JayB

Very sad news. The main thing I am feeling right now is shock - soon to be followed by sorrow, most of which will be reserved for his family, friends, and loved ones - but a bit of which will stem from the interactions I had with him here. He seemed like a good guy who knew his stuff and stayed on the classy side of any conversation that he participated in here. I will miss his company and contributions here, and regret that I never had a chance to meet him in person. I have never personally taken much comfort in the notion that someone died doing what they loved, as my thoughts tend to drift towards all of the experiences that they will miss out on and won't be able to share with the people that they care about now that they are gone. However, it sounds like he made the most of the time he had, and I hope that the people close to him can take some comfort from that. My sympathies to his wife, his family, and his friends.

excellent find, jayb. so, does this mean you are going to have to reassess you typically slanderous diatribes against the left in which you accuse it of condoning stalinist terror? Hello Comrade! I'm afraid I will have to tender a reluctant "No" in response to your question, on account of the profusion of evidence to the contrary, but thanks for asking. Here is a quote from Muggeridge concerning the manner in which his dispatches from the Ukraine were received by his comrades at The Guardian: "I saw in Orwell’s strong reaction to the villainies of the Communist apparat in Spain a comparable experience to my own disgust some years previously with the Soviet regime and its fawning admirers among the intelligentsia of the West as a result of a stint as Moscow correspondent of the Manchester Guardian.” “Later, when I got to know Orwell, he told me the story of how the articles had been turned down by Kingsley Martin, then editor of the New Statesman. I pointed out that, in the same sort of way, my messages to the Guardian from the USSR —for instance, about the famine caused by Stalin’s collectivization policy in the Ukraine and the Caucasus, and about the arrest of some British engineers on spurious espionage charges— had been either whittled down or unused when they were more than mildly critical of the Soviet regime." Source - Muggeridge's words. Your Pal,

