graupel

I think everyone in the states believes that Al Jazeera is bad because the US government tells us so. Does anybody actually watch it before drawing that conclusion? There was an interesting interview of the film maker of a documentary called "Control Room" on the Charlie Rose show about a week or so ago. This movie tries to show how "news" on the Iraq situation is rendered differently depending on the point of view. A review of the movie is shown here: http://worldfilm.about.com/cs/documentarie1/fr/controlroom.htm I haven't seen this movie either, but it might be useful to see before drawing conclusions. Official website about the movie: http://www.controlroommovie.com/ The web shows that it is playing at the Landmark Varsity Theater 4329 University Way NE, Seattle

A World Of Hurt:[Op-Ed] Maureen Dowd. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: May 9, 2004. pg. 4. The flinty 71-year-old kept it together as John McCain pounced and Hillary prodded. But soon he was once more giving snippy one-word answers to his inquisitors, foisting them on his brass menagerie or biting their heads off himself. By Friday evening, when the delegate from Guam, Madeleine Bordallo, pressed him on whether ''quality of life'' was an issue in the Abu Ghraib torture cases, you could see Donald-Duck steam coming out of his ears. ''Whether they have a PX or a good restaurant is not the issue,'' he said with a veiled sneer. Rummy was having a dickens of a time figuring out how a control-freak administration could operate in this newfangled age when G.I.'s have dadburn digital cameras. In the information age, he complained to senators, ''people are running around with digital cameras and taking these unbelievable photographs and then passing them off, against the law, to the media, to our surprise, when they had not even arrived in the Pentagon.'' Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican, mourned that America was in a ''world of hurt.'' If Gen. Richard Myers knew enough to try to suppress the CBS show, Mr. Graham asked, why didn't he know enough to warn the president and Congress? Donald Rumsfeld, a black belt at Washington infighting, knew the aggrieved lawmakers were most interested in an apology for not keeping them in the loop. He no doubt was sorry -- sorry the pictures got out. The man who promised last July that ''I don't do quagmires'' didn't seem to be in trouble on Friday, despite the government's blowing off repeated Red Cross warnings. But who knows what the effect will be of the additional ''blatantly sadistic and inhuman'' photos that Mr. Rumsfeld warned of? Or the videos he said he still had not screened? Dick Cheney will not cut loose his old mentor from the Nixon and Ford years unless things get more dire. After all, George Tenet is still running the C.I.A. after the biggest intelligence failures since some Trojan ignored Cassandra's chatter and said, ''Roll the horse in.'' Colin Powell is still around after trash-talking to Bob Woodward about his catfights with the Bushworld ''Mean Girls'' -- Rummy, Cheney, Wolfie and Doug Feith. The vice president still rules after promoting a smashmouth foreign policy that is more Jack Palance than Shane. And the president still edges out John Kerry in polls, even though Mr. Bush observed with no irony to Al Arabiya TV: ''Iraqis are sick of foreign people coming in their country and trying to destabilize their country, and we will help them rid Iraq of these killers.'' The only people who have been pushed aside in this administration are the truth tellers who warned about policies on taxes (Paul O'Neill); war costs (Larry Lindsey); occupation troop levels (Gen. Eric Shinseki); and how Iraq would divert from catching the ubiquitous Osama (Richard Clarke). Even if the secretary survives, the Rummy Doctrine -- using underwhelming force to achieve overwhelming goals -- is discredited. Jack Murtha, a Democratic hawk and Vietnam vet, says ''the direction's got to be changed or it's unwinnable,'' and Lt. Gen. William Odom, retired, told Ted Koppel that Iraq was headed toward becoming an Al Qaeda haven and Iranian ally. By the end, Rummy was channeling Jack Nicholson's Col. Jessup, who lashed out at the snotty weenies questioning him while they sleep ''under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then question the manner in which I provide it.'' Asked how we can get back credibility, Rummy bridled. ''America is not what's wrong with the world,'' he said, adding: ''I read all this stuff -- people hate us, people don't like us. The fact of the matter is, people line up to come into this country every year because it's better here than other places, and because they respect the fact that we respect human beings. And we'll get by this.'' Maybe. But for now, the hawks who wanted to employ American might to scatter American values like flower petals all across the world are reduced to keeping them from being trampled by Americans. As Rummy would say, not a pretty picture.

Apparently you overlook the minor issue that the takeover of Iraq was elective. The 87 Billion is to try to shore up a mess Bush started without international support. Nobody wants troops coming home in body bags, but I bet you would have heard considerable more discussion if Bush had asked Congress to sign a $100 Billion check as a down payment before going in.

