearly has an agenda which precludes considering these questions to be relevant; as well as, the embedded issue that Paula Gordon brought forward previously.

(beep) (beep) (beep)

rollin' over to hit the

-- snooze button (, November 08, 1999.

"I have seen no information -- as opposed to speculation and assertions -- that demonstrates that the basic infrastructure of the United States will not function effectively as we move into the New Year."

This looks to me like laywer speak for - we will have power for at least the first few days. No mention is made at all for what happens AFTER we are deep into the New Year.

Prediction - we will have power through that first weekend. All the sh!t which comes down after that will be blaimed on cyber terrorists. It is the only way these guys can avoid massive law suits.

-- Dolma Lhamo (I', November 08, 1999.

"But, but, but....I was just following orders!" Get a rope! How many will die because of this bastard and his cohorts? In my own small circle we have a Home Health nurse telling all her elderly patients that "they need not worry, don't need extra cans of soup, leave your money where it is. Its just a big hoax". Magnify her by thousands who have influence over the poor and the infirm and tell me no one is going to die! How many freeze to death on our city streets now. How many will freeze this winter? Where will the poor and the homeless go when all the middle class are occupying the shelters? The whole thing just sickens me. Y2K is bad enough, without Herr Koskinen lying. I am not a religious sort of person, but if there is a God, He will condemn Koskinen's soul to hell.


-- Taz (, November 08, 1999.

Remember-there are no experts on this forum. Mr. Koskinen mentioned "assertions and speculations," in his reply. In my estimation, there has been nothing new revealed to me in this forum in some time. People come on this forum, read all the posts and threads, and then re-hash them repeatedly. Objectivity, clear thinking, and reason seem to fall by the wayside. Since there are no experts here, what I say, and what all others add, should be indeed taken with a grain of salt. The time has passed to keep re-hashing. I made up my mind a long time ago about this issue, decided what to do about it, and have focused my thoughts on other things, such as trying to start a family, my new job that starts Monday, finishing my knee rehab, and helping my in-laws move out of their house. In other words, I will be prepared to the level I believe in, but have also tried to move on and plan my post-Y2K life. Anyone think I'm wacky for thinking this way?? Probably. Sometimes I wonder what some folks on this forum will do for intellectual stimulation when the dust settles, Y2K has passed, and we are forced to move with our unremarkable, everyday lives. By the way, this is my real e-mail address. Any comments will be answered, hostile or friendly.

-- Larry Goldberg (, November 08, 1999.

The thing that sickens me is that when they scream "CYBER- TERRORISTS!" next year,(and they will),the sheeple are going to say "Oh yeah THATS what it was,all those people DIED because of the INTERNET!,we must have controls on the internet established now! All those "doomers" THEY did this!! etc...

I believe the likes of Koskinen,Clinton et al will get off scott free by doing what they have ALWAYS done.... LIED

-- matt (, November 08, 1999.

Sorry guys, I am not Steve Davis. I participate as a member of the Community Conversations Y2K list where this was posted and I thought poeple would be interested to see it. Steve Davis can be contacted at

-- ExCop (, November 08, 1999.

Here are the date/time stamps for the above letters I posted

Subject: An open letter to Mr. Koskinen Author: Lysa Leland at Internet Date: 11/5/99 1:54 PM

Subject: Re: An open letter to Mr. Koskinen Author: Steve Davis at Internet Date: 11/5/99 4:53 PM

-- ExCop (, November 08, 1999.


Nothing wrong with your approach. Nothing whatsoever in my view. There are no experts on this site? Probably not [at least the way I use the term]. Are there any experts anywhere? Not as I see the problem. It is not just a systems problem. It is a collection of systems problems. Interacting systems. I have no idea what will happen over the first 6 months of next year. I wouldn't try to guess. That is the only thing that I can add to the discussion. Not much is it. I know that the problem is real in my own little world and I will try to fix that part. I know that our mainframes are experiencing problems [as we speak]. Could be real problems or not. We will really have to wait and see.

Best wishes

-- Z1X4Y7 (, November 08, 1999.

Pardon me, but where are the hard, concrete answers from Mr. Koskinen in reply to the statistics listed and footnoted by Ms. Leland? All I read in Mr. Koskinen's letter was more PR spin. If the pollys are looking for facts from the doomers, I suggest we ask Mr. Koskinen to provide them as w

-- CD (, November 08, 1999.

"The difference I seem to have with some of those on our conference call is with the fact that I have seen no information -- as opposed to speculation and assertions -- that demonstrates that the basic infrastructure of the United States will not function effectively as we move into the New Year."

Did I miss something, but I thought all future predictions and future plans were based on "speculation and assertions". Facts are only in the past, not future. This guy is slick, because we have no facts proving what will happen, your speculation does not count for anything because we do not like your set of assertions, but our speculations and assertions are on the money for we choose them over yours. Remember, this is the bunch that tells us that all truth is relative.

It is time for me to go out the the hen house and shovel out some real stuff.

