mattp

I'm with Berdinka on the S. Buttress of Cutthroat. I know it remains a popular route, but I don't understand why.

# "Compared to hiker, hunter, skier, and other backcountry incidents, the climbing population [in 2001] fared well. According to Mike Gauthier, Chief Climbing Ranger for Mount Rainier National Park, 'As a group, mountain climbers aren't the most expensive to rescue.' It is lost hikers and hunters who have achieved this distinction." (American Alpine Clubs' Accidents in North American Mountaineering, 2002). Access Fund page I believe the Access Fund has a more specific analysis of the economic benefits of recreational rock climbing somewhere, and I'm sure there is more discusssion of rescue costs available.

I gotta say, though: BOYS WILL BE BOYS. Indignation about how some irresponsible teenagers might possibly upset some innocent bystanders (though they didn't fool me) is, while perhaps justified, maybe a tad unrealistic. When I was an irresponsible youngster we once set up a dummy on a "clothes line" so we could make him run out in front of cars. Stupid and wreckless? For sure. Somebody could have been killed trying to avoid hitting our little guy. But at age 12, we thought it was pretty funny -- and when the drivers got out to check, we pelted them with snowballs. I'd have given those youngsters a good lecture, but I'd have been equally sure it wouldn't have meant much.

Spill the beans. Did anybody have fun?

It is looking more and more like we're getting confirmation that Rove did as accused. Like everything else those crooks in the Administration have been caught doing, I don't expect it to go anywhere, though. wikipedia

Did you get a partner? Mine bailed on me because of the weather and "personal reasons" (read "S.O. pressures and family type responsibilities) and I was going to go to the office tomorrow, but I could still bail and make a day of it on Saturday.

Judging by some of the recent reports here, you'll be competing with lots of other people who have the same plan. An afternoon climb might also be a way to encounter less crowds.

I have known very few parties to do the original 5th pitch in years (I assume you are talking about the pitch before the "Blue Crack" pitch); the original is much easier but runout, and thus modern climbers uniformly opt for the crack leading upward whereas, in the early days of the climb, I think most climbers instincitively followed the lower angled and heavily featured original line.

He's in the phone book you have at home.

You wanna watch? (You're right; this is unseemly. But I'll point out to be redundant once again that I never seek to take it personal. Not once have I attacked Mr. Fairweather on those grounds, and in fact I haven't ever put him down with nearly the vinegar that he has thrown in my face but there is obviously no point in attempting debate with someone who thinks I am "smarmy, dishonest, self important..." and who is going to steer the discussion to that opinion when I thought we were discussing politics. In deference to your fragile sensitivity, KJK, I'll refrain from posting my description of Fairweather's debating personality.) Have a nice evening.

I forgot what your question was two years ago, Fairweather, and I sure don't get it from what you just posted. (I don't see any inherant conflict between an appreciation for privacy and a belief in a single-payer health-care system.) However, "you didn't answer my question two years ago so I'm not going to answer yours now" sure sounds like a pathetic dodge to me. Like I said, I don't find it all that upsetting that you would use my full name because I have made no attempt to conceal my identity. However you only seem to "leak" my full name after we've exchanged a couple of argumentative posts -- in an attempt to discourage or intimidate me or something -- and you are not even denying that is what you were trying to do. I simply ask: should I return fire in the same fashion? Can we talk about the issues now? (Our discussion here need not include personal jabs.)

Is along with some idle banter about PP's odd diversion a sure sign of "almost giddyness" or is Fairweather imagining things here based upon his lack of an open mind about what I might think about this matter?

That's a picture of one of the conservative pundits, biting his fingernail while trying to figure out how to spin this one.

MSNBC Article

You got some pictures for show and tell? I got a small battlescar.

Then there are "valid secondary reasons for invasion" in a half dozen nations, no? Sure, it'd be a major screw up to let him escape, but do you think GW is actually in control of the conditions under which he is held to anything like the degree that GW has been in control of our overall planning and execution of this war effort? But what about the detainees in Iraq? Cheney and Rumsfeld's statements, endorsed by Bush, were obviously intended to apply to them as well. Further, we have lots of guys over there who are not wearing uniforms. Is Mike Adamson wearing a uniform? Would you find it "outrageous" if somebody put him in a prison camp and burned the Beckey bible in front of him and made him pose for pictures with a leash on his neck and some foreign object inserted into his you-know-where? No, I don't think so. If our goal was to capture the perpetrator, we would have sent a bunch of guys to go get him, and we wouldn't have given three months' notice. Bush said we were going to get him "dead or alive," but his program was in fact something else. You're right that the American public demanded ACTION. I don't know about Jim McDermott, but I would have liked to see some effective action. I am not a miltary planner but I bet we could have more likely captured our guy AND we could have completely destroyed the training camps without occupying the nation and installing a new government - and I'm not sure what we are going to gain by the occupation/regime change part of the operation given the fact that virtually every time we've tried that in the past we have failed to accomplish what we set out for. Terrorism experts mostly seem to think that occupying countries - even with good intentions or a "valid reason" - is the single surest way to draw MORE terrorism, not less. I'm not sure we undertook "effective action" on behalf of the American public, though I hear there may be a sweet pipleline deal out of this for those who are invested in such things. By the way, I notice you go out of your way to use my full name, Brian. Is this some kind of intimidation technique? (It won't work because my name is available to anybody who wants to click on my user profile -- how about yours?) I can use your last name anytime I want to but I suspect you would not appreciate it because you've declined to put contact information that could lead someone to your identity on your profile. Now, tell me more about why you think the loss of Saddam as a captive would be so much more a sign of a lack of leadership than was taking us into Iraq in the first place? I mean, really, would it be Bush's fault if some screw up made a mistake that let Saddam escape? Would it be more significant than his POLICY decisions? As much as my strident reply here may seem to you that I'm just a zealot, I am in fact interested in your reply on this point. I sincerely don't get it.

