Activism Change » Environmental Activism

Can we get the harasser's off this board?

admin — Mon, 16 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

mage? what’s mage?–rb From Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) : Mage Mage, n. [F. mage. See Magi.] A magician. [Archaic] –Spenser. Tennyson. It’s a typo he meant Mega.

So he’s not coondemned?–rb

Response:

NO DOCTOR-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, SHALL BE CONVEYED BY MESSAGES IN THIS NEWSGROUP. Have I ever stated or implied otherwise? As far as I am aware, No, you have not.

However you have made this statement: However, a far bigger problem than people who might pass up on alternative medicine because of what the sceptics write here, are people who might take some of the drivel by some alt.med proponents serious and go and have all their silver fillings removed, RCT teeth extracted, eating mage doses of fat-soluble vitamins or diagnose heart-failure by being looked deep into their eyes….

By that, you have defined your mha role as both predatory and suppressive. Yet you are not consistent in that self-designated role. If you truly believed that there was such a "moral justification" for the role, then where are your posts regarding Urine Therapy? UT is an actual practice among certain alt medders, such that they are prepared to avoid recommended medical treatment for certain cancers in favour of UT. Yet you are not speaking out against it, despite what you have written above. In particular, UT involves ingesting those toxic chemicals and metals such as Hg, lead, cadmium, etc, which the same people are advocating removing from the body. Why is it that someone who advocates removal of amalgams, for example, also defends the UT proponent? Why is such an obvious discrepancy overlooked by such as yourself who purport to be here to "Save" people from the dangers of a.m? Similar inconsistencies are evident in both "sides" of debate as you would present it. "Sides" is in quotes as, being an advocate of complementary rather than "alternative" med, I see the entrenching of two opposing "sides" as being less than helpful for discussion, most times.

Response:

Your wish to protect me and others is not wanted, is paternalistic. Go away. Your wish to remain a delusional ass-clown, ever adrift in urine is not wanted, is perverted. Grow up.

It is YOUR perverted sick mind that keeps thinking that UT has anything to do with your twisted ideas. Your continual semi sexual innuendo’s show clearly that you hold secret fantasies about having a sexual encounter where urine is used to excite you. So go for it. Please do stay away from the computer till after you stop orgasmic quivering

Response:

There are certain people in this group who are continuously virulently opposed to alternative medicine and do nothing but downgrade it in the most scathing manner possible all the time.

Top marks for use of hyperbole without actually lying. It waste our time defending ourselves against their baseless attacks and possibly frightens away those timid souls who might otherwise want to post or ask questions in an atmosphere of reassuring acceptance

That would be a support group. Which this isn’t. hiding the fact that they are straight from groups and organizations dedicated to outlawing and banning alternative medicine in the first place!!!!! This is surely harassment.

Top marks for portrayal of a paranoid lunatic. Also there are people that through their propaganda might possibly believe their lies and hooey and decide not to take some life saving alternative treatment-(such as chelation)- and die far earlier than necessary or at least be in poorer health as a result.

Yayah! What he said! I note that you have been utterly unable to defend any "life saving alternative" you’ve discussed except for resorting to insults and attempts at censorship of views you disagree with. What i’d like to know is…..do we have to put up with the harassment of these deceitful fools and wouldn’t it be better if they were gone from this board? Is this a good idea and is there any way to do it?–rb

No. But thanks for demonstrating the use of rhetorical questioning to indicate, most succinctly, that http://versionfiv.com/youare.swf moo

Response:

NO DOCTOR-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, SHALL BE CONVEYED BY MESSAGES IN THIS NEWSGROUP. Have I ever stated or implied otherwise?

As far as I am aware, No, you have not.

Response:

There are certain people in this group who are continuously virulently opposed to alternative medicine and do nothing but downgrade it in the most scathing manner possible all the time.

You mean the ones that post like this? "Dear Peter–concerning this, you need to have you’re If i could get my hands on you i’d pound your obnoxious head to a pulp. Scumbag!–rb" It waste our time defending ourselves against their baseless attacks and possibly frightens away those timid souls who might otherwise want to post or ask questions in an atmosphere of reassuring acceptance rather than one of vicious condemnatory ridiculing,

This is for DISCUSSION, which means presenting opinions and the facts behind those opinions. If you want 100% "reassuring acceptance", it’s not going to be found here. which comes from people–(at least some of them)–hiding the fact that they are straight from groups and organizations dedicated to outlawing and banning alternative medicine in the first place!!!!!

I’m not hiding any connection to anything … This is surely harassment.

You mean harassment like this? "Dear Peter–concerning this, you need to have you’re If i could get my hands on you i’d pound your obnoxious head to a pulp. Scumbag!–rb" Also there are people that through their propaganda might possibly believe their lies and hooey and decide not to take some life saving alternative treatment-(such as chelation)- and die far earlier than necessary or at least be in poorer health as a result.