-- chicken farmer (chicken-farmer@, November 08, 1999.

I also have a question for Mr.Koskinen.....

"Are you capabple of ANSWERING a question?"

-- John Beck (, November 08, 1999.

Remember, Koskinen told Paula Gordon that he would not apply common sense to the issue of embedded systems in order to extrapolate problems, he would only react to known problems.

-- Brooks (, November 08, 1999.

No. Mr. Koskinen is not willing or able to answer questions. I was on that phone call too.

He is a PR man and nothing else. His mission is to prevent panic and he has succeeded.

I told him a while ago that I would hold him personally responsible if people died because his message tells them everything is OK.

No. I have no way of enforcing this, but I will do everything in my power to remind everyone that "they" could have told us the truth.

The truth is that "it will NOT be business as usual"

And I am an expert. I have done enough programming and data conversions to know that the magnitude of the job to be done and the amount of time allocated to doing it do not match. There is simply not enough time!

Maybe I don't fit this forum's definition of an expert, but anyone who stops and thinks knows that programming projects that were planned well in advance are almost always late.

Much of Y2K work was not planned well in advance. Will it be done on time? NO, NO, NO and HELL NO!!!!!

-- Sally Strackbein (, November 08, 1999.

I appreciate the fact that he replied: but he evaded the point by stating ONLY that the "basic infrastrucutre" is sound.

Sorry - he has not addressed (deliberately ?) the remaining points of your (original) letter: the failure of local and state governments, the interconnected failures of the power/telecom/satellite/natural gas/pteroleum/financial/banking/securities/credit card/ATM networks.

As proven by the single flooded basement in NJ that knocked out systems nationawide - not all, but not all of the East Coast had to flood either to knowck out services as far west as OR and WA.

Or the single software error that wiped out MCI for over 10 days. Or the satellite that wiped out ATM's last summer. Or the SFO power failure where one transformer took out a region. Or the damage in Chicago that wiped out the Baord of trade for over a week.

Sorry - his "conclusions" are NOT based on fact, nor extrapolation, nor anything but the "best-case" conditions written by political supporters and analysists. They,nor his panel, are not engineers or technicians who would/will/have actually had to fix the busted systems.

His conclusions are not prudent, not conservative, not safe. They are self-serving political refrains to supprt the Clintons' administration and the banking industry.

That's all.


Now, if any of his conclusions about the economic or infrastructure can be backed by testing - I'll be willing to listen. But there has been no systemic testing, nor independent testing.

Where some lab tests and simulations have been done, they have not always in the field: witness MCI couldn't use the new phone software, after ATT completed "back-to-back" lab simulations.

Or the more recent faillures of the government childcare payment systems, or the driver's license failures in several states, or the water and sewage system failures, or - even - the failures of control system displays in nuclear power plants: the best regulated and designed systems of all.


So it comes down to trust and judgement.......

By the way, can he tell give us ANY reason to believe him? Any justification of WHY we should trust what this administration says?

Can he name ANY public statement made by this admiinistration that HAS been true?

Can he name any policies or programs that this adminstration has done that have correctly predicted the actual outcome? Seems like we bombed an asrin factory - and found out it really was making aspirin. Bombed Kosovo/Albaninan region, and found out they had successfully hidden hundreds of tanks and APC's - that we missed. Claimed there were tens of thousands of murdred Albanians -and have found less than two hundred.

Denied there were Chinese in the weapons labs - and refused wiretaps to investigate. Denied there were fund-raising crimes - and had over 500 witnesses leave the country or plead the fifth.

Delayed and lied during the Senate fund-raising hearings, and then claimed there was no link between Chinese purchases of equipment and their donations to the Democrats.

One. The burden is on him to show that he knows what he is talking about. He has not addressed your questions - by ONLY answering the ONE implied point about national infrastrucutre failure - which you didn't address at all. (You asked about the extent and nature of local failures. He incorrectly answered your questionabout trading partners....and ignored the rest of your points.)

Two. The burden is on him to show that on this issue the administration is not lying.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (, November 08, 1999.


No offense intended. I am sure that you are an expert at what you do. The thing with Y2K is that it involves everything; at one time. Now, no one does every thing at one time. Another error [IMHO] that I have seen is the following: spokesman/woman for a respected technology firm makes a statement and it is taken as expert opinion. As someone who has been through it; not my take. Usually the people making the public statements have either, no, or no recent experience in technology. Six months off can be the same as a lifetime. I've heard these people describe my work without recognizing it. That is why I don't depended on these statements.

Best wishe

-- Z1X4Y7 (, November 08, 1999.


I have no reason to believe he is lying; but you nailed it with this:

The burden is on him to show that he knows what he is talking about.

Best wishes,,,,


-- Z1X4Y7 (, November 08, 1999.

Thanks, ExCop,

I find this statement from Mr. Koskinen interesting:

"I have also sat in on numerous working group meetings of the Council as well as a set of White House Roundtables focused with experts and members of the public on pharmaceutical, medical surgical and food supply systems, public safety, public transit, the internet, chemical manufacturing, higher education and elementary and secondary education."