I think it is fair to say that a slip on that slope above the Hogsback could be fatal. Most of us would not rope up because we don't believe we are risking a slip on terrain like that, and the advice not to rope up if you are not going to belay is basically sound, but just because it is deemed a "beginner's climb," don't take it too lightly. If either you or your partner are not somewhat experienced climbing up and down a firm or maybe icy snow surface, be careful!

I sense a difficult time for your relationship in the near future... I was tempted to comment on this, thought better of it, then I scroll down and see that Alex already has. We obviously know nothing about your relationship or your girlfriend, but my guess is you might want to choose a slightly smaller objective if you are trying to convince her that alpine climbing is "fun." I have not done it, and lots of people say the W. Ridge is a great climb, but it is long and many people have epics on it. Especially in unstable weather. Danger!

Fairweather wrote: I find this very interesting. Isn't Saddam being held by Iraqi's who are (supposedly) not under our complete control? Even so, wouldn't control over the conditions under which he is being held and might escape be WAY out of Bush's control -- like two dozen steps below his level of command? Why would you hold Bush responsible if Saddam escaped, but not hold him responsible for so many things that have been much more directly under his control like announcing to the world that we were not going to be bound by the Geneva Convention in our treatment of detainees in Iraq and Guantanamo, failing to plan for a possible insurgency or provide for veteran's benefit funding or ignoring his own experts who told him that some of the "evidence" he was using to justify the war was bunk? What about announcing six weeks in advance that we were invading Afghanistan and then starting a second war before we captured Bin Laden -- didn't Bush's decisions on these matters effectively let Bin Laden go free? You may not agree that he's been responsible for all of these things, or you may not think all of them are "bad," but surely he carries significant responsibility for at least some of them and the whole thing has not been handled well -- yet I don't see folks who support Bush finding these matters significant some how. If Saddam were to escape, would this somehow be worse than taking us into this mess in the first place? Is he a valuable source of intelligence, or an important war prize at this point? This is a serious question. Why is Saddam so important and so many other things not?

Here's the view from Liberty Bell last weekend:

My impression is that, more than an increase in alpine climbing, we are seeing an inccreased concentration in alpine climbing as everyone competes for a place in line on one of the routes highlighted in Fifty Classic Climbs or Select Climbs of ...

Sorry about the outdated information in Nelson's book. I should have helped him update it for the new edition. Meanwhile, here's a topo for Dreamer: Darrington web page at www.seanet.com/~mattp/Darr

If you type "pentax 5mp waterproof camera" on google, the first hit you get is this one: web page

Fairweather: Looking back tells us a lot about where we're headed. Bush and his guys don't even deny that they used 911 as an excuse to invade Iraq. They only weakly deny that we are there for reasons quite apart from what they've been saying all along. The obvious conclusion is that you can't believe ANYTHING they say about the matter because it is just as likely true as false. The job of the President and his administration is to forumlate a strategy and it is not at all clear that they really have one. Everything we know about this whole business suggests they have not only failed, but actively refused to consider the possible outcome scenarios right from the start. To the greatest extent possible and consistent with any real national security concerns they also have a clear responsibility to level with the American people. Everything we know about the matter shows a constant pattern of flatly refusing to do so. Looking ahead, I can see no reason not to expect more of the same: outright lies and manipulation in support of the blind pursuit of an unstated mission. Our responsibility, as citizens in a Democracy, is to ask questions, think about what they are doing, and to express our opinion about it -- not simply to eat the sugar pills they feed us and go back to sleep. You seem to say "it's OK, I don't care what they've done but I want more of the same." I'd have a lot more respect for you if you'd at least be willing to show some disapproval of how we got into this mess, and to say you'd like to see a national defense policy based on a consideration of real intelligence data and honest discussion. Thus far, your main argument seems to be that those who criticize the President are misguided and deeserve your venomous disdain. Do you think we "hate freedom?" (As to my own idea about what to do now? It seems fairly obvious that we need to get out this mess and that almost certainly means bringing our troups home in -what did Rumsfeld say? 2,4 6, 8, 10 years? I agree with an uncertain timetable. I can't see any scenario where long-term occupation is going to do anything but cause MORE terrorism to be directed at the U.S. and I do not believe that we will be successful in getting the Iraqi army to do our bidding while we remain essentially in control -- without some heavy handed and very costly effort on our part. If we stay there, it will almost certainly continue to be a mess, and in fact immediate and unconditional withdrawal might be a good option if we actually look at the situation honestly. I would like to think that our policy makers are engaged in honest discussion and serious consideration of real intelligence rather than just waiving the American flag and worrying about the next election, but all indications are that Bush and his crew, along with the Democratic leadership, are putting politics way ahead of any strategic planning.)