JayB

5.10 Ascents. Trad-Slipper. Edge well, sensitive underfoot, comfortable enough for multi-pitch. Cheap at www.sportextreme.com. Used them for up to 5.11 slab.

One of the principal satisfactions that I will derive from a Kerry victory, if it occurs, is watching the current administration's critics come to the realization that most of the rifts between the US and that great vaporosity known as "The International Community" are the result of concrete differences in national interests and objectives - none of which will disappear when there's a new man at the head of the executive branch. This is especially true with regards to the Middle East and the conflict between Islam and the West.

Well - if this organization has anything going for it, it's demographics. I bet even the folks at the AARP weep when they compare the size of their target demographic ten years out to these people's. I am anxiously awaiting their efforts to pass punitive legislation against thin, fit people. Oh wait - we're already chipping in to cover their health care expenses........

I too wish my employer believed in America. I don't believe the best way to grow and support American industry is by subsidizing industries that can be done better, cheaper and quicker elsewhere.(bagging chalk being the epitome of this) That's the path Europe's taken and it (with few exceptions) isn't leading them to success. By keeping jobs such as bagging chalk local Metolius inefficently deploys their capital - which could be used developing new products, as an example, making them less competitive. Innovation - both in design, and manufacturing is the way the 1st world will suceed. Amen brother. Thank-fucking-God there's at least one other person on this site that reads The Economist. Now if only someone could let the citizens of Oregon in on the secret that forcing motorists to pay for someone to pump their gas actually results in a net job-loss for the State rather than a net gain....

Ramuta's.

I have seen some pretty-cool homemade slideshows with soundtracks and effects out there, but have never asked the folks who put them together what software they used to make them. Anyone have any experience with software that: 1)Will run on a PC with a processor in the 1GHz range. 2) Maintains the quality of the original (digital) images in the slides. 3)Makes it easy to add narration and a soundtrack, and control the duration of each slide. 4) Has some other simple-but-cool effects - motion from stills, etc. Thanks for the input.

There's a service from one of the credit bureaus that goes $10/month that will alert you within 24-hours of any new accounts, lines of credit, etc being opened under your name. I left my wallet on the roof of my car while leaving Darrington a couple of weeks ago and it had everything but a passport in it, but thankfully there has been no fraudulent activity as of yet. Nonetheless, I will be subscribing to the service. There's also a good resource for identity theft provided by the federal government, which has a step-by-step checklist for what you need to do to clear fraudulent debts and prevent any further activity. You have my sympathy. It was probably stolen one of those worthless Scottish-socialist-lowlife emmigrants who was deep in the throes of sheep withdrawal and made an emergency purchase of 2-dozen Love-Ewe dolls.....

"The short explanation is this: as the ice freezes fast under supercooled conditions, the surface can get covered except for a small hole. Water expands when it freezes. As freezing continues, the expanding ice under the surface forces the remaining water up through the hole and it freezes around the edge forming a hollow spike. Eventually, the whole thing freezes and the spike is left." I am the winner: "ce freezes from the outside in, and expands as it freezes, so my theory is that the water in the interior is both supercooled and under pressure, and that the ice-projections form when a minor crack develops in the surface of the cube, at which point the water flows through and freezes into position extremely quickly. The water in the central portion remains liquid, and flows through the core until the projection becomes so narrow that the entire thing freezes solid and the flow stops."

How would you rate it for kayaking at 800cfs?

What an awesome trip/TR. Thanks for sharing.

Ice freezes from the outside in, and expands as it freezes, so my theory is that the water in the interior is both supercooled and under pressure, and that the ice-projections form when a minor crack develops in the surface of the cube, at which point the water flows through and freezes into position extremely quickly. The water in the central portion remains liquid, and flows through the core until the projection becomes so narrow that the entire thing freezes solid and the flow stops.

Tieton is the best bet - but there may be some folks running the Skagit for a couple of weeks longer.

And the German Nihilists.

"it is likely that control of afghanistan and transfer of central asian oil played a critical role in *triggering* the 9/11 attack (even though it had been planned long before)" Flesh this one out - should be great reading. My Quote: "There were plans to do this at one time - during the Clinton administration - but they were discarded by the oil company prior to the Bush's innauguration. Such plans could always be revived at some point, but the guy has no evidence whatsoever to support the assertion that such considerations motivated the attack." Your response "except for the negotiating that took place with the taliban up to August 01, when the bushies told them to behave or be ready to get squashed" This is classic. You say that the administration was negotiating with the Taliban until August of 01, and leave it at that. What you are implying, of course, is that the administration was actively negotiating with the Taliban in an effort to pave the way for the construction of an oil pipline through Afghanistan, and the Taliban refused so the US attacked. The record seems to show that the administration was negotiating with the Taliban, but were doing so as part of an ongoing effort to fund a campaign to help Afhghanis involved in farming Opium poppies to switch to other crops. This is something rather different than what your statement implies. But that's the point isn't it? Speaking of your statement, in it you also seem to be implying that the administration knew about the attacks in advance and permitted them so that the US would have a pretext to attack Afhganistan and build the pipeline? If not this, then what - exactly - are you claiming when you state that the administration told the Taliban to "behave or get ready to get squashed?" As far as the movie is concerned, it's central claims are secret - so it's hardly necessary to see the movie to debate them. I have never seen "Triumph of the Will" either, but I am nonetheless familiar with its content and the ends which it was attempting to further. I have yet to read "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," but again - I am familiar with both its claims and the agenda which it wishes to advance and am thus in a position to dispute both of them. I will see the movie eventually, once I can do so without contributing a cent to Michael Moore.

