Jason_Martin
-
Posts
740 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Jason_Martin
-
-
What geneva convention violations did he cover up?
Torturing or humilating prisoners is a violation of the geneva convention. As somebody aruging anything about a secretary of defense, you should know this.
I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that issuing a news release about the abuse 3 days after it was reported was considered "covering up".
One of the cool things they taught me in GED class was how to use Google. I thought I might try this newfound skill to see if Rumsfeld was involved in any type of cover-up.
First of all, we know that it is a violation of the Geneva convention to humilate prisoners. Rumsfeld himself pointed this out here.
Secondly, there was an internal report made by the Red Cross which indicated that there were prison abuses going on months ago. You can read about that here.
Thirdly, Rumsfeld knew about the abuses but did his best to keep them quiet. In fact, Bush was upset that he didn't know about the abuse prior to seeing it on television. You can read about this here.
So the question is: Did Rumsfeld cover up the abuses? I think the answer is both yes and no. By not pursuing the reports vigorously and dealing with the issue immediately through his very position as secretary of defense, he became part of the scandal. He kept the information from the public, from congress, and from the president. The question becomes whether or not this was an active cover-up or whether he just didn't think it was that big a deal.
To be perfectly honest, I feel like he was probably in the latter camp. He just didn't think that the issue would come out -- he certainly didn't believe pictures would be available to the public -- so he really didn't do anything about it.
Was he actively lying...? Probably not. Was what he did wrong? Absolutely.
I think Rumsfeld needs to be fired and that the prison needs to be torn down. These symbolic steps -- which are non-partison steps -- would help rebuild some of the ever slipping faith that the middle east has in the united states occupation.
Jason
-
From the "well-known left-wing publication" article cited earlier:In the end, will it matter if some Americans have meshed together Sept. 11 and Iraq? If the US and its allies go to war against Iraq, and it goes well, then the Bush administration is likely not to face questions about the way it sold the war. But if war and its aftermath go badly, then the administration could be under fire.
"Going to war with improper public understanding is risky," says Richard Parker, a former US ambassador to several Mideast countries. "If it's a failure, and we get bogged down, this is one of the accusations that [bush] will have to face when it's all over."
How do those moonbat liberals dream up this stuff?
I think one of them did a year of junior college after he got his GED.
Jason
-
Martlet,
You don't appear to have a very good understanding of the word "lies." Most of us around here define this as when one intentionally misrepresents a given piece of information. Misrepresentation is what the Bush administration is all about.
It's becoming harder and harder every day for me to understand how people can believe in a leader who leads based on his own best interest instead of on what's best for the nation.
Chasing terrorists seems like a good idea. Inventing terrorists and alienating many of our former allies by invading Iraq seems like a bad idea. Providing contracts to a company you have ties to in order to rebuild the country you just attacked is about as immoral as you can get.
Perhaps Martlet, once you catch up to the rest of us and get your GED maybe you'll start to see through all the lies.
I heard a great joke the other day:
-How do you find the Republican on the Pirate Ship?
-He's the one wearing two eye patches.
Jason
-
There's a lot more to these pictures than our friend on active duty appears to be seeing.
Initally we went into Iraq under the assumption that there were weapons of mass destruction. In order to make the world a safer place we had to find and destroy these weapons. That didn't happen. There were no weapons to speak of. As a result, the spin doctors had to come up with another reason for Iraq.
The back-up reason for going to Iraq was to liberate the people from Sadam. Don't get me wrong, though this wasn't the primary reason for going there, this was a bad guy who was worthy of being overthrown. However, the pictures which have surfaced paint U.S. forces as being just as bad as Sadam. Muslims in the Middle East have a hard time looking at pictures of a Muslim man in handcuffs at the feet of an American Soldier, pictures of Muslims forced into homosexual positions by U.S. forces are beyond shocking to these people... According to recent interviews with some prison detainees, many would have preferred death to what they were subject to.
On top of all this, the Red Cross made a report in which it insinuated that this is the mere tip of the ice berg, that indeed there have been murders within the prison walls perpetrated by American troops. This of course is under investigation.
In light of all this, it is important to remember that many of those in the prisons were taken there in mass raids, wherein they arrested everybody in hopes of figuring out who the bad guys were later. Due to this, it stands to reason that some of those who have been humiliated at the prison in Iraq were innocent.
However, it doesn't matter -- innocent or guilty -- as was stated earlier, the U.S. forces need to be doing things in a way which paints them as liberators not as sadistic occupiers. Many have argued that the fall of the Soviet Union was due to policies. In part that was true. But in part, Russians liked the idea of an America that they were seeing in movies and hearing in music. They admired the culture. This won hearts and minds in that ideological battlefield. Photos of U.S. soldiers doing things that would be considered "cruel and unusual" punishment does exactly the opposite.
The attitude of the United States government compounded by these types of things going on in Iraq has done little to eliminate the threat of terrorism. Instead, this type of action is exactly what men like Osama Bin Laden want to see. It gives them the fuel they need to pour on the fire of Jihad against the west.
Since these pictures have come to light, I suspect that many who were moderates in Iraq, who wanted Saddam to fall, have slipped away from us. Instead of creating allies among these moderates we've created enemies.
