klenke

An irish joke (sort of): > A Frog walks into a bank and approaches the teller. He can see from her nameplate that her name is Patricia Whack. > "Miss Whack, I'd like to get a $30,000 loan to take a holiday." > > Patty looks at the frog in disbelief and asks his name. > > The frog says his name is Kermit Jagger, his dad is Mick Jagger, and that it's okay, he knows the bank manager. > > Patty explains that he will need to secure the loan with some collateral. > > The frog says, "Sure. I have this," and produces a tiny porcelain elephant, about an inch tall, bright pink and perfectly formed. > > Very confused, Patty explains that she'll have to consult with the bank manager and disappears into a back office. > > She finds the manager and says, "There's a frog called Kermit Jagger out there who claims to know you and wants to borrow $30,000, and he wants to use this as collateral." > > She holds up the tiny pink elephant. "I mean, what in the world is this?" > > (you're gonna love this) > > (its a real treat) > > ( a masterpiece) > > The bank manager looks back at her and says... > > "It's a knickknack, Patty Whack. Give the frog a loan. His old man's a Rolling Stone." > > (You're singing it, aren't you?)

Hard to tell, is that an op-ed piece or standard journalism? It reads like the former even though I see no indication it is an op-ed. The article is simplifying what I'm sure is a complex issue. I won't pretend to know all of the details and the article doesn't elaborate (of course), so I can't or won't pass off an opinion. Certainly, I'd like the U.S. and Iran to be friends. Can't we all just get along?

Also, Corona, Squid, Squid's friend Michelle, Rocksanyone, GaryY, Dave Schuldt, another one of Nelson's friends, and, most important of all, Dr. ChucK. (Chaucer was also there in spirit.) That's 21 by my count! I wonder what the record is for highest turn out.

Uh, yeah, the yellow clouds can roll in fast and produce golden showers.

In fact, I will be there! Hey, aLex with the big L on the forehead, in fact you weren't there.

Maybe it is if you equate mounties with zombies. Eric, I suspect the remake will not be up to par with the original. At least that seems to be how most remakes go.

Gary, this is that famous chockstone in Norway I was talking about: Kjerag.

Due to the bad grammar I don't even understand the statement, much less see the problem. That's why I asked him to use better punctuation/capitalization. Arguments come across much more cogent when they're written well.

No, not too late. Especially if you bring coronas Corona. Gary: if we cc.commies paid you, would you & your trio do a gig for us at the next BBQ?

Answers to your labeling query provided in the gallery. I'll let you transcribe the answers into your post above. Here is a picture of McClellans from the west last Wednesday (from the Hall Creek-Change Creek Divide):

No, because I asked first.

Heck, maybe you should run for office because you seem to have all the answers. We need people like you in office, not the ineffectuals we currently have in there. To wit, I will say I have no answers and I know it. I have only scenarios and what ifs. I'm not an auger. I can't tell you what one course of action or another will lead to in the future. That's conjecture. I'm at least smart enough to know that. But actually you don't seem to have any answers either because you keep avoiding the questions I've asked you to answer. Your tone has always been insulting to others. It's just the way you come off I guess. I'm sure you're a perfectly nice guy in person. You insulted me by insinuating that I hadn't thought the security fence through and that it has a tantamount despicability to South Africa's apartheid program. You painted a picture of me that wasn't me. (You un-scumbled the gray back into black and white.) Since you sincerely believe that SA's former apartheid and Israel's security fence are the same thing ("there is no difference"), I would like you to elaborate in how they are the same. I agree there are facets of both that are similar, but there is one marked difference between the two that you are not seeing (or are ignoring on purpose). And, can I make a request: can you please use capitalization? Thanks.

Phew, that'll save me some PMs. Thanks, voodoo man! Meanwhile, here's the puke graemlin that some of you will no doubt be needing:

Truly classic. this post should be engraved in a piece of frozen poo and enshrined in the muir hut for generations of scot'teryx and catbirdseat offspring to gape at with awe and reverence

Don't forget page 1 of the previously cited link. Page 1 has pictures. This page 1 link used to have a sub-link to other pictures in it. The sub-link has since been removed, probably because one of the pictures was of a mutilated human corpse. I still have this link, however, but I'm not going to provide it here. If you are some looney who loves seeing half-eaten bodies, then send me a PM and I'll provide you will the link privately.

I've often contemplated this myself while huffing and puffing up through brush only to stumble upon evidence of other human impact. Or being able to find the place I came up on the return even though it's all brush. Humans are like homing pigeons when it comes to brush bashing. Or maybe it takes experience.