You fear we might prevent someone from throwing their money down a rathole? Prevent someone from doing something dangerously foolish, like those weeks-long laxative "purification" sessions? YAY! What i’d like to know is…..do we have to put up with the harassment of these deceitful fools

This is USENET … so yes, you do. It’s a public facility and as long as my news provider doesn’t mind what I say, your choices are limited to reading or not reading my posts. and wouldn’t it be better if they were gone from this board?

Better for the quacks, their shills and their pimps, definitely. Bettterfo rthe generla public, no. Is this a good idea and is there any way to do it?–rb

Not on USENET. If you want a nice cozy spot where you can control who posts what, you have to start your own bulleting board system or forum. Tsu — To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection. – Jules Henri Poincar

Bed length

admin — Thu, 27 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

The diesel tanks are less than half that. But I still bought the V10. Can’t stand the stink and the noise of the diesel. I had a 6.2 Jimmy back in the ’80s. Oops. Don’t want to do that again.

To each his own – I love the smell of diesel in the morning. I took the cure with a 1986 Chevy 6.2 – bought it new – broke two cranks in it – off warranty of course – on the 2nd time round we put a 350 gasser in it and I sent it on down the road PDQ. I later learned that those 6.2s were susceptible to a harmonic vibration when you had a standard tranny behind them. They needed to have the crank, flywheel & harmonic balancer balanced as an assembly (as opposed to balancing them as individual components – which was the norm). If you didn’t do that, and you ran them long enough, they would crack out the mains, the crank would start to flex and eventually you would have a 6.2 grenade. It appears that GM may have finally got it right with the Duracrap but I will withhold judgement until it has been out for 4 or 5 years. R.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work)

Response:

snipped I will now depart from your silly confrontation Hugh. Carry on solo if you wish. And a Happy Birthday to you. AW

Really. This is the entire post I responded to;

Other than turning radius requiring a sliding hitch, is there any other disadvantage to a short bed compared to a long bed when towing a 5th wheel? TIA Kevin Long beds come with long wheel bases. Long wheel bases give better stability/handling when towing. AW" Now you can get twisted if you want, just don’t think everyone has to agree with you. And I guess we’ll just leave it to those who read as to who got confrontational. You made a statement that long beds come with long wheelbases and I pointed out that they ALL don’t. HD in FL

Response:

The longer the pickup the better. I love my Chevy 3500 crew cab long bed. Very stable tow platform and it rides great solo. However, those parking lot speed bumps will cause quite a rear end bounce when solo. Parking can be problem in parking lots marked off for small/medium size cars, but when that happens I just go to the outer edge of the lot and use several spaces. I am sold on the crew cab long box dually pickups! (and the Duramax Diesel) Ron

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hugh, it makes very little difference in towing, but in a lot of cases, a great deal of difference in riding comfort. I went from a super cab with long bed to a super cab with short bed, and with the same trailer, the porpoise effect is considerably more with the short bed. When I was driving 18 wheelers, those cab over short wheel tractors would beat you to death, compared to a conventional cab. I most likely will never buy another tow vehicle, but if I do, you can bet your booties that it will be a full 4 door pickup with a long bed. Tom J And what you say Tom makes sense. But before club cabs and such, most 5th wheels were towed by standard cab, long bed pickups. I would take a 2500 GM club cab with short box with its 143" wb over any standard cab GM, long bed with a 133" wb anytime. And a 1500HD crew cab short box has a 153" wb. Would make a nice unit for towing an under 30′ light weight 5th wheel. Of course that 26 gallon fuel tank would make a trip interesting

I tow a 22 foot fiver with a ext. cab longbed 2500, and partially due to the short fiver I suppose, I’ve never had a problem maneuvering. We put it in some really tight spots out in the woods, and I do appreciate being able to jackknife it around. I personally would not ever buy a shortbed. Tom

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The one unanswerable advantage to a long wheel base, on a gas rig, is the larger gas tank. That is absolutely true but it is also what keeps TransferFlow in business. I put one of their 50 gal tanks in my CC shorty and now, even when towing we can go further than our bladders can handle. And I took the rear window out of my shorty with the front corner of the trailer too. I put that down to operator stupidity, not engineering. R.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work)

Which brings up another advantage of diesels. The aftermarket tanks for ODPII gas rigs run well upwards of $1000. That didn’t survive an elementary cost/benefit analysis in my case. I need to stop every 200 miles and stretch my legs anyway. The diesel tanks are less than half that. But I still bought the V10. Can’t stand the stink and the noise of the diesel. I had a 6.2 Jimmy back in the ’80s. Oops. Don’t want to do that again. Bob

Response:

Most of life is a compromise. Those who bother to educate themselves, know what compromises they are making, and why they are making them. Sadly, far too many people act upon whims rather than logical thought.