Have these Roundtable discussion been published?

The grammar of the above sentence appears to differentiate segments by some weighting factor: A, B, and C; D, E, F, G, H and I.

It appears Mr. Koskinen is saying that he is equally or better informed than others and based on the seriousness of his responsibility to the public, his actions are in the public's best interest.

I submit that the Plan is "Panic Avoidance" because Y2K will be worse if there is a general panic in the markets, in the grocery stores or in the banks. Y2K will be whatever it is, so I suspect Mr. Koskinen is doing all that is possible to avoid an out of control situation.

Personnaly, I hope he is successful - I like my job, my home, my kid's school, etc. But by failing to "declare war on the Y2K menance" in early 1998, I feel the "Panic Avoidance" strategy may have doomed a greater percentage of people who will suffer Y2K impacts unprepared.

-- Bill P (, November 08, 1999.


There are at least three mailing lists around that could be described as "Community Conversations" mailing lists, two of them over at Davis' site and one from the GSA. The GSA list is closely tied to the regular teleconferences that take place among Koskinen's staff and community organizers.

Would you kindly be more specific regarding the name of the list to which this letter was posted? Thanks!

-- regarding (lists@checkem.twice), November 08, 1999.

"The difference I seem to have with some of those on our conference call is with the fact that I have seen no information -- as opposed to speculation and assertions -- that demonstrates that the basic infrastructure of the United States will not function effectively as we move into the New Year."

This is the same response Paula Gordon recieved when she questioned Koskinen herself about that same disconnect she percieves as does Ms. Leland.

For those who haven't read Dr. Gordon's part 6 of her ongoing White Paper, it is a must read that explores this kind of disconnect in general (denial), and relates her encounter with Koskinen.

http://www. Also, if you are not familiar with Dr. Gordon's background, I suggest you take the time to read her bio.


-- Chris (#$%^&, November 08, 1999.

"I put into the hearing record yesterday our checklist and in my testimony stressed that people should be prepared"

He mentioned this checklist during the community conversation in Atlanta in September. He said at that time that it would be out in a couple of weeks. Hmmmm.....early November a couple of weeks??? Anyway, has anyone seen the list? It didn't get any publicity last Friday. Does anyone have a link to it? Does it differ from the Red Cross checlist??

-- Duke 1983 (, November 08, 1999.



But - I submit that this administration has NEVER done anything in the country's (public's) best interest, but rather every action has been specifically and deliberately designed to be in the Clintons' best interests, and the best intersts of the latest group to provide the DNC with campaign money.

Further, I submit theat - while he has been subjected to more briefings than probably anyone, the information provided to him has been distorted and polished to present strictly what the administration feels is in the "best interests" of the public.

Thus, wrong conclusions come from wrong/distorted information - (perhaps even if there is an attempt to provide an honest evaluation.


Further, I dispute his assumption that he - or anyone else on his group - is "best qualified" to critically evaluate the information.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (, November 08, 1999.

The letter(s) were posted on the list for the biweekly teleconference call.

-- Sally Strackbein (, November 08, 1999.

Give em hell Sally! We all love you.

-- Earl (, November 08, 1999.

THE most damning statement he made in that letter is; "in my testimony stressed that people should be prepared -- and should be prepared early."

Has ANYONE in the public (besides us) heard this? NO Has the current administration EVER went on Prime-Time tv, to tell the common man this? NO Has he gone on Primetime tv before to tell them all "Dont worry be happy" ? YES

When failures occur, people will yell, "WHY didnt they warn us?WHY didnt they tell us to prepare?" At that point, Clinton will say, "Koshiken was supposed to do it." I dont think he will get away with it, but Clinton WILL try to brand Koshiken a Judas and turn his back on him. Terrible benefits for such a lousy job.

-- River (, November 08, 1999.

"A lie would have no reason if the truth were not felt dangerous"

Robert Heinlein

-- John Beck (, November 08, 1999.


I agree with your accessment.

I think that Mr.Koskinen is doing his job as he is told to do it. Give the guy some slack folks.

Does a private in the Army tell a general what to do? The bullypulpit is Mr. Clinton's. He, for whatever reason, has chosen not to use it.

Mr. Koskinen,

I have one recommendation.

Watch your backside.

-- the Virginian (, November 08, 1999.


The bottom line is Koskinen has a well stocked bunker (at taxpayer expense) waiting for him if y2k is really bad. Take care of yourself.

-- (1929 @ll over again. com), November 08, 1999.

These messages and the others I have posted this morning are from the Government hosted Community Conversations e-list and Teleconference forum sponsored by the Presidents Council on Y2K - Coordinated by GSA of which I am a member

-- ExCop (, November 09, 1999.

See also...


-- Diane J. Squire (, November 09, 1999.


Y2K Experts Issue Open Letter to Federal Reserve Board Chairman 001iJr

-- Diane J. Squire (, November 09, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