Here you go: "Analysis: Shame of Duranty's Pulitzer By Martin Sieff UPI Senior News Analyst Published 6/2/2003 7:46 PM WASHINGTON, June 2 (UPI) -- As the U.S. media still digests the shock and lessons of the Jayson Blair affair at The New York Times, a far older and far worse journalistic wrong may soon be posthumously righted. The Pulitzer Prize board is reviewing the award it gave to New York Times Moscow correspondent Walter Duranty more than 70 years ago for his shamefully -- and knowingly -- false coverage of the great Ukrainian famine. "In response to an international campaign, the Pulitzer Prize board has begun an 'appropriate and serious review' of the 1932 award given to Walter Duranty of The New York Times," Andrew Nynka reported in the May 25 edition of the New Jersey-published Ukrainian Weekly. The campaign included a powerful article in the May 7 edition of the conservative National Review magazine. Sig Gissler, administrator for the Pulitzer Prize board, told the Ukrainian Weekly that the "confidential review by the 18-member Pulitzer Prize board is intended to seriously consider all relevant information regarding Mr. Duranty's award," Nynka wrote. The utter falsehood of Duranty's claims that there was no famine at all in the Ukraine -- a whopping lie that was credulously swallowed unconditionally by the likes of George Bernard Shaw, H.G. Wells and many others -- has been documented and common knowledge for decades. But neither the Times nor the Pulitzer board ever before steeled themselves to launch such a ponderous, unprecedented -- and potentially immensely embarrassing -- procedure. Indeed, Gissler told The Ukrainian Weekly that there are no written procedures regarding prize revocation. There are no standards or precedents for revoking the prize. The Ukrainian famine of 1929-33, named the "Harvest of Sorrow" by historian Robert Conquest in his classic book on the subject, was the largest single act of genocide in European history. The death toll even exceeded the Nazi Holocaust against the Jewish people a few years later. In all, 10 million Ukrainians, most of them peasants, died as catastrophic, stupid and cruel collectivization policies were imposed by Soviet dictator Josef Stalin on the richest, most fertile, wheat-exporting breadbasket in the world. In the decades before World War I, its annual grain exports regularly vastly outstripped those of the American Midwest. The enforced collectivization of land and the unbelievable death toll were deliberately whipped up by conscious policy and malice. Stalin was determined to crush the slightest remaining glimmer of Ukrainian national identity and also to liquidate the "kulaks" or wealthy peasants, which in practical terms meant any family with the expertise to raise a decent crop on the land. Mass shootings of entire families, or so-called liquidations, were commonplace. The production of food collapsed. Yet the mainstream Western media was virtually blind to what was going on. And in the United States, serious newspapers across the nation took their lead from the then-revered and utterly trusted Duranty. As Richard Pipes, a leading U.S. authority on Soviet history, noted, "It has been said that no man has done more to paint in the United States a favorable image of the Soviet Union at a time when it was suffering under the most savage tyranny known to man." British journalist Malcolm Muggeridge, London correspondent for the left-wing Manchester Guardian, scooped the world by fearlessly going into the Ukraine and defying the Soviet secret police -- then known as the OGPU -- to expose the true horrors of the famine. He also knew Duranty well and observed him closely. Writing 40 years later in his classic memoirs "Chronicles of Wasted Time," Muggeridge concluded that Duranty was a sociopath without a grain of professional integrity or human decency to his name. He described Duranty as "a little, sharp-witted, energetic man" who liked "to hint at aristocratic connections and classical learning, of which, I must say, he produced little evidence. One of his legs had been amputated after a train accident, but he was very agile at getting about with an artificial one." Duranty may well have been blackmailed or bribed or both by the Soviets, but Muggeridge concluded that his real motive in lying outright about what he knew to be true and helping the Soviets in their unprecedented, astonishingly successful cover-up was a far simpler one: He loved and revered Stalin precisely because he was so colossally murderous and cruel. "He admired Stalin and the regime precisely because they were so strong and ruthless. 'I put my money on Stalin' was one of his favorite sayings.'" Indeed, Muggeridge related that in one conversation they had, Duranty even admitted to him that he knew there was a catastrophic food shortage, even famine in Ukraine and that he knew the Soviet authorities were prepared to kill large numbers of people there to keep control. As Muggeridge described the conversation, "But, he said, banging the sides of the sofa, remember that you can't make omelettes without breaking eggs -- another favorite saying. They'll win, he went on; they're bound to win. If necessary, they'll harness the peasants to the ploughs but I tell you they'll get the harvest in and feed the people that matter. The people that mattered were the men in the Kremlin and their underlings. ... The others were just serfs, reserves of the proletariat, as Stalin called them. Some would die, surely, perhaps, quite a lot, but there were enough, and to spare." An appalled and a fascinated Muggeridge listened to all this and later recalled, "I had the feeling, listening to this outburst, that in thus justifying Soviet brutality and ruthlessness, Duranty was in someway getting his own back for being small, and losing a leg, and not having the aristocratic lineage ... he claimed to have. ... Duranty was a little browbeaten boy looking up admiringly at a big bully." In his own lifetime -- he lived to the age of 73, though he died broke and forgotten -- Duranty was never called to account. Indeed, as Muggeridge also noted, "He came to be accepted as the great Russian expert in America, and played a major part in shaping President Roosevelt's policies" towards the Soviet Union. The Pulitzer Prize board's re-evaluation of Duranty's award therefore comes late in the day, to put it mildly, but it is still a welcome, indeed necessary gesture towards American journalistic integrity and to the hecatombs of dead whose cries were hushed. "

I just can't help but wonder if anger or nostalgia is the stronger of the two emotions driving the protests in NY...

Jackson Creek Dome has some dope slabbage if you are into that - and I never saw another party there when I climbed there. If you head back to the headstone area - Topaz is one of the first lines on the left as you arrive at the rock from the trail. It starts out on slab, transitions to a dead-vertical crimpfest on incut chicken heads, and climbs over an amazing roof on the way to the anchors. The last climb on the right side of the Headstone goes at 10a, and has an incredible position. There are a couple of worthwhile trad lines in between these routes as well. Post the deets if you head back there or to McCurdy. Not exactly in the Platte - but check out 11 Mile Canyon for moderate trad as well. I hear that Mueller Canyon State Park has come formations that might be worth a visit as well.

Post some pics if you have any. BTW - did you scope out the backside at all? Supposedly lots of potential for new routes that no one has bothered with because there's so much good stuff on the frontside...

France's has been building the political equivalent of the Maginot Line with respect to the Islamists for quite a while now....