Okay, perhaps Moore is not a pretty sight to look at, but questioning what is going on has merit. Hardly any of the posters on this thread address the content of what he says here. Is spending that much, with more to follow, with an indeterminate outcome, without consequence? Do you hardcore conservatives not have a problem increasing the national debt, devaluing the dollar, yet doing nothing policy wise to reduce US consumption of petroleum? Or is it okay to get screwed over by the government as long as something blows up in the process? What about allowing the drug trade to regenerate in Afganistan? The drug money was another way the bad guys get their funding. To put the financial aspect into perspective for a topic closer to home, shortly after the war portion of Dubya's little adventure started there was a cost attributed to the monthly occupation. I noticed the cost of one month occupation happened to be the amount that the entire National Park Service claims to have in maintenance backlog which took probably decades to accumulate.

Personally, I think the MegaRide is the best boot I've ever had. They are pretty reasonable on weight, and after forming the included thermal liner to the foot, the fit has been without trouble. The Scarpas are kinda boxy on my foot, and the flex in the front of the Denali is not as "progressive" as I like, instead kinda biting in the shin, like an old pair of Langes. If you don't need the Dynafit capability, just get the G-Ride and save some dough for some new skins that are "wall to wall". I forget what the suggested retail is supposed to be on the Adrenalin. Theoretically, it should cost them less than the MegaRide to make. Apparently licensing the ability to use the Dynafit binding componentry in the boot shell costs enough that the company should be charging around $100 more at retail. In reality, I think they eat a little of it to make a price point on the MegaRide. Even still, the MegaRide retails for something in the low $500 range (and apparently sold out quite well). I would guess the Adrenalin would be similar in price. To some extent, I think they are thinking they are going to capture some of the Alpine skier market, who are likely accustomed to paying that much and more for performance Alpine boots.

You would likely spend a few days in your walk to try to return. Judging by various reports, it sounds like the shuttle bus in the Stehekin area is not able to travel further than High Bridge this year, so you would have a fair amount of road followed by the trail from Cottonwood Camp over the pass. That is going to cut into your "week" time. You would probably be better off trying to cajole someone into doing a day of driving with you so you can leave your car at the end.

Oh, and it isn't replacing anything, just adding to the spectrum of choices. Depends on what you are looking for as to whether it is worth waiting. Hard to quantify the amount, but they are claiming it to be stiffer than the G-Ride. The Mega Ride / G-Ride is just fine by me as it is. But if you don't place as much of a priority on doing both touring and skiing well, but rather on skiing stiffness, you might be interested in the Adrenalin. Though the fit is different, the top of the line Scarpa stiffened up a bit more for next year too.

As if uncoated nylon is going to be cooler than Gore-tex? Maybe only cause you will already be wet, but otherwise, I don't see it. Coated would often be lighter of course, which is a valid approach if you figure you are wearing the soft shells most of the time anyway. In truth, you need both soft shell and hard shell in pants. The soft shell you will use nearly all the time, while the hard shell equivalent (be it waterproof/breathable or just coated) will be just for the foul weather. Depending on how well you choose your weather, you can get by without the full storm protection. If you need to be out in all conditions, you are going to need a storm barrier of some sort.

Lawgoddess: They make women's sizes of these now if torso size was your issue. If volume was the issue, there are smaller models, like the "Stash". The Stash BC is a little larger for a day of backcountry whatever-you-choose, but the Stash is flatter against the back for things like lift accessible trips out of bounds. They also have a couple of top loaders that provide a choice for higher volume needs. All have the hydration sleeve in the shoulder strap to prevent freezing. For the original poster's question, I have used the Stash BC and like it. If you have bought into the hydration program and need to keep that tube from freezing, your choices for cold weather are pretty much anything from BCA or the Switch series from Osprey (3 volume choices).

from http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/04/14/ron_reagan/

Not sure if this thread is about cars anymore, but just in case, you might find this "Rave" post from Craigslist entertaining: http://seattle.craigslist.org/about/best/sfo/32010873.html

Kinda sounds a little like Nick Berg. The US was claiming the Iraqi police were detaining him prior to his demise, yet supposedly he told his parents that the US had been holding him.

Another issue is many of the "cleanup" expeditions, even if successful at removing stuff from up high, they often just bring it down and leave it in a rubbish pile near the base of the mountain. On the Nepal side several years ago there was a pretty large trash heap in Lobuche. Nobody seems to be willing to pay for the porters to actually haul it all the way out.