They act on whim or misinformed feel-good. This is way OT but I did read the book I am about to recommend WHILE IN MY RV this winter so that makes it at least a little relevant. Bjorn Lomberg has written an excellent expose of the feel good myth that permeates our society masquerading as environmental activism. The title of the book is "The Skeptical Environmentalist" – I heartily recommend it to any critical thinker, no matter what your take on the environment. And for those of you of the environmental ilk – you know who you are – why don’t you read it too. Then you could rebut any claims I make here based on what I have read – and I intend to make many such claims. And you will never know when I am making them because the book is chock full of references – literally 1000s of references – some of them to such bastions of right wing thought as the US EPA, WWF, Greenpeace, etc. You will never know when I am quoting Bjorn because it will be attributed to someone else. R.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work)

Response:

Sorry, didn’t realize you were an expert on the issue. Wasn’t trying to "prove" you wrong, just pointed out the obvious. Oh yeah, plenty of people with pulses are towing light weight 5th wheels with 1/2 tons. As long as they stay within the manufacturers guidelines they don’t have problems. Naturally a 3/4 ton is better for towing anything but with the newer trucks, the "1/2" ton models properly equipped will do the job which required a light "3/4" ton before. I didn’t use sarcasm in my post, why did you feel you needed it? And I’ve had a fairly looong life as well. Next month will mark my 68th. HD in FL

Response:

Really? I don’t remember ever (in my entire lonnng life) seeing a 3/4 or 1 ton short wheelbase p/u truck. Seen tons of half tons equipped that way though. And most folks with a pulse know better than to hook a 5er to a half ton…SWB or LWB.

I must be missing something here. I presently own 2 shorties – an F250 & an F350 – I don’t own every one that has ever been built – they are everywhere. Either I am misunderstanding what you are claiming or you don’t get out enough. R.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work)

Response:

responded to my confession of stupidity: Do you have to be concerned about smashing the back window out of your truck if you pull with a shorty? Absolutely. Does that concern negate the use of a shorty? Absolutely not. I think the same arguments apply to hooking up a fifth wheel to a truck (long/short/club/crew/regular – who cares) with a tailgate. It only takes one time of smashing the back window or dinging the tailgate to learn not to make the same mistake again – for most of us

ABSOLUTELY. Forgot to remember that incident. I put a ding in the endgate 3 trucks back and – - – SO FAR – - – haven’t repeated the exercise. People need to remember that everything is a compromise. If all I ever did with the truck was pull the 5W then I would probably have a 1-ton crewcab duallie which would be a longbed because they don’t make them any other way. However, since I like to drive for groceries, park in parkades and parallel park in the city, I have a 1-ton shorty with singles. OTOH, if I had that 350 CC dooly it would probably be a bus and this discussion would be moot. R.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work)

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Long beds come with long wheel bases. Long wheel bases give better stability/handling when towing. AW Uhhh, wrong. Long box standard cab has a shorter wheelbase than a clubcab shortbox. While it’s no sweat off my back for you to try to prove me wrong, long beds still have a long wheelbase. The original poster mentioned nothing about standard cabs or extended cabs. Therefore they were not included in my comments to him. When towing a 5th wheel, wheelbase is not as important as when towing a conventional trailer. Having driven a variety of vehicles equipped with a fifth wheel device and a king pin stuck in it for many years and many miles, I’ll consider your comment to be your opinion. Which is BTW, unequal to mine. Wheelbase length is not a disadvantage for towing 5th wheel. HD in FL Really? I don’t remember ever (in my entire lonnng life) seeing a 3/4 or 1 ton short wheelbase p/u truck. Seen tons of half tons equipped that way though. And most folks with a pulse know better than to hook a 5er to a half ton…SWB or LWB. AW Sorry, didn’t realize you were an expert on the issue. Wasn’t trying to "prove" you wrong, just pointed out the obvious. Oh yeah, plenty of people with pulses are towing light weight 5th wheels with 1/2 tons. As long as they stay within the manufacturers guidelines they don’t have problems. Naturally a 3/4 ton is better for towing anything but with the newer trucks, the "1/2" ton models properly equipped will do the job which required a light "3/4" ton before. I didn’t use sarcasm in my post, why did you feel you needed it? And I’ve had a fairly looong life as well. Next month will mark my 68th. HD in FL

Remember telling me how "Uhh wrong" I was? And now you say "I didn’t realize you were an expert". I never claimed to be an expert. As for sarcasm, you would have likely have been insulted to the point of plonking me if I was being sarcastic. I will now depart from your silly confrontation Hugh. Carry on solo if you wish. And a Happy Birthday to you. AW

Response:

Were you, or were you not, the smart ass who posted: " And most folks with a pulse know better than to hook a 5er to a half ton…SWB or LWB. ?"