Did you guys get on Topaz or Dave's dillema on the Headstone/Tombstone at Devils Head? I thought that those were two of the better routes there for sure. Amazing routes. That is one of the better climbing spots I came across in CO with tons of untapped potential - and I am amazed at how little traffic it gets. Plus if you climb to the top of the fire lookout after you are done you have an unmatched overview of most of the formations in the Plate - with close up views of the Taj Mahal, Jackson Creek Dome, and a few other obscure crags that litter the Platte. One suggestion for Plexus, JRCO, et al is to hit McCurdy Park Tower (last few pages of Hubbles book on the Plate). Might be one of the better concentrations of moderate-multipitch stuff anyhwere, on fantastic rock, in a remote and beautiful setting. I wish I had spent more than a weekend there when I lived in Colorado.

Older example -Chile. Salvador Allende was democratically elected. The US was worried about the Socialist wave spreading in South America and provided financing, funding, and intellegence for a coup. Allende was killed and Pinochet was put in place, we turned a blind eye to his death squads over the next 20 years. Similar situations in El Salvador and Guatemela. Recent past: We backed Sadaam until he didn't listen to orders anymore. Did we sqawk when he was using poison gas against the Kurds or Iranians? No - because he was serving a purpose. He held together a fractionious country, was a counter point to Iran's fundamental government, and sold oil to us. Current: Rather than put together a government in Afganastan that includes local coalitions, we choose a government that was put together by Wolfiwitz back in D.C., and contains folks that haven't lived there for 20 years. Harmet Karzi was picked for one reason, he was previously an employee of Unacal, which was pushing for the hugh gas pipeline that will go through Afganistan. Or you could pick our annual $3 Billion that goes to Israel, including major military hardware, which they use to control the Palestians. You can researh thru Amnesty Internation for Israel's track record. My bottom line is this - we'er a county of great folks (mostly) with quite a bit of weath. Can't we put that weath to use at home and abroad in ways that will benefit more people, and will be less intrusive than military spending. I think the answer is yes. And I don't mean isolationism. I mean no imperialism. You can be engaged in the world without depending on military or violent solutions as the standard approach. The principal objection I have to your characterization is that it completely ignores the geopolitical realities which animated the decision making and fails to address the alternatives which reality presented at the time. Any serious attempt to understand the history of the 20th century and evaluate the morality actions that took place within it has to account for the fundamental struggle that occured between the free world and totalitarianism - principally the conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union. Can anyone seriously deny that the fundamental political objective for the United states during the latter half of the 20th century was eliminating Soviet totalitarianism in all of its manifestations about the globe, or that the US failed to devote sufficient resources to this task? Take a look at the sphere in which we concentrated the bulk of our resources - the Soviet Union and its satellite states - and claim that the people who reside their are less free as a result of our efforts, or that our fundamental objective was to deny them democracy. Feel free to travel to Poland or Moscow or what used to be East Germany and lecture them about how they have less political freedom as a result of American initiative - and that they should restore the systems that collapsed under the pressure orchestrated by the United States. Good luck. Ditto for Japan and Germany - both had some fine democracies going on until we came along and ruined everything. And as far as the Middle East is concerned - I am certain that scrupulously declining to take sides in the Iran/Iraq war would have led to the establishment of a Democratic Eden all across the region - because that's what the Iranians were fighting for - as evinced by the political system they established in their own state. And as far as Saddam is concerned, once we were on his team we should have backed him in the end just to be consistent - I mean we shamefully turned our backs on Stalin after we jointly eliminated the common threat posed by Nazism, "they were our friends as long as it suited us and then..." - so its doubly outrageous this time around . Certainly the correct stance would have been to have let him run roughsod all over the Arabian Pinensula - because its not the ends that your policy is serving that matters - its consistent alliances irrespective of the consequences for humanity that determine the morality of any foreign policy decision. As far as the 3 billion that goes to Israel - as compared to the 1-2 billion annually that goes to Egypt - every dollar is obviously directed towards thwarting democracy - because if there's one undemocratic state in the entire Middle East - it's definitely Israel. Meanwhile the Palestinians used their limited mandate to set up a model state, equal if not superior to the oases of democracy established by their ideological brethren in Syria, Algeria, Libya, et al. And speaking of ideological brethren - I am sure that if we stopped meddling in their affairs the Islamists could finally set about establishing democracies without our interference in their affairs. I mean - the Saudis certainly have their faults, but if we would stop our anti-democratic interference and let the Islamists overwhelm the current regimes I am cerain that they would establish liberal democracies that would turn Sweden green with envy immediately - because that's what they have been campaigning for all along. They mainstream press and Fox may have even deluded you into thinking otherwise, but actually they have been waging jihad in order to finally legalize gay marriage and modify the Sharia to provide insitutional support for freedom of expression throughout the Arab world. Wow - that was a fun rant. I think that you are a reasonable guy who only wants what's best for the world, but taking a Michael Moorian approach to history and excising a tidbit here and a tidbit there and turning the full scope of American initiative into a bizzare collage of anti-democratic intrigue is neither accurate nor an effective means of bringing that about. If anything - I think that the greatest risk in the years ahead is not that the US will intervene too forcefully in the world's affairs, but that the citizenry will have grown weary under the weight of such specious critiques and decide to withdraw from the world entirely - consequences be damned. If the average citizen sees that the US can't intervene in *&^%ing Somalia or $#@ing Kosovo without being denounced and accused of aquisitiveness, and imperialism - it's probably best to leave the world to its own devices so that the protesters can finally face the consequences of their rhetoric . Sudan and Rwanda are exhibit A IMO - and if history is any guide - there will be plenty more catastrophes that will occur in between gulf that exists between the global Left's self-righteous posturing and it's ability to act in support of its ideals - as in, again - Sundan. The EU has 2-3 million troops engaged in nothing more serious than securing the cappucino stand down the street while the outrages in Sudan continue...