Ideology is far more important that millitary might and on that front, with the people in the Middle East we are losing.
Jason
-
McCain is anti-right to choose on the abortion issue.
Unfortunately McCain is a bit confused on social issues...as are the vast majority of the marginally educated super right-wingers, and I agree this is a problem. But he's still the best Republican out there. And I'd take him over our current dictator in a second.
Jason
-
Sometimes I think Bush would be worse if he didn't have the constraints of our constitution hemming him in.
Since his goal appears to be to undermine the constitution wherever he can, I would tend to agree...
I don't feel too bad for truck drivers and other non-military people working in Iraq who come home to the U.S. with a huge amount of money tax free. Unlike the military personnel in Iraq these men and women have made a choice to be there and they have every right to make the choice not to be there.
Jason
-
It's not a bad idea to pay attention to rap slings. Testing has showed that cyclic loading on water-knots tends to cause them to come untied. In other words, the more often a knot is rappelled on, the more likely it is to slowly work its way untied.
I'm with Dylan. I find biners faster than I can leave them behind. I haven't carried rap rings or quick links for quite awhile.
Jason
-
To those of you who have had questions about my comments...
Like I said in the previous post, I've only had experience with five piece bolts. So when they got to the part of their lecture where they were talking about problems with glue-ins I was only half listening. It may be epoxy related problems and it may be glue related problems, but there was definately a contingent of people at the clinic who felt glue-ins pose some problems due to water entrapment.
Take this post for what it is. A request for those who place bolts to know what they're doing. Whether glue in or not, bolts have to be good. And those placing them have to be good at what they're doing. People who are placing bolts who don't know the strengths and weaknesses of the fixed anchors they are building should simply not be placing bolts. I don't see anything wrong with researching the quality of glue-ins vs. the quality of five piece bolts or whatever else for a given type of rock in a given area.
I would like to clarify that I'm not saying that all glue-ins are bad. I'm simply saying that I have heard questions about them and as such it would be good to find out more.
Jason
-
Certain types of rock are not completely waterproof. Both sandstone and limestone come to mind immediately. Water may percolate through this type of rock. This may be what the people who presented the workshop were concerned about.
Once again, I think it is well worth researching beyond the scope of the people who contribute to this board.
Jason
-
Do what you like... Some things are better in some situations, but I have a feeling that if you try this, you'll find quite a few uses for it.
Jason
-
Let me preface this by saying that I don't have any experience with glue-ins. However, I did attend a bolt replacement clinic where they recommended against glue-ins. Their reasoning was that if water gets into the bolt hole, it has a much more difficult time finding its way out past the glue...
I have to admit, I didn't ask any questions about this issue at the time because I was more interested in five piece bolts. But it might warrant some research before committing to glue-ins on your project.
Jason
-
on a slab just about any rap device will "rachet" as you climb the rope and pull through the rope.
The big difference being that the reverso will automatically lock you off, whereas most other devices don't have this option. This is particularly nice if you have to use both hands to deal with whatever problem has arisen. Tying off, using a autoblock, or whatever else you come up with, I still think the set-up I described above is the best option.
Jason
-
To Get this back on track:
I'm a big proponent of rappelling on an extension. In other words rappelling with a sling girth hitched through my harness, with the rap device about two feet away. The reason I like this is because of the diversity it offers. I'm not going to go into all the benefits, but I will go into the one that fits here. The following requires rappelling on a reverso.
If I get to a problematic rope end or some other need to ascend the rope, I simply clip the fin of the reverso on my extension to my belay loop. I then automatically have a ratchet with which I can ascend the rope. If this takes place on in a hanging position, I have to add a prusik to do this and to ascend the rope. If there is a stance of any sort, I can create the ratchet by unweighting the rope. I can then quickly ascend the rope by pushing the ratchet up and standing on stances. Even on the tiniest of stances I can do this. The result is an extremly effective means of climbing back up the rope and fixing the snafu.
Good stuff! Time to go climbing now.
Jason
-
-
I've climbed the left east couloir in spring conditions to the North Ridge twice. The couloir to the left gets up to about 55 degrees. Looking down on the one on the right, it appears to only be about 45 degrees.
The crux of the route was the North Ridge. This low fifth class ridge will be mostly snow right now and will have sections that exceed sixty degrees. It is recommended that you have rock gear and snow pro for this section. Expect the rock beneath the snow to be loose. Good pro on the North Ridge is difficult to find.
That said, this is an excellent route... But due to the looseness, not necessarily one for someone on their very first mixed climb.
Jason
-
For six years, I taught in a traditional classroom setting at both the high school and the college level. For the last five years I've been an outdoor educator, two of those five years working as such year round as opposed to just summers...
That said, I think that there are things that are more easily taught from an experiential perspective. Climbing is clearly experiential. Reading about crevasse rescue in a book or the building of an anchor is helpful, but doing it will actually set it in a person's mind.
On the other hand, there are elements of education which cannot be taught with such a hands on approach. For example, most people will not understand philosophy or literature without some kind of traditional classroom oriented build to that understanding.