Now you have the gall to accuse Hugh of engaging in a "silly confrontation?" I don’t object to a confrontational style, but if you are gonna do it, stop whining about gettin it back. Lon

Response:

People need to remember that everything is a compromise. If all I ever did with the truck was pull the 5W then I would probably have a 1-ton crewcab duallie which would be a longbed because they don’t make them any other way. However, since I like to drive for groceries, park in parkades and parallel park in the city, I have a 1-ton shorty with singles. OTOH, if I had that 350 CC dooly it would probably be a bus and this discussion would be moot. R.J.(Bob) Evans

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Other than turning radius requiring a sliding hitch, is there any other disadvantage to a short bed compared to a long bed when towing a 5th wheel? TIA Kevin Long beds come with long wheel bases. Long wheel bases give better stability/handling when towing. AW Uhhh, wrong. Long box standard cab has a shorter wheelbase than a club cab short box. When towing a 5th wheel, wheelbase is not as important as when towing a conventional trailer. Wheelbase length is not a disadvantage for towing 5th wheel. HD in FL Hugh, it makes very little difference in towing, but in a lot of cases, a great deal of difference in riding comfort. I went from a super cab with long bed to a super cab with short bed, and with the same trailer, the porpoise effect is considerably more with the short bed. When I was driving 18 wheelers, those cab over short wheel tractors would beat you to death, compared to a conventional cab. I most likely will never buy another tow vehicle, but if I do, you can bet your booties that it will be a full 4 door pickup with a long bed. Tom J

And what you say Tom makes sense. But before club cabs and such, most 5th wheels were towed by standard cab, long bed pickups. I would take a 2500 GM club cab with short box with its 143" wb over any standard cab GM, long bed with a 133" wb anytime. And a 1500HD crew cab short box has a 153" wb. Would make a nice unit for towing an under 30′ light weight 5th wheel. Of course that 26 gallon fuel tank would make a trip interesting

Response:

The one unanswerable advantage to a long wheel base, on a gas rig, is the larger gas tank.

That is absolutely true but it is also what keeps TransferFlow in business. I put one of their 50 gal tanks in my CC shorty and now, even when towing we can go further than our bladders can handle. And I took the rear window out of my shorty with the front corner of the trailer too. I put that down to operator stupidity, not engineering. R.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work)

Response:

Long beds come with long wheel bases. Long wheel bases give better stability/handling when towing. AW Uhhh, wrong. Long box standard cab has a shorter wheelbase than a clubcab shortbox.

While it’s no sweat off my back for you to try to prove me wrong, long beds still have a long wheelbase. The original poster mentioned nothing about standard cabs or extended cabs. Therefore they were not included in my comments to him. When towing a 5th wheel, wheelbase is not as important as when towing a conventional trailer.

Having driven a variety of vehicles equipped with a fifth wheel device and a king pin stuck in it for many years and many miles, I’ll consider your comment to be your opinion. Which is BTW, unequal to mine. Wheelbase length is not a disadvantage for towing 5th wheel. HD in FL

Response:

Other than turning radius requiring a sliding hitch, is there any other disadvantage to a short bed compared to a long bed when towing a 5th wheel? TIA Kevin

You also have more room for cargo. We can carry our bicycles in the bed with the long bed.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Other than turning radius requiring a sliding hitch, is there any other disadvantage to a short bed compared to a long bed when towing a 5th wheel? TIA Kevin Long beds come with long wheel bases. Long wheel bases give better stability/handling when towing. AW Uhhh, wrong. Long box standard cab has a shorter wheelbase than a clubcab shortbox. When towing a 5th wheel, wheelbase is not as important as when towing a conventional trailer. Wheelbase length is not a disadvantage for towing 5th wheel. HD in FL

Hugh, it makes very little difference in towing, but in a lot of cases, a great deal of difference in riding comfort. I went from a supercab with long bed to a supercab with short bed, and with the same trailer, the porpoise effect is considerably more with the short bed. When I was driving 18 wheelers, those cab over short wheel tractors would beat you to death, compared to a conventional cab. I most likely will never buy another tow vehicle, but if I do, you can bet your booties that it will be a full 4 door pickup with a long bed. Tom J

Response:

Uhhh, wrong. Long box standard cab has a shorter wheelbase than a clubcab shortbox. When towing a 5th wheel, wheelbase is not as important as when towing a conventional trailer. Wheelbase length is not a disadvantage for towing 5th wheel. HD in FL

Response:

<< Wheelbase length is not a disadvantage for towing 5th wheel. I’ve heard that and the opposite. I’m going to the Freighliner RV Hauler Club rally in a month. I’ll try to hear experiences on wheelbase issues. Tom

Response:

While you’re there, see if you can find a person with engineering training to explain to you why OTR truck drivers and drag racers prefer long-wheelbases. But until you do that, consider this: they don’t use Bobcats to tow on the highway. One key reason is that a long wheelbase translates to superior directional stability. It is certainly true that a short wheelbase improves maneuverability in tight quarters, but on the highway longer is better. Will Sill