Loading American businesses with a competitive disadvantage on the world market? Proponents of going metric claim it is just the opposite. Sticking your head in the sand while everyone else bathes in sunlight just delays the inevitable, and makes it more difficult to compete in a world economy with those that already converted. http://www.pueblo.gsa.gov/cic_text/misc/usmetric/metric.htm

Just remember that it was Reagan that eliminated the U. S. Metric Board and cancelled its funding which likely prevented mainstream America ever going metric.

I guess that is one way in which he did his country and the world a service.

For those that need their computer monitors cleaned. http://www13.de/4u/screenclean.swf Decidedly not safe for work, your kids, or anything else.

I guess "innovation" comes in the form of Michael Powell dismantling concerns about anti-trust issues with such things as media consolidation.

The descent into Luna Cirque is not trivial, especially after the snow is gone as it likely would be at that time of year. The glacier to get to the Arm has crevasses. Both of those things are not deal breakers skill wise, as proper routefinding should reduce your technical issues (i.e. need to use the rope for anything other than "what if I fall into a crevasse" on the glacier). The routefinding is the key, and avoiding falling off of rugged ground while scrambling around unroped. You also need to be able to judge hazards before you subject yourself and others to them. That and an attitude and fitness that accommodates suffering. Yup, I'd call that the need for good mountaineering sense and skills just as Fred has recommended.

Some heli flights occur in the park to do things like check on snowpack levels for hydrology, like estimates of the progress of the spring runoff. There are some glaciology studies that use a couple of flights a year to position measuring instruments or check on movement. Even if it was there for an official reason and with permission, every heli pilot I've ever seen enjoys flying those things and will get closer to ridges than might otherwise be needed to do things like check for wildlife and such. I guess you were a "scenic attraction" that day.

Now you can start the day in front of the computer and know just how fearful to be. Note the sponsor links on the right column includes the Bush/Cheney campaign. http://www.exittoshell.com/products/homeland/index.shtml Then check out the fine print at the bottom of this page: http://www.exittoshell.com/faq.shtml#policies

