stinkyclimber

Holy shit, there is some weird-ass shit over there on the Mountie board. I don't mean to stir up the old Mountie-bashing pot, but wow, it really is stunning. Long arguments over whether a particular route is on the "Basic Approved List" or whether the Project Bandaloop dancers have a backup on their Grigris. Wow. (not that discussions here are any more earth-shatteringly relevant or important!) Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Whatever...

Actually, jaee, yes, I have. Falling into a small crevasse in snow doesn't produce a lot of force, and any force that is there is partially absorbed when the rope digs into the snow at the lip, and by the fricton of the rope over snow. Having said that, I carefully qualified my recommendation by saying I only use this set up on the smaller or less active glaciers we get in the south coast range (you know, those little pocket glaciers or cirque glaciers), or (and mainly) on ski trips where the chance of falling into a crevasse is slight, and where there will be a lot of soft snow to arrest a fall. I would not take this set up onto Rainier in the summer where slots are opening up, and the snow is hard. Have YOU ever held a normal crevasse fall? I am always amazed when I see 11mm ropes on Baker in early May...40ft snowpack, knee deep loose snow on the surface, and everyone on skis - WTF does one need 20lbs of rope for in this situation. Alaska, or even Rainier, in the summer is a different story. But the guy was asking for a rope for occassional use, not for heavily glaciated peaks. I'd rather use a small rope, than not have a big one because it was too heavy/I was too lazy to bring it along. But it is one's own call...

Hint: they are different languages

Mmmm....poutine.

What about a correlation between owning ice tools and being a nut? I wish I could post a Tami Knight cartoon of an iceclimber here...

An even more interesting topic: Number of Canadians Who Don an Australian Flag When Travelling Abroad Because Most of the World Now Associates the Maple Leaf With Wanker Americans Too Scared or Ashamed To Show Their True Colours And Instead Fuck Up Another Perfectly Good Flag. Wearing the Aussie flag is easy. Nailing the accent is harder - to cover up my shitty Aussie accent, I have found it best to act like a drunken, misogynist prat with bad fashion sense. That gets people thinking, "Australian". Or Irish. Or British.

Schizophrenia is a disease that strikes otherwise healthy young males, usually sometime after their late-20s. Both bad people and good people get it. I could get it. Even you could get it! Of course, I don't keep weaponry like swords at home. Ooops - you have many guns. Hope you are feeling OK... no paranoid delusionary episodes? (I mean besides when you are posting here)

No, I don't think that is implied. Rather, jailing/executing someone who is schizophrenic won't really have the intended effect: punishment, and rehabilitation. He won't know he is being punished (if he is schizophrenic, he is already paranoid that everyone is out to get him). And he won't get rehabilitated in a penitentary...he'll require anti-pyschotropic drugs and counselling support. Locking up people who have severe mental illnesses seems kind of pointless. I suppose it makes the victim's family feel better, but the justice system isn't supposed to cater exclusively to the victim (otherwise it is just vengence). But whatever, the US justice system seems so perverted, I guess it doesn't really matter....whatever it takes for the DA and the judge to get re-elected.

He hardly pulled it off...the cat (or turkey) is out of the bag. Only took a week for it to leak. Of course, Fox News probably will make light of it, if they mention it at all, so most voters won't even hear about it, so you are probably right - he did pull it off!

You really think it was a "gesture to the troops". If that was the case, why did he bring all 5 photographers and cameramen, and then carried a fake turkey? Surely if it was truly a "gesture to the troops", he could have left the photogs behind, and carried a REAL turkey. Seems like it was really a gesture to the US public. Which case using a fake turkey does speak volumes about his philosophy: as a famously drunken Canadian author said it best, "don't let the facts get in the way of a good story". Fake turkey. Fake WMDs. Fake terrorists. Where does it end? Re-election, I suppose...