Simon may be full of himself, loathe himself, plagued with self-doubt, have mixed feelings about his childhood, etc, etc, etc - but this has nothing to do with the accuracy or significance of the factual errors or methodological flaws in Moore's work that he raises in his critique of Moore's film. I'm actually not sure what you were trying to say in your post. You stated that you aren't familiar with the facts and ask for forgiveness, quote a journalist that who says that journalism is morally indefensible, then restate the known by saying that Simon is a journalist and Moore is not. Is this some kind of round-about double syllogism? 1. What all journalists do is morally indefensible. Moore is not a journalist. What Moore does is not morally indefensible. 2. What all journalists do is morally indefensible. Scott Simon is a journalist. What Scott Simon does is indefensible. Cosmic. I think that the argument would be stronger in Haiku form.

"as if you cared about iraqis ... please spare us the hypocrisy." This is an evasion, not a counterargument. Better go back to Moore's website and memorize some more talking points. Leaving me aside for a moment - Michael Moore purports to care about them, so it is incumbent upon him to assess their condition both under/as it would be under Hussein and contrast that with their current condition and prospects.

Here's another one - Moore's claim that one of the administrations prime motivationsn for mounting the invasion of Afghanistan was motivated by the immediate prospect of building an oil pipeline through the country. There were plans to do this at one time - during the Clinton administration - but they were discarded by the oil company prior to the Bush's innauguration. Such plans could always be revived at some point, but the guy has no evidence whatsoever to support the assertion that such considerations motivated the attack. There's also the larger problems in the movie, such as the complete absence of any consideration of the motives underlying Brittain, Spain, Italy and the Netherland's participation. All dupes of the dark cabal of Texans? How about some consideration of facts of life under Saddam and the implications of doing nothing?Then there's the intellectual incoherence that runs throughout the entire premise in which he simultaneously argues that the administration consists of a bunch of incompetent ideologues who are too dense to be entrusted with the responsibilities of their respective offices AND a sinister bunch of puppetmasters intent on and capable of subverting the entire apparatus of government to serve their particular ends. Which is it? The sinister cabal or the pack of clowns? You were on stronger ground when you were singing the praises of Kim Jong Il there, amigo.

There are people out there who are no friends of the Bush administration who also have reasonable grounds to criticize Moore's films. Moore's assertion that the administration gave the Bin Laden family a free-pass out of the country after the attacks has been conclusively refuted by scores of reporters, and none other than Richard Clarke himself. This is just one of many false claims made in the film that his cheerleaders on this site and elsewhere have yet to address.