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Other than turning radius requiring a sliding hitch, is there any other disadvantage to a short bed compared to a long bed when towing a 5th wheel? I have towed with both & I will never tow with a longbed again. The longbed has a wider turning radius. The notion that it is a problem maneuvring with a shortbed is simply an illusion. We currently pull with an F350 crewcab shortie. I have a slider hitch. In 2 years I have needed to move that hitch exactly zero times. I "wanted" to move it once but it was rusted in place so I put the trailer into the site without moving the hitch. I can’t conceive of a situation where you would actually be able to put a trailer into a site with a slider that you wouldn’t be able to get into without the slider. The site in question, on the occasion where I "wanted" to move my hitch was a site where all my neighbours were in unanimous agreement that it was physically impossible for anyone to get my 5th wheel into anyway. We got into it without sliding the hitch. We routinely put the trailer into forest sites in Canada & the US, into beach sites in Mexico and – most difficult of all – uphill and around a corner into our own backyard at home. By the time you touch the fifth wheel front to the truck you are turned REALLY short. At that point the tires on the trailer are scrubbing sideways. The bigger concern parking a 5th wheel is being able to quickly initiate a turn and for that you need an "agile" truck – one that initiates a turn quickly. The longer the wheelbase on the truck, the more sluggish it is to initiate a turn and the more difficult it is to park a trailer with that long truck. Watch switch tractors working in a freight yard for an extreme example of what I am talking about – a switch tractor is a shorty, often with only a single drive axle, designed so as to maneuvre trailers into tight spots. A shortbed truck more closely approximates that situation and will simply be easier to use. Do you have to be concerned about smashing the back window out of your truck if you pull with a shorty? Absolutely. Does that concern negate the use of a shorty? Absolutely not. R.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work)

I actually DID smash the back window out of my short bed truck on my second trip, in Gearhart, Oregon. Just laziness and arrogance, not wanting to get out and slide the hitch back. One moment I was just close, the next I was a quarter inch past close. The one time you really do need a sliding hitch, and it’s happened to me several times, is when you get too far up a narrow forest road (or a dead end city street) with no turnouts, and need to jack knife the trailer to turn it around. The one unanswerable advantage to a long wheel base, on a gas rig, is the larger gas tank. Bob

Response:

Other than turning radius requiring a sliding hitch, is there any other disadvantage to a short bed compared to a long bed when towing a 5th wheel? TIA Kevin

Response:

Other than turning radius requiring a sliding hitch, is there any other disadvantage to a short bed compared to a long bed when towing a 5th wheel? TIA Kevin

Long beds come with long wheel bases. Long wheel bases give better stability/handling when towing. AW

Response:

Other than turning radius requiring a sliding hitch, is there any other disadvantage to a short bed compared to a long bed when towing a 5th wheel?

I have towed with both & I will never tow with a longbed again. The longbed has a wider turning radius. The notion that it is a problem maneuvring with a shortbed is simply an illusion. We currently pull with an F350 crewcab shortie. I have a slider hitch. In 2 years I have needed to move that hitch exactly zero times. I "wanted" to move it once but it was rusted in place so I put the trailer into the site without moving the hitch. I can’t conceive of a situation where you would actually be able to put a trailer into a site with a slider that you wouldn’t be able to get into without the slider. The site in question, on the occasion where I "wanted" to move my hitch was a site where all my neighbours were in unanimous agreement that it was physically impossible for anyone to get my 5th wheel into anyway. We got into it without sliding the hitch. We routinely put the trailer into forest sites in Canada & the US, into beach sites in Mexico and – most difficult of all – uphill and around a corner into our own backyard at home. By the time you touch the fifth wheel front to the truck you are turned REALLY short. At that point the tires on the trailer are scrubbing sideways. The bigger concern parking a 5th wheel is being able to quickly initiate a turn and for that you need an "agile" truck – one that initiates a turn quickly. The longer the wheelbase on the truck, the more sluggish it is to initiate a turn and the more difficult it is to park a trailer with that long truck. Watch switch tractors working in a freight yard for an extreme example of what I am talking about – a switch tractor is a shorty, often with only a single drive axle, designed so as to maneuvre trailers into tight spots. A shortbed truck more closely approximates that situation and will simply be easier to use. Do you have to be concerned about smashing the back window out of your truck if you pull with a shorty? Absolutely. Does that concern negate the use of a shorty? Absolutely not. R.J.(Bob) Evans (return address needs alteration to work)

Response:

My 97 GMC long bed has a 129 liter gas tank. This means I have to refuel every 300 to 400 kilometres to be on the save side. The same year short bed had a 96.4 liter fuel tank. That would mean refuelling between 225 and 300 kilometres. For me, it would be a pain to have to refuel more frequently. There are a lot of things to be concerned about when you are pulling a trailer (height, weight, etc). I did not what to be concerned about denting the truck or trailer at the end of a long day. I think I would like to have a short bed for the following reasons; * easier to park * shorter turning radius * easier to back up the trailer (shorter turning radius) I chose the long bed for the following reasons; * I would not have to think twice before I get into a tight turn (trailer hitting truck). * Increase driving range before refuelling * Better stability. (longer and heavier tow vehicle is normally more stable)

Other than turning radius requiring a sliding hitch, is there any other disadvantage to a short bed compared to a long bed when towing a 5th

wheel?

