IT'S OFFICIAL - Canadians To Be 'Kept In The Dark' During Y2K Rollover!!

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Tuesday, December 14, 1999

Information sessions to be infrequent New Year's Eve By JENNIFER DITCHBURN -- The Canadian Press

OTTAWA (CP) -- Even if the lights don't go out, Canadians could be kept in the dark for extended periods on New Year's Eve about what's going on across the country and abroad.

Federal officials announced Tuesday they have scheduled two information sessions Dec. 31 and two Jan. 1 to update the public on Y2K developments.

None of the briefings is scheduled for the hours around midnight -- the first one slated for Jan. 1 is around mid-day.

Members of the media will also be barred from entering Emergency Preparedness Canada's monitoring centre on New Year's Eve, where information will be collected and disseminated about any troubles across the country.

Guy McKenzie, the federal Y2K spokesman, said the government's priority is to put out accurate reports and not unverified anecdotal information.

He added that officials from several departments, such as National Defence and Foreign Affairs, would be available to answer questions when needed.

Extra briefings could be scheduled as events unfold, he said.

"When we'll be communicating information, we want to make sure that the information is as confirmed as possible -- this is not entertainment for us," McKenzie told a news conference.

"This has always been an issue related to health, safety and economic wellbeing of Canadians and we take it seriously."

The U.S. government's Y2K council said at a briefing Monday it's holding three briefings on Dec. 31st and two or three briefings on each of Jan. 1, 2 and 3, said McKenzie's spokeswoman.

The British government hasn't decided on its information sessions yet, a government official said.

Reform MP John Williams, chairman of the Commons public accounts committee, said the government must "come clean" immediately if it hears about problems.

"We will know on Dec. 31 how other countries are faring, and if they're not faring well there will be apprehensiveness in Canada," Williams said.

"For them not to schedule news meetings to alleviate that apprehensiveness I think is shocking.

The Liberal government has gone to great lengths to portray itself as forthcoming on Y2K issues, declaring transparency one of its primary goals.

Countries around the world have poured a lot of resources into public relations campaigns to allay fears over the year 2000 and perhaps prevent a panic reaction.

Federal officials say Canada is well prepared to face the new millennium, and is unlikely to see any major difficulties.

Government departments have completed all their fixing, testing and emergency planning, and the country's biggest sectors -- such as banking and telecommunications -- have long finished their remedial work.

[ENDS]

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), December 15, 1999

Answers

I bet this is a blue print that we'll see used by the US also.

Thanks John

-- Dick Moody (dickmoody@yahoo.com), December 15, 1999.


The chance of keeping anyone in the Western Hemisphere "in the dark" is zero.

When it is breakfast time in the USA/Canada it will be after midnight in the Orient/Australia/New Zealand. We will know if anything has happend. Even in a police state, a rumor is faster than the secret police.

They can't shut down communications. If they try to, then people will think the worst and really panic.

-- woody (woody11420@aol.com), December 15, 1999.


U.S. businesses already announced that they aren't going to reveal any of their problems for fear of losing investors, and the government certainly isn't going to reveal any of their problems unless they there is no way to conceal them from the public, so the U.S. will be in the dark as well.

The only way we will know if something fails is if it is obvious like a power failure, or people being sent home from work on January 3rd because their employer simply cannot function.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 15, 1999.


Hmm, I was just reading the following thread

From the Horses Mouth; Martial Law on the 28th

when this came up. Isn't a media blackout standard procedure for a military operation? Of course it is stupid. Sorry, I forgot.

To me the name of the game is to create panic, deliberatly. Especially when you read

Two unverified rumors...

and consider the type of training those folks are getting.

Re read what was in "From the Horses Mouth; Martial Law on the 28th" again and the theories there are begining to make a whole lot more sense.

But the question remains who is calling the shots and why?

My take is:

Has anyone else thought this explains all the terrorism/hacker warning?

-- Interested Spectator (is@aol.com), December 15, 1999.


Canadians are so understated compared to US folks.

You got to understand that during the Iraq war Canadians were watching CNN news reports. Now with the internet it opens up a new way to aquire info from around the world.

As far as the Canadian press goes, this is a military operation in Canada and it is no suprise to me that they would control media access. Like failures could be covered up for very long. If phonelines are up we will hear about them and if they aren't up we will be in a worse position.

There is also one thing about information, it is best done on the net in groups like this. If we are online then it is less than a 5 and if you can't get on line it is over a 5. If it is over a 5 you will not be worried about the rest of the world. Your community will be more relavent.

I'll be listening to the defacto emegency AM call in show. If I can't hear AM I will go to the legion or firehall for info.

It is interesting to wonder how the press are going to deal with Day Zero. Don't think the forum has ever considered what it is going to do?

We are going to be hearing more about media coverage (or the lack of it) alot more.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), December 15, 1999.



I cannot think of a more compelling arguement for having a shortwave radio as part of your basic preps.

-- Midas (Midas_Mulligan_2000@yahoo.com), December 15, 1999.