More commentary by Scott Simon When Punchline Trumps Honesty There's more McCarthy than Murrow in the work of Michael Moore. BY SCOTT SIMON Tuesday, July 27, 2004 12:01 a.m. Michael Moore has won the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival, and may win an Oscar for the kind of work that got Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair, and Jack Kelly fired. Trying to track the unproven innuendoes and conspiracies in a Michael Moore film or book is as futile as trying to count the flatulence jokes in one by Adam Sandler. Some journalists and critics have acted as if his wrenching of facts is no more serious than a movie continuity problem, like showing a 1963 Chevy in 1956 Santa Monica. A documentary film doesn't have to be fair and balanced, to coin a phrase. But it ought to make an attempt to be accurate. It can certainly be pointed and opinionated. But it should not knowingly misrepresent the truth. Much of Michael Moore's films and books, however entertaining to his fans and enraging to his critics, seems to regard facts as mere nuisances to the story he wants to tell. Back in 1991 that sharpest of film critics, the New Yorker's Pauline Kael, blunted some of the raves for Mr. Moore's "Roger and Me" by pointing out how the film misrepresented many facts about plant closings in Flint, Mich., and caricatured people it purported to feel for. "The film I saw was shallow and facetious," said Kael, "a piece of gonzo demagoguery that made me feel cheap for laughing." His methods remain unrefined in "Fahrenheit 9/11." Mr. Moore ignores or misrepresents the truth, prefers innuendo to fact, edits with poetic license rather than accuracy, and strips existing news footage of its context to make events and real people say what he wants, even if they don't. As Kael observed back then, Mr. Moore's method is no more high-minded than "the work of a slick ad exec." The main premise of Mr. Moore's recent work is that both Presidents Bush have been what amounts to Manchurian Candidates of the Saudi royal family. Mr. Moore suggests (he depends so much on innuendo that a simple, declarative verb like "says" is usually impossible) the Saudi government, having soured on their pawns for unstated reasons, launched the attacks of Sept. 11. "What if these weren't wacko terrorists, but military pilots who signed onto a suicide mission?" Moore asks in the best-selling "Dude, Where's My Country?" "What if they were doing this at the behest of either the Saudi government or certain disgruntled members of the Saudi royal family?" Central to Mr. Moore's indictment of the current President Bush is his charge that the U.S. government secretly assisted the evacuation of bin Laden family members from the U.S. in the hours following the Sept. 11 attacks, when all other flights nationwide were grounded. He supports this with grainy images of indecipherable documents. But on our show on Saturday, Richard Clarke, the government's former counter-terrorism adviser and no apologist for the Bush administration, told us that he had authorized those flights, but only after air travel had been restored and all the Saudis had been questioned. "I think Moore's making a mountain of a molehill," he said. Moreover, said Mr. Clarke, "He never interviewed me." Instead, Mr. Moore had simply lifted a clip from an ABC interview. Perhaps Mr. Moore just didn't want to get an answer that he didn't want to hear. (See how useful innuendoes can be?) In what is perhaps the most wrenching scene in the film, an Iraqi woman is shown wailing amid the rubble caused by a bomb that killed members of her family. I do not doubt her account, or her sorrow. I have interviewed Iraqis about U.S. bombs that killed civilians. People who agree to wars should see the human damage bombs can do. But reporters who were taken around to see the sites of civilian deaths during the bombing of Baghdad also observed that some of those errant bombs were fired by Iraqi anti-aircraft crews. Mr. Moore doesn't let the audience know when and where this bomb was dropped, or otherwise try to identify the culprit of the tragedy. Mr. Moore tries hard to identify himself with U.S. troops and their concerns. But he spends an awful lot of effort depicting them as dupes and brutes. At one point in "Fahrenheit 9/11," someone off-camera prods a U.S. soldier into singing a favorite hip-hop song with profane lyrics. Mr. Moore then runs the soldier's voice over combat footage, to make it seem as if the soldier were insensitively singing along with the destruction. In another scene, U.S. soldiers make savage jokes about the awkward effects of rigor mortis on one part of the corpse of an Iraqi soldier. I do not doubt the authenticity of those pictures. But I also have no particular reason to trust it. A few basic details, like where and when the video was shot, are considered traditional reporting techniques (especially after the front-page photos of British soldiers brutalizing Iraqi prisoners turned out to be frauds). A few other basic facts might have informed the audience. Was the Iraqi killed in battle? By a suicide bomb? Moore says the U.S. soldiers are good boys turned coarse in an immoral war. But I have also heard those kind of ugly and anxious jokes about corpses from overstressed emergency room physicians. In the New York Times, Paul Krugman wrote that, "Viewers may come away from Moore's movie believing some things that probably aren't true," and that he "uses association and innuendo to create false impressions." Try to imagine those phrases on a marquee. But that is his rave review! He lauds "Fahrenheit 9/11" for its "appeal to working-class Americans." Do we really want to believe that only innuendo, untruths, and conspiracy theories can reach working-class Americans? Governments of both parties have assuaged Saudi interests for more than 50 years. (I wonder if Mr. Moore grasps how much the jobs of auto workers in Flint depended on cheap oil.) Sound questions about the course, costs, and grounds for the war in Iraq have been raised by voices across the political spectrum. But when 9/11 Commission Chairman Kean has to take a minute at a press conference, as he did last Thursday, to knock down a proven falsehood like the secret flights of the bin Laden family, you wonder if those who urge people to see Moore's film are informing or contaminating the debate. I see more McCarthy than Murrow in the work of Michael Moore. No matter how hot a blowtorch burns, it doesn't shed much light. Mr. Simon hosts NPR's "Weekend Edition Saturday" and is the author of theforthcoming "Pretty Birds," a novel about the siege of Sarajevo, from Random House.

Pretty sweet photo.

Three hundred thousand dead and Moore shows only kites and a few weddings.

Yeah we had the full-on reflector oven going on up there. The only thing working in our favor was starting out a couple of hours before the sun hit the face and a fairly constant breeze on the upper portions of the route.

Yeah we the full-on reflector oven going on up there. The only thing working in our favor was starting out a couple of hours before the sun hit the face and a fairly constant breeze on the upper portions of the route.

Were you part of the couple that arrived about 6:00PM Friday afternoon? We were rapping down Westward Ho at that time after finishing up the Blueberry route. Big thumbs up for taking the time to head up there and repair the stations.

You obviously need to select your climbing partners much more carefully...