Here is Michael Moore's take on the fake turkey. I look forward to watching the shit storm that Michael Moore usually provokes on this site... Turkeys on the Moon... from Michael Moore December 8, 2003 Dear Mr. Bush, Well, it's going on two weeks now since your surprise visit to one of the two countries you now run and, I have to say, I'm still warmed by the gesture. Man, take me along next time! I understand only 13 members of the media went with you -- and it turns out only ONE of them was an actual reporter for a newspaper. But you did take along FIVE photographers (hey, I get it, screw the words, it's all about the pictures!), a couple wire service guys, and a crew from the Fox News Channel (fair and balanced!). Then, I read in the paper this weekend that that big turkey you were holding in Baghdad (you know, the picture that's supposed to replace the now-embarrassing footage of you on that aircraft carrier with the sign "Mission Accomplished") -- well, it turns out that big, beautiful turkey of yours was never eaten by the troops! It wasn't eaten by anyone! That's because it wasn't real! It was a STUNT turkey, brought in to look like a real edible turkey for all those great camera angles. Now I know some people will say you are into props (like the one in the lower extremities of your flyboy suit), but hey, I get it, this is theater! So what if it was a bogus turkey? The whole trip was bogus, all staged to look like "news." The fake honey glaze on that bird wasn't much different from the fake honey glaze that covers this war. And the fake stuffing in the fake bird was just the right symbol for our country during these times. America loves fake honey glaze, it loves to be stuffed, and, dammit, YOU knew that -- that's what makes you so in touch with the people you lead! It was also a good idea that you made the "press" on that trip to Baghdad pull the shades down on the plane. No one in the media entourage complained. They like the shades pulled and they like to be kept in the dark. It's more fun that way. And, when you made them take the batteries out of their cell phones so they wouldn't be able to call anyone, and they dutifully complied -- that was genius! I think if you had told them to put their hands on their heads and touch their noses with their tongues, they would have done that, too! That's how much they like you. You could have played "Simon Says" the whole way over there. It wouldn't have been that much different from "Karl Says," a game they LOVE to play every day with Mr. Rove. Well, if you're planning any surprises for Christmas, don't forget to include me. When I heard last week that you wanted to send a man back to the moon, I thought, get the fake goose ready -- that's where ol' George is going for the holidays! I don't blame you, what with nearly 3 million jobs disappeared, and a $281 billion surplus disappeared, and the USA stuck in a war that will never end -- who wouldn't want to go to the moon! This time, take ALL the media with you! Embed them on the moon! They'll love it there! It looks just like Crawford! You can golf on the moon, too. You'll have so much fun up there, you might not want to come back. Better take Cheney with you, too. Pretend it's a medical experiment or something. "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for every American who's sick and tired of all this crap." Yours, Michael Moore mmflint@aol.com www.michaelmoore.com

For smaller alpine glaciers on the coast (i.e. all those except for the ones on the big glaciated volcanos), I have found a 35m length of 7mm cord great. It packs as small as a water bottle, and should have plenty of strength for the short falls expected on the usual coast range glacier. Shit, people rap on 6mm, so 7mm should be plenty strong. Obviously, more than 3 people is getting kind of tight on this length. It is cheap, and so small that you are more likely to bring it with you in situations where you would hesitate to haul along a thicker rope, even if you really should have it along. The only trick with 7mm rope: you will need to use 4mm prusiks - regular 6-7mm won't grab. They look kind of dinky, but they haven't broken on me yet! (I usually bring along some 6mm too for setting the anchor auto-block thing - you can make extra wraps to keep it from slipping, and will give you some extra strength while hauling). I am sure the safety freaks won't like the 7mm suggestion, but I would rather wear a thin rope like this than nothing at all because everyone in the party was too lazy to bring a thicker rope. I have seen a 7.5mm dynamic rope for sale, I think sold as a twin rope for ice climbing. That would be great, but probably way more expensive.

Likely only other canucks will appreciate this (or hate it, depending on your view of the man): I shook hands with Pierre Trudeau in the mid-90s - bumped into him at his book signing at UBC. I was tempted to give him the PET double 1-fingered salute, but only for fun....there is no better photo of a politican than that of PET flipping both birds off the back of that train in Salmon Arm. RIP PET

yeah... sure... but if they get shot, who cares? Ooops, sorry, I wasn't arguing this point. I am with you there - if they get shot in the field of battle, well, that is the risks of doing that job. I was speaking to Dru's question about whether Al-Jazerra is any different from CNN embedded reporters...that they are both doing legitimate jobs. Of course, I can't say I agree with the rest of your analysis, but I don't think we will ever agree on the role and contributions of media! Off to a meeting...

Journalists\reporters have a lot more freedoms than soldiers. It's simple... War is not black and white like you are trying to paint it. No, it isn't black and white - I wasn't portraying it as such...and that is why I repeatedly brought up that unmentioned, but largest, group involved in war...civilians. Shit, it is way complicated. Soliders on both sides and at all levels of command. Politicians. Now reporters, as this thread brings up. And as always, civilian bystanders. Fucking messy - being the unfortunate ones stuck in the middle sucks, and the less choice you have about being there, the shittier it must be.

Any worse? It's the same thing. The point is THEY ARE THE ENEMY! What side are you on Dru? During the active combat ortion of the war Saddam's army would have taken out our embedded CNN reporters the first chance they got (not that they did, but they would have). If Al Jazeer is in league with the enemy, we should take them out. Period. Ah yes, lets use the justification of Saddam's regime to apply to this situation. Fuck, I thought the latest rationale for this war was to "act as a seed of democracy in the region" or some such thing. If all the US forces are going to do is emulate Saddam by killing the media, then why did the US bother...they could have just let Saddam do it? Nope, either you live by your own rules (reporters are NOT fair targets, and you let them report as long as they don't aid combatants, no matter what "side" you think they are on), or don't live by them but also don't get to say you are spreading democracy or anything. Is the world really so black and white to you, with just two sides - the good and the bad? Al-Jazerra is not based in, nor were they ever under the control of Iraq. They regularly air stories critical of Islamic governments throughout the world. Who's side are they on? Well, enough of this - I gotta get back to work (I was bored there for a few minutes..but this has pepped me back up).

I agree here too. I was applying the same argument with Scott: that reporters, like soliders, have a wide variety of motivations for why they enlisted or choose to report from Iraq. That being said then, I see the heros as the ones working, and sometimes dying, in the public interest, whether as a solider, or reporter. However, my sympathy is also with the noncombatants, who will get no medals, or bylines or even a paycheck...just misery, homelessness, joblessness, death.