Classroom teachers do use experiential learning as much as possible. How often did you have to identify a part of speech in English class or complete an algebra problem in math?
There is no "better" means of teaching. Some people find certain techniques more effective than others.
Lastly, the important thing to remember about experiential learning in an outdoor setting is that most of the time everybody wants to be there and wants to learn. This is not always the case in the classroom. The result is that outdoor educators appear to be stronger teachers because they get better results... Some ARE better teachers, but then again, some aren't. Just like methods of learning, there are tremendous differences in teachers both in the outdoors and in the indoors. Some are great and some should probably go back to school...
Jason
-
About two years ago, a friend of mine was teaching crevasse rescue to a bunch of kids on the Easton. One of the kids called up that she could see some skis down in the crevasse and that there was something red down there. My buddy decided to rappel down and have a look. Turns out it was a snowmobile, jammed way down in the crevasse.
Like the snowmobile my buddy found, I think it is very unlikely that they will retrieve the machine that fell in the crevasse the other day...
Jason
-
I'm looking to get lots of alpine experinece this coming year but being a southern boy for the most part I have no glacier experience and I pretty much refuse to take a class being old school and figuring everyone should have a climbing mentor. The question is are there any safe glaciers or areas to go out solo and walk around to gain confidence on crampons or ice axe arrest. I'm assuming arresting on ice is much different than snow. And what about alpine "climbs" that are safe enough to build confidence and provide a progressing, build my confidence reading snow and avalanch hazzards.
I've put this up a few times before, but it might be useful to you anyway...
Jason
-
As a new trad climber, you should bring whatever you feel comfortable leading with. If you need a set of stoppers and cams up to #2, go for it. A 5.10 climber telling you that he only used two pieces of gear is not going to help you much...
If you feel more comfortable in rock shoes, wear rock shoes. If you have a pair of sticky rubber tennis shoes (like La Sportiva Boulders or the like) wear those for the climb... If this is one of your first multi-pitch leads, I would sway away from wearing mountain boots on the route.
You should probably have an ice axe for the the pass...
Have fun!
Jason
-
Hey, go for it, dude. Take him up. When you take a plunge into crevasse and your shitbrick newbie partners can't remember how to get you out then you'll be thinking different.
When you were guiding ,I would imagine there were other guides on these climbs, as well? That makes a big difference...that's plain reckless otherwise. But then Mountain Madness was pretty reputable too til they got a bunch of people killed on some big famous peak in the Hima.
It is a common practice for guides to take beginners up mountains on a one to one ratio without other guides around. The reality of this situation is that the guide understands that if something should go down, he will have to be the one to deal with it. And a guide who is well trained will be able to deal with it...
Guiding Mount Rainier or Mount Baker is an incredibly long stretch from guiding an 8000 Meter Peak. I'm no expert on guiding those types of mountains, but I do know that guiding the volcanos on small ratios with experienced PROFESSIONAL guides is about as safe as it's going to get...
Jason
-
I think some of the people above have had a huge influence on high end climbing, but what about the average every day climber...
My vote is for Paul Petzoldt.
Petzoldt did the fourth ascent of the Grand, the first winter ascent and the first ascent of the Grand's north face. He got extremely high on K2 and probably would have summitted if the expedition had been better organized...
From an influential perspective, Petzoldt developed rope signals (on belay, climbing, slack etc.) and was the first to do this in the U.S.. He co-started Exum mountain guides and was the driving force behind NOLS. He testified in favor of the 1964 wilderness act, developed the early leave no trace ethic, started the Wilderness Education Association, and the Paul Petzoldt Leadership School.
Oh yeah, he taught cold weather survival skills to over 12,000 10th mountain division soldiers and tried to climb the Grand on the 70th anniversary of his 1924 ascent...
From the way we dress, to how we communicate, to how we act in the mountains, to the way we treat the backcountry environment, I would say Petzoldt had a lot of influence on the way most climbers do things...
Jason
-
Lummox,
I loved the Donini slide show! I actually enjoy most slide shows and I've been to quite a few of them. I think I'm an easy audience... But the Birdwell slideshow was just plain bad.
Jason
-
I was unaware of that.
So I guess we are only looking for a guide with a permit!
Which ultimately means RMI or one of the other guide services that work on the Emmons like American Alpine Institute, Alpine Ascents International, Cascade Alpine Guides, or Rainier Alpine Guides.
Jason
-
There are definately places where skis suck too. If there is thick brush -- bushwacking brush -- then snowshoes are clearly better. If there is inconsistent snow on a boulder field, then snowshoes are better. However, in most other cases, skis are better.
To say that one system is better than the other across the board doesn't take into account particular difficulties on certain approaches. My recommendation is to look at each approach seperately and then to make a decision based on the difficulties which a particular approach might provide.
The unfortunate answer to your question is that both items have their place in the backcountry. Which of course means investing cash in two different methods of movement...
Jason
Accident on Hood
in Oregon Cascades
Posted
Seven or eight years ago, I fell into a moat unroped right below that rock. Both my feet punched through and as I was extracting myself I looked down in the hole. It was deep and some ways down I could see a ski lodged between the rock and the snow that somebody had lost...
Jason