Brian: I know that pop nihilism has become all the rage these days, as the tendency amongst the leftists of the world to equate Moqtada Al-Sadr with the French resistance has shown - but do you really believer that all political violence can be evaluated apart from the context in which it occurs and the ends which it is dedicated to furthering? By this logic the assasination attempt on Hitler by his officers in an effort to end his reign and the assasination of Lincoln are morally equivalent to one another. If you accept that all assasination attempts - be they against Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot or FDR, Churchill, or Sadat are all equally illegitimate - then I suppose that your stance at least has a theoretical cohesiveness going for it, but it would be a bit much to claim that it makes sense in any functional moral framework. I can see how one could equate all political violence while operating in the theoretical ether - but on the ground - any moral framework that fails to distinguish between violence based on the means, ends, and targets runs the risk of conflating an assasination attempt on Pol Pot with the 9/11 attacks falls far short of anything resembling seriousness or legitimacy. As in the case of the death penalty, the Left seems to have a hard time distinquishing between acts that are physically equivalent and morally equivalent -and I think that

My buddy just got a full set-up for $400. Once you've got the gear you are just looking at gas $$. Thanks to everyone for the links BTW.

Yeah if you check the gauges there was a fairly significant spike in the flows after the recent rain event - I think the Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie went from about 250cfs to close to 10,000 cfs in about 24 hours. The surge could certainly have dislodged some debris - but keeping an eye out for wood should be part of the standard practice for everyone all the time. I have often thought it would be nice if there was a cc.com like board for boaters where people could notify one another of new logjams and other hazards. It wouldn't be a substitute for independent assesment - but would be mighty helpful nonetheless.

So how many of the folks that post here paddle? Seems like there's quite a few based on the responses I've had after going fishing for spare gear in the Yard Sale Forum. I know of at least one - Fromage - besides myself as I bought a padddle from him recently - but there must be others. Raise your hand for a headcount. Also - FWIW it looks like a bunch of local rivers will be in condition tomorrow after a long drought - especially the moderate stuff that I am into. Someone should go out and get after them! Washington Gauge Info

So what is the date? I still want to take my niece and/or nephew out climbing and this would be an ideal time.

I was just trying to troll Gowans by insulting Scottland, the Democrats, Al Gore, and socialism simultaneously - maybe if I had worked exchange students and runners into the mix.... Looks like I got some other people going though so it wasn't all in vain.

Just because no Scottland can't even sue it's way to a medal in the Special Olympics, let alone the real ones, is no reason to pin the poor sportsmanship on display on the US. If the element of ligitigiousness is manifest in American culture - as best exmplified by the example of Gore's retracted concession+demanding a recount+not accepting the results of the recount after they've been validated seven different ways+whining about the results for four years - perhaps the best thing to do would be to get rid of the Democratic Party and their most loyal base of support - the trial lawyers - and ship them off into the warm embrace of their whiny ass ideological kinfolk in that grand nebulosity known as the International Community. With the looming population decline and gerontification in Europe I am sure that they'll be happy to make room for a bunch of their fellow socialists...

