cj001f

I prefer Airborne Demolition:

How much is it worth to ya?

Someone spent their weekend watching labyrinth...

Climbing in the Magic Island (Lofoten, Norway) - Ed Webster on the skiing side: Sierra Spring Ski Touring - HJ Burhenne (2nd BC ski guide in the US) Skiing - The International Sport (oversized 30's limited edition awesomely illustrated ski book - includes ski mountaineering) 3 of the 4 editions of Snowy Torrents

While it's space saving, stashing stuff in your helmet reduces the effectiveness of the helmet. Unless you want a mask implanted in your skull. SAM Splint, Bandaids, bit of gauze, Ibu

To turn the card - what does Bush stand for? We have a set of ideals the continually espouse (free markets, freedom, yada, yada) - but policy doesn't fit these often (pork farm bills, perscription drug cards, etc). When they change course they refuse to admit that. The President gives policy speaches so infrequently who knows what he actually believes (and when he does the language is so basic as to be absurd). And compared to Kerry Bush has less than half the time in public office to amass a record (Bush was elected governor in 1994 - Kerry was elected L Governor in 1982, Senator in 1984) Think of the changes in 20 years - do you really want someone who hasn't changed their opinions?

Landrieu (D-LA) was the absent vote. Many members were probably sincere in their support of the ostensible purpose of the Patriot Act - but this act was rammed through in near record time - passed on Oct 25, 2001(and let's not forget the weeks before was when the Senate offices closed from the Anthrax letters) it wasn't subject to heavy scrutiny. In my mind the Bush Administration has certainly used the spirit in which the Patriot Act was passed by using it to crack down on drug offenses.

Yes, we are painfully aware that we have to pay to climb where you get to go for free. Free? Hardly. Registration is around $50 a year per sled, not to mention trailers. Whoopee! We pay (in season) $15 every damn time we want to go - unless you buy the "volcano pass" bs. But wait - you get a Snowpark permit FREE! with your $50 registration! Trailers are a motor vehicle fee. Bitch at the DMV

The question of course begs - how was the vote scheduled? It's not entirely implausible that the R Senate leadership would schedule a quick vote, knowing Kerry was out of time. Wouldn't be the first time either Party had done that.

Black Diamond Zippo!

Get a really goddamn bright neon Yellow bike jacket. Beware suburbans driven by people on cellphones. Watchout for streetcar tracks Beware the after work happy hour

I've seen several individuals using static rope to lead climb. I'm not going to do it. Here's how you "fall". You reach the crux, and are to busy to feed the rope through the ascender, because they never feed as well as you'd like. Now there's a couple extra feet out, plus no tension in the system - and since your using static rope, you get nicely shock loaded TR anchors. The problem with a Gibbs isn't the teeth, it's the bottom end of the housing. Hang on one.

Yes that would be called a "Via Ferrata" If it helps they have them in places like the Dolomites, along with "Real" Climbing

Senator James Inhofe - R OK "WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A Republican member of the Senate Armed Services Committee dismissed Tuesday the outrage over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. troops, saying Iraqis depicted in widely broadcast photographs probably had "blood on their hands." http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/05/11/inhofe.abuse/index.html He just doesn't get it, does he?

I believe they are itty-bitty bits of sand now. Like Osama is?

Your ascender will probably kill the rope before a cross loaded biner would break...

It's got some decent routes. Not as crowded as Seneca. I can see why you think it's funny, but that's probably the future of climbing on the East Coast (and parts of the west).

I've seen (and can't find right now) a nasty picture of what a Gibbs Ascender can do under load to a rope. I'd worry about shock loading your anchors (easy to do!) if you use a static. But I suppose it might work if all you ever want to climb is columnar basalt

That's the Yuppie Stuff. A Southern Man drinks Speight's!

Probably more useful is: 80 Mt. Adams Recreation Paved - One Lane 05/04/2004: Open to Wicky Shelter.

WTF is your point? The US has known the Saudi regime is a bunch of corrupt, psychopathic nuts for decades. Who extort their population for the betterment of themselves, covertly (and not so covertly) fund terrorists and fundamentalists. Who brutalize their own populations, and foreigners (hell, just try to get a visa!) We haven't done squat. They are also the swing oil producer - coincedence?