This is not an answer. Give me your ideal timeline for this pullout. Again, shouldn't those governments unpuppet themselves? What carrot are we dangling in front of them that they can't unpuppet themselves (cut the puppet strings, as it were)? Is it the American government dangling the carrot or the American businesses or both? As wrong as it does seem to me the way American companies expand globally at the expense of where they're expanding in to, it's still up to those governments to say no. Just say no. Easy as that. What a conservative idea that is! Exactly. We are in agreement here. How have I contradicted myself here? I don't see it. The original three items I listed (pseudo-transcribed from your original list of things we should do seven posts back) did not include U.S. $$$ support for Israel. You should have put that in your initial list then I would have spoke to it. I agree with you. We shouldn't be giving Israel all that money. But, that said, the terrorists will/would hate Israel regardless of whether we gave them money. That's been going on since Israel became an independent state 50-60 years ago. Actually, you could say it's been going on since before the Crusades. Now you're just insulting me. There is a difference and you know it. Please don't insult me like you try and insult PP. I have not insulted you. I have tried only to get your ideas for how to deal with terrorism out of you. How do we deal with the gripes of the Arab population then? By doing your three things (1, 2, & 3) listed above + stop supporting Israel? Is this enough or do we need to do more? Should we also feed the Arab/Muslim states lots of money (like how we do with Israel)? Wouldn't feeding them money make them our puppets (another dangled carrot)?

So, j_b, let me see if I understand you right. The purple text are the questions I'm adding to the discussion. You're saying we (America) should do the following 1. Pull all troops out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Phillipines, whereever else. What timeline do you think is best for this? Right away, three months, six months, three years, six years? 2. Pull all business interests (McDonald's, oil/gas companies, etc.) out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, whereever else they're unwanted. Shouldn't the governments over there tell these businesses to leave? Isn't it up to them to decide who should be able to do business in their country? If this is true and they're not doing this, aren't then the terrorists misguided in who they should be focusing their anger at? 3. Not impose our economic principles on other countries. They should develop their own principles. Of course, as you know, the U.S. economic principle (in general, not at this moment) is the best in the world. If they don't want to use our system (which is entirely up to them), then they are free to develop their own. Note that probably most of their economists were educated right here in America anyway. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ After the above three have been done (by the U.S.), the terrorists groups will disband and return to being upstanding citizens of their societies. Well, what about the terrorists' anger with the Zionist state? That isn't really anything to do with the U.S.. The terrorists have been hating the Israeli entity for quite some time. By association, they hate America because we support Israel. I'd like to think America also supports the idea of a Palestinian state but that fostered terrorism within Palestine degrades that support. Note that I am not a supporter of Israel and their aggressive expansionist ideologies, but I tend to give them more of the benefit of the doubt in terms of their methodologies for combating the killing of their innocents (for instance, I am for the security fence). I think that, even if the U.S. does the above three things listed above, the terrorist entities will continue to exist and still go after U.S. interests, kill innocents. They will create new ideologies for themselves once the original ones have been appeased by the civilized world. My thought is that you can't really ever appease terrorists because they themselves have moved beyond appeasement. Or to say it another way, appeasing them won't satiate them.

j_b, please answer my question posed in bold letters at the top of this page. How exactly should we deal with terrorists? Are you an answer man or just a complainer?

Nice TR. Well written. Like the summit pano. Thanks to everyone for the extra info and annotated photos.

I'd like to repose the question Harpell first put forth: How exactly should we deal with terrorists? I still haven't read any solutions from you armchair politicians. All I've read is analysis of past events and conjecture as to their meaning going forward. What should the world do about terrorism? All the liberal democrats are pretty sure we haven't done the right thing. And yet, they don't themselves know what is or was the right thing to do. I'm speaking to terrorism in general, not Iraq specifically. It seems to me that to the liberals among us it is not so much what Bush did but what Bush didn't did, if you get my meaning.

PP --> <-- j_b PP --> <-- j_b us --> me -->

Directions info here. 534 15th Ave. E I expect to see Tread Tramp there, right Ralph?

FYI: Remaking the classic Romero flick. Romero's 1978 version was one of the funniest horror flicks I've seen. I'll have to see the 2004 version to see if it's up to snuff.

Stonehead, you make some good points. In regard to your "Only the solitude of the mountains provides the breather from the insanity, ugliness, and stupidity of the sometime state of human affairs. For a brief moment anyway, until you return," I have a pertinent story: My friend Mark and his father were backpacking in the Pasayten when 9/11 happened. He later told me that, about halfway through the trip, they decided to make a cell phone call from one of the summits. They were only barely able to get a signal. Well, they made the call the day after the attacks (or thereabouts) and the person they called felt the need to inform them about it, thus ruining their otherwise peaceful/unstressful trip. It made me wonder if not informing them would have been the better action to take. Then, in the weeks following the attacks when I was coming back to the city from the mountains, I would wonder here and there if Seattle would still be there. I wasn't obsessed about it, but it did cross my mind as a possibility.