Response:

On site report of the John Quigley take down

admin — Sat, 11 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

On site report of the John Quigley take down 10/Jan/2003, Fredric L. Rice All that effort spent for one lousy tree. It’s a damn shame those people don’t take on a meaningful cause. You sure don’t see a turnout like that for ANY picket of Scientology…but then, trees don’t hire PIs, dig through your trash, or make false complaints to the police. Rather than wasting all that time protesting about Scientology, why don’t you do something about the homeless?

Like Shydavid’s work at women’s shelters and domestic abuse hotlines. All these problems — over population, the destruction of ancient trees and the environment, homelessness, domestic abuse, and Scientology — are all legitimate but hopeless efforts to fight. Even if money was available to oppose such things it would still be hopeless. But they are all _worthy_ venues to fight since to do nothing is to die a sort of spiritual death and just maybe a few — people or trees — are saved along the way (kind of like slot machine gambleing, huh?) Some people who oppose Scientology have become _defined_ by their opposition; fighting Scientology becomes their way of life and Mr. Minton mentioned that fact in one court transcript. It’s like Segourney Weaver constantly fighting the aliens — she did nothing else. Environmentalists are prone to the same problem of becoming defined by their environmentalism. Good or bad depends upon the level of extremism, the methodologies of their opposition, and whether the activist has become addicted or not. Each of us has to pick their ground and their meaning. Each person has a right to say "This far and no further!"

At the Quigley take down last night the protesters were of all mixed "racial" types that Southern California is home to. Blacks, Mexicans, Indians, whites, Asians were all there shaking hands, touching each other on the backs and holding each other’s shoulders while talking in a spirit of humanity that rarely exists among individuals who are not united in a cause. The people there knew it was just one tree in a long line of trees that had already been cut down in the canyon and, in fact, going further in there are still others that are set for destruction. "This far and no further" when Quigley climbed the tree was the act of a speed bump that, while doomed to be run over by the developer, slowed him down just a bit, long enough for the world’s media to take a look at Don Quixote tilting at Windmills that threaten humanity’s quality of life. Granted that many such acts are stupid. I think it might be in the genetic code. The problem is in grading those in "stupid", "inspired by the gods [oh dear]", "probably a good idea", "you’re a loonie", etc. Thankfully, most countries don’t limit that expression. I probably wouldn’t be upset about anyone’s non-violent protest. Frequently, I think that many "attaboys" at a picket are for sticking to Co$, rather than about protesting what they’ve done. Go figure!

Picketing them hurts their revenues, I think. — George W. Bush threatens to kill us all — for oil http://www.gwbush.com/ http://www.bushwatch.net/ Soon to come: http://www.notserver.com/

Response:

That’s not very fair, though. Environmental activists have adopted a venue of activism that’s every bit as legitimate as the people who criticize and work to expose Scientology’s crime racketeering. You yourself have put in as much time, energy, and committment working to expose and/or stop Scientology’s some times deadly and always dangerous "NarCONon" quack medical frauds. Said environmentalists might well consider such efforts to halt Scientology’s abuses to be a meaningless cause. The Old Glory effort isn’t "just one tree." The L. A. Times this morning — page one photograph, no less — called the effort a symbol of what’s taking place in Southern California over the past couple of decades. There’s deeper meaning in opposing unchecked expansion of the human species at the cost of uprooting trees that were here before the European invasion. That "one tree" is a line that was drawn by some people who have honest and legitimate concerns about our future and our quality of life in Southern California and the large numbers of people who came out day by day reflects what I think is growing unease at our growing population and what that means. Critics, human rights, free speech rights, or whatever you want to call us activists who work to reform or halt Scientology’s abuses and crimes are just as Quixotic, just as doomed to failure, in my opinion. We’ve kept a lot of people from being swindled and quite possibly killed by the criminal enterprise, but nothing we’ve ever done or will ever be able to do will stop the criminal enterprise completely. It’s up to the FBI and BATF to take out organized crime and we all know that the right people are being paid the right amount of money to make sure that never happens. Well, Quigley was a speed bump that halted another kind of abuse which effects other people in other ways, and in the end he’s just as doomed to failure as we all are since his problem, too, is insurmountable because the right people are getting paid the right amounts of money. These environmentalist extremists are alike in many ways to the extremists that oppose Scientology’s abuses. I don’t see how you could consider their effort meaningless without also considering or own efforts to be meaningless. — George W. Bush threatens to kill us all — for oil http://www.gwbush.com/ http://www.bushwatch.net/ Soon to come: http://www.notserver.com/

Response:

On site report of the John Quigley take down 10/Jan/2003, Fredric L. Rice 5 police cars, lots of trucks, and started evicting the ground support crew, tearing down the signs that school children and other well washers had placed on the smaller fence that had surrounded the oak tree.