Like as a VicePresident?

The Megamids practically unchanged in 20+ years. La plus ca change, la plus'que c'est le meme chose.

Well we were a UN oversite body. From today's WashingtonPost: Investigate, Don't Incapacitate By Tom Lantos Saturday, May 8, 2004; Page A19 Since the end of January, when an Iraqi newspaper alleged that a senior U.N. official had taken bribes from Saddam Hussein, the United Nations has been the target of unsubstantiated allegations involving potential mismanagement, unethical behavior and collusion with Hussein's despicable regime. The notion that a high-level U.N. official could have been on Baghdad's payroll is sickening, if true, and it must be investigated. That being said, it has been just as sickening to see that longtime haters of the United Nations are using the bribery charge and other unproven allegations to discredit the world body when the case against it is far from clear. This campaign of slander threatens great harm to U.S. interests because it is aimed at undermining the United Nations' ability to help us in Iraq. Based on my preliminary review of the oil-for-food program, it appears that the United Nations took action to prevent some of the abuses of which it is being accused, and that much responsibility for the problems that beset the program lies with the members of the Security Council, including our own government. We know that U.N. officials raised concerns about possible Iraqi fraud in oil-for-food contracts as far back as early 2001, when Secretary General Kofi Annan issued a report warning that Hussein had begun to implement a system of surcharges on sales of oil under the program. Annan's reports led to reforms in the program. We also know that some U.N. officials tried to halt Hussein's scheme to extract kickbacks from companies seeking to sell goods under the program. Although the Security Council did not give the U.N. Secretariat oversight authority, U.N. officers worked to hold up overpriced contracts by demanding that missions that submitted them on behalf of their companies explain any overcharges. In many cases, the missions were unable or unwilling to defend the contracts, and they were never approved. In cases where the missions did attempt to justify the overpricing, the United Nations forwarded them to the Security Council's Sanctions Committee with red flags about the cost. Nevertheless, the State Department never exercised the power it had as a Sanctions Committee member to block any of the overpriced contracts flagged by the United Nations, nor did it otherwise try to halt Hussein's kickback scheme. Other members of the Security Council, including France, Russia and China, also failed to act. We have learned that the State Department approved dozens of ridiculously overpriced contracts, including three multimillion-dollar deals submitted by Syria that were inflated by a whopping 44 percent. In February 2002, the State Department even approved the sale of a fleet of 300 Mercedes-Benz luxury cars for use by the Iraqi government. We have learned that the State Department approved dozens of ridiculously overpriced contracts, including three multimillion-dollar deals submitted by Syria that were inflated by a whopping 44 percent. In February 2002, the State Department even approved the sale of a fleet of 300 Mercedes-Benz luxury cars for use by the Iraqi government. I fully understand that our highest priority as a Sanctions Committee member was to make sure that Iraq could not get its hands on illicit and dual-use items, and the United States blocked thousands of contracts based on these concerns. But another important priority should have been to prevent overpriced contracts that invited kickbacks. The United Nations clearly has to answer to the allegation that a U.N. official accepted bribes from Hussein, and the panel of inquiry headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul A. Volcker will thoroughly investigate this charge. I would expect that such an inquiry would look at whether the United Nations had put in place sufficient mechanisms to deter corrupt behavior by its employees. If the panel also discovers evidence of shoddy management or other problems in the program, the United Nations must make appropriate reforms. In Congress, as we move forward with a responsible inquiry, we should also focus attention on our own government and other Security Council members, and find out why they didn't use the authority they had to block Hussein's padded contracts. U.N. bashers would love to hold the United Nations culpable for Hussein's abuse of the oil-for-food program, because it would make an effective case for excluding the United Nations from Iraq's transition. But fairness and U.S. national interest require us to avoid being distracted by reckless distortions and to focus on facts. Rep. Lantos, of California, is the ranking Democrat on the House International Relations Committee.

No, it's the 8 signatures that Chessler's charging a $305 premium for. The cheapest edition on Abebooks is $45