The Livingston Group is a lobbying firm in Washington DC run by a former Republican Congressman. This is the firm that is representing the Iraqi Lawyer, Mohammed Al Rehaief, who supposedly provided information for the Americans to recover Jessica Lynch and has the book and consulted for the made-for-TV movie. Employed at that firm is Lauri Fitz-Pegado, the woman responsible for coaching the 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl who testified in Congress that in Iraqi occupied Kuwait, babies in hospitals were being removed from incubators and left on the floor to die, which is now confirmed to be false. Lauri Fitz-Pegado now represents the Iraqi Lawyer on behalf of the Livingston Group for the book and movie deals pertaining to his story of his involvement with the "rescue" of Jessica Lynch. http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/db/Uhorrockswashington.Ra74_DON.html The BBC questioned the account of events early on http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,956255,00.html Now for the propaganda http://www.msnbc.com/news/986663.asp?0sl=-20&cp1=1#BODY =============================== Sources: From http://www.proparanoid.com/congrec.htm "In 1990, after the Iraqi invasion of their country, the Kuwaiti Government in exile formed "Citizens for a Free Kuwait." They hired the lobbying firm of Hill & Knowlton to attempt to influence public opinion in the United States toward entering the conflict. Lauri Fitz-Pegado was in charge of the effort. Her strategy was to use alleged witnesses to atrocities to tell stories of human rights violations in occupied Kuwait. Using their testimony live and on video news releases, she orchestrated what has come to be known as "the baby incubator fraud." Ms. Fitz-Pegado first coached a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, identified only at the time as "Nayira," to testify before Congress that she had seen Iraqi soldiers remove Kuwaiti babies from hospital respirators. Nayira claimed to be a Kuwaiti refugee who had been working as a volunteer in a Kuwaiti hospital throughout the first few weeks of the Iraqi occupation. She said that she had seen the Iraqis take babies out of incubators, take the incubators, and then leave the babies "on the cold floor to die." Nayira's emotional testimony riveted human rights organizations, the news media, and the Nation. That incident was cited by six Members of the Senate as a reason to go to war with Iraq. However, it was later discovered that the girl--who had only been identified as an escapee from occupied Kuwait--was in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States. It also turned out that Lauri Fitz-Pegado had concealed Nayira's real identity. Apologists for Lauri Fitz-Pegado say that she did not hide Nayira's real identity; she told Congressman Tom Lantos who Nayira was. But what Ms. Fitz-Pegado's supporters do not say is that Congressman Lantos' Congressional Human Rights Foundation received rent-free office space from Lauri Fitz-Pegado's firm, Hill & Knowlton. Their telephones were answered by the Hill & Knowlton switchboard, and Citizens for a Free Kuwait made a $50,000 donation to the foundation after the invasion. Instead of apologizing for Lauri Fitz-Pegado, we should be investigating those ties. " ==================== from http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:hwmIIipln6gJ:www.livingstongroupdc.com/inthenews/releases/news1.html+&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 The Livingston Group hires Mohammed Odeh Al-Rehaief, the Iraqi lawyer who assisted in the rescue of Private Jessica Lynch Statement by former former Congressman Bob Livingston, President and CEO of The Livingston Group "My initial role in the arrival of Mohammed and his family in the United States was that of a private citizen who is grateful to a heroic individual - an individual who has risked his life and the safety of his family to help rescue an American soldier. I am only one of a number of people, in and outside the United States government, who worked with a prominent NGO specializing in refugee cases on this effort. "Mohammed was formally granted political asylum status in the U.S. and is employed at The Livingston Group. Much of his time over the past few months has been devoted to getting his family settled in the area. Mohammed has had surgery on an eye, which was seriously injured during his activities related to his role in the rescue of Jessica Lynch. He is studying English and contributing to the Livingston Group’s work related to the Middle East. He also has been working on a book to be published by Harper Collins. It addresses his role in the rescue of former POW Jessica Lynch. And, of equal importance, the book allows him to provide insights into the life of an Iraqi man coming of age in a tumultuous political environment." Statement by Mohammed Odeh Al-Rehaief "My family and I are very grateful to everyone who has welcomed us to the United States and contributed to our adjustment in this new environment. I am humbled by the honors bestowed upon me by various organizations and am pleased for the opportunities to travel to several cities on the East and West coasts of this beautiful country. We are learning a great deal about the United States. What has impressed us most has been the way we have been embraced by Americans. We look forward to improving our ability to communicate and contribute to this community and to helping those we left behind in Iraq." ============================== Employed at the Livingston Group is Lauri Fitz-Pegado From http://www.livingstongroupdc.com/corporateoverview/team/fitzpegado.html Honorable Lauri J. Fitz-Pegado (Principal) Lauri Fitz-Pegado has over twenty-five years of international experience in the public and private sectors. She provided strategic communication counsel to governments, non-profits and corporate clients independently and in partnership with Livingston Moffett Global Consultants for three years prior to joining the Livingston Group as a principal of the Livingston Moffett International Group Practice in May 2003. She also is responsible for The Livingston Group’s external communication and media relations. She served as Assistant Secretary and Director General of the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service at the Department of Commerce, promoting U.S. exports and assisting U.S. companies expand market share and compete for contracts around the world, overseeing a network of 130 offices overseas and 90 in the U.S. In 1997 she joined Iridium LLC, the world's first global satellite and paging company, where she was Vice President for Global Gateway Management and Vice President for Corporate Affairs and Communication. A former Foreign Service officer who served in Latin America early in her career, Ms. Fitz-Pegado also provided domestic and international clients public and government relations services over eleven years at Gray and Company and Hill and Knowlton. Ms. Fitz-Pegado is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. She serves on the boards/advisory boards of the National Education Association Foundation for the Improvement of Education, Constituency for Africa, The Women's Foreign Policy Group, the United Negro College Fund's Institute for International Public Policy, The Ronald H. Brown Foundation and the American and African Business Women’s Alliance. She is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Vassar College and has a Master of Arts degree in Latin American Affairs and Economics from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. She speaks Spanish and Portuguese. lfitzp@livingstongroupdc.com

Well, if you hadn't already read it, before they decide what to waste the money on, they already have spent half of it on the administration of collecting the fees . The Government Accounting Office Report got them to disclose that they have been disguising how much the program actually costs. http://www.americanwhitewater.org/archive/article/851/ I don't think it is readily known how much actually makes it into trails, but a whole lot of it goes elsewhere. Notice all those new outhouses? Yet the Forest Service in the Pacific Northwest tries to tell you how all the money that is supporting the trail maintenance is coming from the fees. Even if you take their word on this (and there is no reason that you should) what they don't tell you is what percentage of the total that is. They also don't reveal how much they are making headway on the infamous "maintenance backlog" because as the GAO report highlights, they don't know what their backlog is! They never made an attempt to track it since since as part of the manner in which the "Demonstration" portion of the program was set up, Congress didn't establish that as a criteria for evaluation of the program (so explains the Forest Service, anyway). Write your senators. With enough outcry, there is a chance it might be prevented from being carried forward into the 2004 budget. The senate vote will probably be coming up soon so get your faxes or phone calls in.