Response:

On site report of the John Quigley take down 10/Jan/2003, Fredric L. Rice Two of my sons and myself drove to Santa Clarita and the site of Old Glory, the 300 year old oak tree destined for cutting to make way for the widening of the road (for background see http://www.skeptictank.org/treesit/treesit.htm for description and photographs.) We had arrived at 6:00 p.m. (Friday night) with the belief that the police were going to bring Quigley down since he had stayed treed after authorities served the tree a notice of trespassing. The bad guys had installed a 8 foot hot fence a long way down the street and put in K-rail barricades all over the place to keep citizens from re-supplying John. A couple of nights ago the bad guys had come at 1:30 a.m. in the dark of night with over hired security goons, more than 5 police cars, lots of trucks, and started evicting the ground support crew, tearing down the signs that school children and other well washers had placed on the smaller fence that had surrounded the oak tree. The people who live in the area had quite a bit to say about the noise; the bad guys picked 1:30 in the morning to try to avoid the media. It didn’t work very well since the ground crew and other activists who were being evicted from tents under the tree were quickly in contact with the media which came out in large numbers and were on site and filming a half hour later. The bad guys helped out by turning on lights on trailers they had brought with them. Tonight the atmosphere was utterly unlike a protest or a picket and was more like a circus and summer camp. After finding a parking spot for our Jeep we walked down to the new barricades and started looking at the security arrangements to see how well the bad guys had planned ahead to keep activists from re-supplying John. We had heard that a very small boy the day previously had managed to get under the fences and make it to the tree to get something to John but the fence covering the culvert on the right hand side of the site up against the cliff had been strengthened with more fencing and sand bags so that route had been blocked off. There were seven news vans parked up and down the street, six of them being large, well equipped vans from the major television stations, and one of them a smaller van from a Mexico television news station. It was hard to see but a television news van had managed to get parked in the residential housing area directly across the road from Old Glory and had its boom extended. Parking was not yet a problem though the whole area was quickly filling up. Toward around 8:00 p.m. or 9:00 p.m. the cops started stopping cars further down the road and telling them they couldn’t proceed unless they lived in the area. Most looked to me like they turned around and parked way the hell down Pico Canyon Road and started to walk in though we did see people turn around and leave when told there’s no way to park in the area. There were about 200 people down the street singing, talking with each other, yelling slogans, and chanting down at the far end where the road had been blocked off — and blocking the road seems like an illegal act; blocking the road was not done due to safety reasons or any legitimate reason other than to keep people from exercising their freedom of speech rights to include their chosen audiences which included John Quigley. I’d hazard a guess that about one fourth of the people at the site were children under the age of 18. While many of the people were in their 30’s, the demographics of the people who had come out to support the saving of the oak tree and to support Quigley were broad spectrum and not what I would consider to be the usual type of environmental activists in a general sense. I suspect the media and the easy access to the site accounted for that. Looking at the signs that had been placed on the new fence I noticed that the _message_ being conveyed by some of the people protesting the planned destruction of the oak tree had changed somewhat. Previously the attitude and message was uplifting, light, and positive, appealing to the city to do what’s right and divert the highway. Tonight there was a sign on the fence where most citizens gathered at the early evening hours that equated the city planners and Antonovitch (spelling?) to terrorists, equating three people to Osama, Saddam, and I think the leader of North Korea. It was more than a bit much and extreme and was a new slant to the protests that cropped up from time to time during the night. A walk way of dirt along the fence on the right of about 10 or 11 inches wide allowed citizens to approach the tree to within about 110 feet or so. After checking with people to see what the status was, one son and I worked our way along the fence’s dirt path toward the tree and met with another group of people there. Three television news crews were at that location and a guy from KFI talk radio was there. John had a small electric light up in the canopy and, even in the darkness we could see that much of his support platform had been removed by the bad guys. The American flag still hung down from nearby his platform but it did look like the roads and other support equipment had been removed. The new fence blocked off the public access right along the rock cliff on the right — which was another civil rights violation — and it looked to me like the fence was pretty well confining anyone from going in and getting supplies to John. I had thought that the fence was impassable but that proved to be incorrect as events transpired later. It had been reported that Quigley’s cell telephone had gone dead — not surprising the number of interviews he’s given over the phone — but he was still in contact with a ground crew by radio. My sons had brought radios and about a forty pounds of other electronic equipment so we got to listen in. Over the next couple of hours the number of people rose to about 300 or 400 with most of them down by the blocked off road’s barricades though about 100 down where I and one of my sons was. The other son had stayed at the road block and was in contact by radio. Toward the end there were about 200 of us down closer to the tree. There was much singing, clapping, the yelling of slogans, and, down by the road block, a prayer circle forming up. In the quiet periods messages would some times be yelled back and forth between John and well wishers on the ground. With the noise John didn’t seem able to understand a lot of what was yelled but he usually yelled back a "Thank You" regardless. }:-} I don’t know what time it was but down the road a tanker truck drove up to the barricades and it looked to me like this was the start of the arrival of the equipment to take John out of the tree. I yelled up a warning to John to "lock up" if he hadn’t done so already since it could have been the start. People in the area around me were wondering if the bad guys were going to water John down to see if that would make him leave the tree — not a totally unlikely notion since Antonovitch doesn’t seem to care about his political future in this county. John yelled down "What?" The tanker truck came up the road and it started to look like it was really the start of the take down but the tanker had stopped directly across from Old Glory to talk with the knot of police and security goons and then proceeded further down the road and out of sight. False alarm, and the only one that night. There were eight security goons inside the fence, four of them in one little knot, three in another, and one of them walking the far fence keeping an eye on the culvert that had been dug and sided in concrete. At one point in the protest six or seven of them collected near us at the fence for a while and then they all turned and walked away. When they were about 40 feet away we started shaking the fence and pretending to go over it which made some of them come back. That got everyone laughing though. Since there were a lot of children all over the place nobody was going to do anything so stupid as to rush the fence — or so I had thought. More and more cops kept showing up, and a cop helicopter stayed in hover mode above the site with his Night Sun off but without doubt using FLUIR to watch for activists working their way into the fenced in area and on to the hillside up the cliff to the right. A distance away and at a higher altitude was a news crew in a helicopter also in hover mode filming and reporting on the line of cars that was coming in and/or being turned back. From time to time the cop’s helicopter would leave station and circle around over the hillside turning on his Night Sun to look at things up there and then return to station. At about 8:15 or so, I think it was, the news copter left. The police copter then took up station over the expensive residential houses on the left and illuminated the oak tree and surrounding ground with his Night Sun from time to time. Eventually it was reported by telephone that a large force of bad guys were heading our way so my son and I went back to the blocked off road barricades to rejoin the other son and to await the arrival of the force that was coming. We had grabbed about 30 or 40 other people to strengthen the number of protesters at the road for the new arrivals. A couple of minutes later more police cars came in followed by a fire company paramedics truck and a hook and latter fire engine which was in turned followed by more cop cars. They each got a good yelling and good-natured cussing amid boos and (thankfully) only a few yells of "fascist Nazis" and other inappropriate comments. As the last cop car went past the opened gate, two young women started grabbing at people saying, "Let’s go!" and one grabbed my shirt and yanked be toward the opening. I knew immediately they wanted everyone to come streaming in to the site and I must admit I thought about … read more »