I agree with you there. But I don't think anyone, even Rummy, has said that they were aiding combatants...only that they were tipped on where to show up to get footage of resistance/guerrila action. You are right too that few wars are lawful (except for Afganistan, the Baltics stuff, etc.). That is what the UN is trying to change: to stop unilateralism, and the power of might to make right, to use power over the weak.... Idealistic, undoubtedly...but the US was and still is a signatory.

Quote: "you dont ahve a fucking clue about journalism" Oh well - scratch what I said about "no personal attacks" It was good while it lasted. Yes, I have heard about the Ukranian example....from 1919...and involved ONE reporter!! How this relates to the hundreds of reporters, all presumably with different motivations for reporting, currently reporting in Iraq in 2003 is beyond me. I never said that ALL reporters share one motivation or other. Sure, some "want to change policy", but surely not all?! [Note to US reporters who want to change policy: you must be doing a lousy fucking job, because you aren't changing shit!] Not the ones I read in my daily paper or listen to on the radio (I don't own a TV). Anyway, as i said earlier, not everyone in the world, or the US, is going to support the contributions of a free media to democratic society. Clearly you do not. However, I don't think your view is shared by everyone (but I could be wrong after seeing the junk of US TV). If it is not shared by everyone, and if not all reporters think alike, and if there is room for free speech in the US Constitution and indeed all democracies, then doesn't it at least allow a smidgen of room for reporters to report the war in Iraq FROM BOTH SIDES? Obviously rhetorical, as I assume you will answer NO!

Well, "making policy" is YOUR opinion on why reporters are there. Not necessarily true of all reporters, or even most of them. Most would probably laugh at that statement - you ever see how most of them live and their salaries? I wouldn't disagree if you you included in your statement instead "media owners want to make policy and that is why they are there", but that is a different argument, and no media baron has died, or will die, in Iraq. Just like how none of the senior US forces commanders (like the President, and the senior civvies in the DoD), who also make policy, will ever die in Iraq. The only ones dying in Iraq are powerless (when it comes to policy-making, I mean) servicemen and reporters (and I am not talking about network anchors...they don't die either...I am talking about the AP stringer, or the photog with AP-France). Good discussion with no personal attacks!! What will cc.com think of next? [Enter at stage left the enraged sprayer]

you think they have a choice after they signed up? the journalists can tell their bosses to fuck off... wouldn't be pretty if one of the enlisted men did that. Sure, that is technically true (but: they were not forced to enlist, and knew it was possible they would be called to fight), but I think it is missing the point: that both servicemen and reporters are there serving voluntarily the public interest. Sure, they may not be all on the same page all the time when it comes to their opinion of the justness of the war, but isn't that the supposed great strength of the US political system, and of democracy in general?...free speech, and empowering opposing views as a system of checks and balances to guard against totalitarian authority?

It is lawful for reporters to "embed" with US army units because the US government is making the laws in Iraq. It is not clearly so clear cut that the military action in Iraq - the invasion and occupation of a soveriegn country without UN approval - is lawful. Obviously, or hopefully, the US administration believes their actions are lawful under the UN Charter. However, since it is not clear cut and definately up for debate by a great majority of UN members, it is not or should not be surprising that other countries do not see it as a lawful war, and therefore would not object to the "embedding" of Al-Jazerra journalists in resistence units in Iraq. US and British reporters regularly reported on the actions of the French Resistance in WWII. I am NOT equating the US-led invasion of Iraq with Hitler's occupation of Europe, but merely drawing a parallel between embedding reporters in the French Resistance (an illegal organization in occupied France) and doing the same in the Iraqi resistance (also illegal in occupied Iraq). Flame away...

Aren't US servicemen there voluntarily as well? No one forced them to join - they are not conscripts. It seems to me that both groups - servicemen and reporters - are there to serve the public interest. Many reporters feel that reporting the news is a critical contribution to democracy: to speak truth to power, to inform the public, etc. Likewise, obviously servicemen are making a critical contribution to democracy: to guard the physical safety of citizens and the homeland. Some may feel that reporters are, in the case of Iraq, making a lousy contribution to democracy by being biased/critical/money-grubbing/whatever you want to call it. Likewise, other people say that the US armed forces are making a lousy contribution to democracy by being unilateral/oil-grubbing/operating outside of UN sanction/whatever you want to call it. Each side has their opinions, but it doesn't change the motivation of many/most reporters and servicemen in Iraq: to serve the public interest. They are all there voluntarily, they are all getting paid, and they all feel they are making a contribution. I mourn the deaths of all involved in this conflict: servicemen, reporters, and that oft-forgotten group...innocent civilians who did not choose to be born in Iraq, and even the Iraqi Army conscripts who did not choose to be in the army.

I think I can see a bolt/sling...we must still be on route

"Fuck. We're fucked." "The rock doesn't look too bad..." Dru: "Yah. Dude. It'll rock: easy access, clean line and no one else has been in there. Trust me."