All of those tarriffs suck - but if you judge the candidates by their rhetoric and their party's historical tendencies then it's reasonable to believe that the tarriff situation would only get worse under a Kerry administration. AFA Latin America is concerned, their collective fate over the course of the last century exemplifies the typical trajectory of economies that have followed the tarriff-barrier model....

Yeah - nothing creates jobs, wealth, and innovation like protectionism. Just look at South America...

You can pretty much just dip the cannister in the hot water that you've melted by the time the pressure drops to get the stove going at full bore once again - and repeat as necessary until you've got all of the hot water that you need. Works like a charm.

Matt - I think the point with respect to Kosovo is that this was a millitary operation that was not authorized by the UN Security council - being strenuously opposed therein by the Russians and the Chineese - two nations which, have somehow morphed into distinguished arbiters of geopolitical morality since Clintons day - when no one seemed to care what they, or the UN had to say about using arms in an attempt to mitigate the carnage in the Balkans. Since a UN security council resolution backing any use of arms has become the sine qua non for legitimacy since that time, it is fair to point out that in this respect Clinton defied this element of the "International Community" just as brazenly as Bush did, yet there were very few people indicting either the legality or the morality of the intervention there on this ground. This, as you well know, is quite unlike the present situation, in which Bush's failure to secure UN security council authorization prior to the invasion is paraded about as one of the Presidents chief failings with respect to Iraq, and as grounds to indict the legitimacy, legality, and the morality of the intervention there. The last point is the most curious of all - in that in any coherent set of ethics an action is either considered moral or immoral in its own right, not because an authority of any sort approves or condemns it. Yet I have seen and heard thousands of people claim that they would have supported the war if the UN security council had authorized it - as if such an authorization would have changed the essential nature of the invasion in any way whatsoever. Oddly enough, I never saw them out protesting the use of force in Kosovo on these grounds.....

I know it's bad form to answer a rhetorical question with a real answer, but you might to start with the Congressional Budget office - Link. While you are at it, could you please furnish figures and/or an argument based on them that shows precisely how, under any circumstances, this operation will result in a net financial gain for the US? If you are unable to do this and wish to instead revert to the Cabal-of-Oilmen theory to explain the millitary intervention in Iraq, feel free to brake with form and back the claim with facts. Bonus points if you somehow integrate Tony Blair into the Cabal - as well as the Dutch, the Spainiards, the Italians, all of Eastern Europe et al. Triple bonus points for explaining why - since we've always just been after the oil - we left the oilfields in Iraqi hands after 91, etc, etc, etc. It might require a bit of reading and or a bit of math -but in the end you will have a template that you can use to reduce all American millitary inventions in history - past, present, and future - to efforts to secure oil supplies and you will never have to pretend to think about these matters again! Just modify the template and voila...Bosnia/Kosovo - all about the oil. Haiti -oil. Somalia - had to be the oil. Cold War - an attempt to get our hands on Russian Oil. Vietnam - Oil. Korea - Oil. WWII - all that German Oil. WWI - ditto.

This sucks in a huge way. That terrain on the backside of Upper Northway has dealt out the best payoff for a bit of hiking in the state for so long - it will be painful to see it go. I can't think of another place where 10 minutes of hiking opens the door to that kind of vert and that kind of terrain. I am going to have to tip a 40 atop Northway this spring and have a moment of silence for the passing of the state's best lift served run.

The scope of the is such that its probably no longer possible to include routes at a lower grade, but there's tons of grade II and especially III stuff in the AAJ's of yore - all the way through the early to mid-90's or thereabouts. Hopefully there will be exceptions to this rule once in a while for routes that while not Grade IV, are noteworthy nonetheless.

Gets easier every time. I am, however, slightly dissapointed that you didn't refer to the armed millitants as Freedom Fighters - but I am confident that you can remedy this shortcoming and return to your typical form in subsequent posts.

I can't believe that my evil homonym has bypassed this opportunity to launch into an impassioned defense of Al-Jezeera's scrupulous impartiality and strict adherence to the highest ethical standards....