mattp

The ghoul with the red hat on is beyond satanic. The devil won't mess with him.

And these characters:

This guy, however ...

You're probably right. This guy, too, seems to be able to exercise some measure of self-control:

It was.

Sorry, Chris, he isn't the arm in green. He's here, with another unnamed sprayer: In the first photo, two of cc.com's elite sprayers are shown at middle and right while Hansel (left) is only a lurker. He might not even have a computer.

Name the Sprayers:

JayB- Thanks for the history lesson. I agree with you that the U.S. has a policy goal in mind when it arms countries like Pakistan and works with Russia, and that even when we are dealing with the very worst of thugs around the world we are probably always doing so in the pursuit of policy goals quite apart from the crimes those thugs may commit. It is not intellectually dishonest of me to argue that is what we do, however, and that Greg's statement could apply to the U.S. in every way.

That is the Ballard GRILL and Alehouse. 4300 Leary Way. Come one and come all and maybe it'll be like old times -- it is the middle of winter so nobody will be out exercising or anything and we all have lots to talk about because, for once, lots of people actually climbed something this week instead of staying home and wasting their time on the internet. Sayjay may make a rare appearance, and who knows: we might see a local legend.

Looks like another nice day at Zoa Beach!

Veggie- Nobody is arguing that Saddam is a good guy. I believe the current international and domestic debate has to do with what to do about him, what may be the costs or benefits associated with any particular scenario, and what should be the nature and extent of international cooperation in the world. I believe that even the most ardent anti-war protesters here and abroad acknowledge that Saddam is an evil despot.

Greg- Again you jest. The US has consistently refused to pay its dues.

Greg- that's a laughable statement. We probably ignore UN resolutions and international treaties as much or more than any other nation on earth (I think that makes us a "rogue"). Meanwhile, we maintain ties to all kinds of zealous groups all over the world and even arm them when they are on our side of any particular issue. Further, to name a few recent examples, we have supplied military assistance to governments in countries like Israel, Pakistan, and Indonesia, who are actively engaged in the destruction of cultures either within their own boundaries or nearby.

Let's see: In September, he said that neither the US or Britain had shown any evidence that Iraq actually had weapons of mass destruction and he called for UN involvement in the situation. He jokingly noted that Cheney had opposed his release from prison while the majority of the U.S. Congress had supported it and said that this was an illustration of how Cheney is conservative. Two weeks ago, in addition to pointing out that we are the only country to have used nukes, he said that (1) he thought our quest for control over oil production/distribution was an important motive in this situation; (2) it is hypocritical that we allow Israel to get away with acts of terror and to amass weapons of mass destruction; (3) it is deplorable that the U.S. would go outside the U.N. in its efforts to confront Iraq; (4) Bush is arrogant and lacks foresight in his war planning; and (5) it appears our foreign policy may be racially oriented because we are ignoring Annan. You may call that "stupid shit" but I call it speaking his mind, and I believe there are lots of people (including Norman Schwartzkopf for one) who agree with at least some of what he said. The outraged reactions against his statement appear to me to be an expression of the narrow-minded view that this is war and you are either for us or against us. I don't think that is a useful viewpoint, even if you ARE in support of going to war against Iraq. Can't we tolerate a public figure's stating that the U.S. may be doing the wrong thing? What's wrong with discussing issues like this -- and in this manner?

Are the people who would advocate our reserving the right to use our nuclear weapons the same people that were outraged when Nelson Mandela pointed out that we are the only nation that has used nuclear weapons against civilian populations? Just curious.

So is there any possibility we could figure this out before the end of the day? We haven't heard from any youngsters that they want to attend, and nobody seems to know what we would find at the Bowling Alley. My vote would be to go to the Ballard Ale House or the Pyramid (where is that?) and send a scout past the bowling alley on their way home. If a 10:00 site visit reveals that we could actually find a couple of lanes open and there are some tables somewhere that would allow non-bowlers to sit and talk a little bit, we could put it on the calendar for next week.

Mr. Mud- It sounds as if you've had the REAL Mountain Loop Highway experience. I would think it would not take 5 hours to get to Windy Pass from the Copper Creek trailhead (you didn't say whether you came in from that direction or from the Windy Creek side). The north side of Liberty Mountain looks as if it has relatively brush-free slopes at least for the upper 1500 feet so you might be able to follow the Green Giant Buttress approach trail, climb up to the old mine and swin through the bushes for 1000 or 1500 feet, and then find easier going to the top.