Many ham radio operators in Canada. Also there is a device called a phone patch which allows a ham station to connect to areas that may have phone service. The word will get out, don't worry. Same here in the US. They have a network in place and there are standard designated emergency channels and ham emergency nets. I was able to purchase an older ham rig with a phone patch on line and the seller was local so we just picked it up. Also have a radio shack dx-398 shortwave that will pick up many more frequencies. Also a scanner set to pick up local happenings. All of these work off of batteries. For Xmas asked Dad for a solar trickle charger for the deep cycle battery for the ham rig. Solar aa battery chargers are online at Campmore.com ($16) Hint: Large variety of small to very fancy solar/battery/inverter setups avail. at any RV dealer! (also have a cb, frs and battery operated tv). Good time to ask for one or more of the above for Xmas or look around on line for someone near you who is selling this kind of equipment. Sometimes they will trade. All you need for an antenna is a wire kit that's under $10 at Radio Shack. Our little wire picks up every ham band and have heard as far as So. Africa. Suggest that the scanner (local)is probably the most useful. You can even program in the utility companies freqs. I can't imagine siiting in the dark not knowing what's comming. You need to have a heads-up so you can get outta there if you need to!!!!

-- Charli Claypool (claypool@belatlantic.net), December 15, 1999.

No power = no TV. Single sideband shortwave radio necessary; at least you can "monitor" some things. Another very helpful thing: being able to understand at least Spanish/French/Portugese. (Wish I knew Russian).

-- Dot (dromano03@snet.com), December 15, 1999.

A non-licensed way to holler for help if necessary would be the FRS, Family Radio Service which has a range of 2 miles. (I think CB would be the worst choice) FRS can now be had with 14 channels and the Ranger brand that they are selling at Kmart are scannable. Those are like $39.00-$49.00 each. This is the only "scannable" model I've seen so far. They take AAA batteries and you can get a huge pack of those for under $10 at the warehouse stores. We have heard other people on our 2 channel cobra. BTW: We were surfing the ham bands (with the meager wire [dipole] antenna) a few weeks ago when the phone lines were out in the Carribean due to their last hurricane. We picked up a Navy ship and their calls to home (all over the US) were being relayed by a Ham operator with a phone patch. The freq. was 14.383.8 All of them were telling their folks/girlfriends that they were not allowed to go any further than 500 miles away for the holidays and some of them slipped, saying that they couldn't come home for the holidays because of the "Y2K thing" and further that they had only been told the day before. FWIW. Just confirms that the lower ranks had/have not been informed any better than the rest of us about what's going on. We heard them again the following Sunday on that freq. but the connection was bad and they switched to 14.483.5 so I'm suggesting that those are good freqs. to check for military-types if you're monitoring ham radio.

-- Charli Claypool (claypool@belatlantic.net), December 15, 1999.

Hey John,

Still listening to the media I see. Why would you wait for confirmation from the government if things go awry? If you are as well informed as you think you are, you are like the rest of us, tuning into Timebomb 2000 waiting for all the positive information to be reported.

As Guy MacKenzie says, they would be more responsible to the public by only reporting on confirmed information not the typical "Toaster blew up, must be Y2K problem" response by people on this forum.

Llama

-- Llama man (llama@cool.net), December 15, 1999.



Hawk:

The only episode in a series (LOL) of Y2K symposia sponsored by Goldman Sachs had Jeff Jinnet (SP?) talking about the legal aspects. With respect to companies deciding to withhold information, it is interesting in retrospect that they anticipate the largest source of litigation to be shareholder lawsuits against the company for failing to provide accurate information. This is a rather gloomy prediction in many ways since it's based on the premise that these companies must first sink link stones.

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), December 15, 1999.


Koskinem was on CSpan the other night, and he said, after a reporter asked him if they would be reporting other events going on worlk, that no, they would have to more or less verify these things before they released them and we would probably hear about them from other sources before the government would confirm anything was happening.

-- Marsha (MSykes@court.co.macon.il.us), December 15, 1999.

Llama Man:

Perhaps living at close quarters with animals that have a higher IQ than you has given you your dogged sense of insecurity? Who knows? It's beyond me to fathom why Pollys who appear 'brain-dead' [as opposed to Polly's who put forward thoughtful and useful arguments] frequent a forum like this. You need to get away from those llamas for a while...:)

TIMEBOMB 2000 is a form of 'media' by virtue of what it is; it's just faster. more wide-ranging, and generally transmits information that is a whole lot more perceptive and intelligent on Y2K than the regular 'mainstream media'.

But I am curious about one thing. You obviously are getting multiple personal updates from Peter de Jager on Y2K. You must be - or you'd have to be relying on 'the media' to relay his views to you. Even de Jager's own web site prominently carries daily 'media stories' on Y2K from around the world, so if you're relying on him and his web site only, he's still quoting 'the media'.

Not being inconsistent here, are you...?

-- John Whitley (jwhitley@inforamp.net), December 15, 1999.


Greetings John,

Thank you for the kind and somewhat prompt response. It is great that we can sit at our computer and debate this issue under aliases like Llama man, Wiffer, Joe Pubic, etc.

Fortunately, we both have real jobs. Y2K has been my job for close to three years now. Yes, it is a real job. I have many important responsibilities and yes, I will be glad when this thing is over.

Personally, I'm between the polly/doomer stage. I made my preparations 6 months ago (one month).

As far as the media is concerned, I think their doing as good a job as they can. They are as consistent with Y2K as they are with any other issue. Meat and potatoes reporting. Just when things are looking great, I see reports that are quit upsetting. No, these aren't reports from Reuters or Bloomberg or Hamanski (sp.) These are status reports from project managers that I am privy to.

As far as thoughtful and useful arguments are concerned, they're pretty much used up. I'm bored. What's going to happen is going to happen. There's nothing we can do now. I'll debate using bad grammer, puntuation, spelling, unless something warrants a real response.

Personal updates from Peter de Jager, I think not. I have read his literature and I understand his background and I do believe he is accurate on his personal assessments of Y2K. But, that's my opinion.

Llama

-- Llama man (llama@cool.net), December 15, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