Greg- As I stated above, I don't think we know if they intend to close any of the Enchantments or Colchuck Lake area, only that it sounds as if they intent to close the route in via Mountaineer Creek. A visit to their web page reveals that Fleb- If you actually believe that crap about being innocent until proven guilty, you are naive indeed. If officer Larry or one of the wilderness rangers gets the wrong idea and gives you a citation, you will have to prove your innocence rather than the other way around. If there is a situation where they say one thing happened and you say it happened a different way, THEY will be believed by a judge and not you. And you will have to drive to Yakima at least twice to put on your defense. Good luck. I would hope that the Access Fund or Mountaineers or other climber groups could work with hiking clubs to try to work with the Leavenworth District to clarify the access situation and, perhaps, arrange for such a thing as "off-hours" access or something. But I doubt this will happen.

Right on, K. We skied that Train Glacier in a whiteout the only time I was up there and I wondered what it looked like! Jordop-thanks for the Picture. I take it, going in via Donnelly Creek is probably quite a bit easier than climbing over the ridge between the Pass and the Creek and camping at Semaphore Lakes but maybe the ridge route avoids snowmobile traffic. Do they run the snow machines all the way up Donnelly Creek to the glacial moraines?

Fleb-that was the point. They said they couldn't believe that I would approach the Enchantments from Ingalls Creek even if I obtained a hiking permit to go that way and parked my car at the Ingalls Creek trailhead. Because they would have no way to verify that I ACTUALLY hiked in that way, instead of risking harm by sneaking up Snow Creek they said, they couldn't allow it. Remember: at the same time, they said the Enchantment Basin was not closed. Does that make sense? Eric8- I have no idea if they are going to close a large part of the range. What I am suggesting is that whatever closure they do decide upon is likely to be enforced in an arbitrary fashion by front-country rangers like Larry-the-Tool and back-country rangers who think they've heard it all before and can't cut any slack when someone comes up with a "story." Climbers and rangers in Leavenworth have a poor relationship and while some might blame selfish and self-righteous climbers for the problem, part of it comes from the District .

Wow! Another cc.com team reports a successful weekend! this rocks! Got pictures?

Isn't that highway 2 problem pretty much limited to the hours of five to seven on Sunday's, as well as ski-season Saturday's? Go home earlier, or if you are caught in it you might consider heading to the Bush House or the Index Cafe and having dinner -- it'll probably be over by the time you are done.

One of the things I like about this site is that it is casual enough that people feel comfortable asking funny questions or discussing their aborted climbs or whatever, rather than sticking to "safe" topics and bragging about their "exploits." In addition to the obvious danger of traveling alone, your post illustrates a couple of noteworthy points about how crampons can provide a false sense of security and how "non-technical" terrain can be dangerous. Thanks, ChucK. Glad you're OK.

In past discussions of this topic, I've criticized Dwayner and some of his anti-bolt compatriots for being bitter and divisive. However, this time around I'll take Dwayner's side. Bolts ARE inherently ugly and DO NOT belong on the rocks. I clip them, and I have placed plenty of them, but this does not change my fundamental belief that they don't really belong there and they constitute a permanent alteration. As with the burning of fossil fuels, to reference Dwayner's example, I agree that they need to be used in moderation and that many overindulge. I disagree with Dwayner about a place like Vantage or Exit 38, though, because I am willing to accept that measure of environmental degradation at some of our roadside crags and even on some (but certainly not all nor even most) of our more "pristine" rock formations. To me, it is a question of balance. I can definitely understand why, when that balance appears to be completely lost, some would resort to the use of a crowbar. I don't advocate that, and I don't support anybody who argues one side or the other without recognizing the position of "the enemy." Bolt wars and hate-mongering from either side of the issue have and will continue to cause problems that lead land managers to close our climbing areas. I suppose some might take comfort in the idea that there will be no more bolts placed if an area is closed after an agency receives complaints about bolting or after a bolt war erupts into vandalism and other police and political problems, but such a closure would not have been undertaken with environmental concerns in mind and in fact I think there have been some rather arbitrary closures brought about by exactly these kinds of problems.