Response:

Yosemite Park official resigns to protest Bush -Bush wants to build road through Smokies roadless area

admin — Wed, 06 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Boy that’s a real ego.. Glad to see your so impressed with yourself.. I doubt that many other are.. What an ass.. — Tight Lines Bill White / KM6SX "Fishing – Hours of boredom, with moments of intense insanity sprinkled in between" Remove " oon " from e-mail for address

| |

Response:

Boy that’s a real ego.. Glad to see your so impressed with yourself.. I doubt that many other are.. What an ass..

Best bit of paraphrasing I’ve seen today. Wolfgang carry on.

Response:

"Fishing – Hours of boredom, with moments of intense insanity sprinkled in between"

Huh? And just when does the boredom start? Russell Dude, must not be a fferman.

Response:

I’m glad to see that there are other out there that are just as sick of this "We know everything, because we are tree huggers" Bull Crap as I am.. These people are so full of themselves and their PC weird science that you can’t even enjoy going to these parks anymore.. They make you feel like you are some kind of pervert because you don’t see the same " Vision" that they have about nature and how we the little people should be allowed to enjoy it " per their rules". I’ve backpacked the Grand Canyon several times. Even spent my honeymoon their freezing our butts off on Sept 26, 1980 and you used to be able to enjoy it much more then because you could travel around at your own speed. Now the Nature Nazi’s have you on buses etc.. Let’s keep America first.. Most of these park have more Europeans in them then Americans.. If we are going to say no to someone.. Let it be them.. Thank You Soap box has now been returned to the garage.. =}8-)~ — Tight Lines Bill White / KM6SX "Fishing – Hours of boredom, with moments of intense insanity sprinkled in between" Remove " oon " from e-mail for address

| | | Some links about this if interested: | | http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/breaking_news/4215129.htm | http://www.ecomall.com/activism/sierra144.htm | | | –0-459238875-1036567907=:5810 | Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii | | Yosemite park official resigns in protest | October 03, 2002: Another high-level government official is resigning | in | protest to the Bush administration’s environmental policies. The | superintendent of Yosemite National Park, David Mihalic, has opted to | retire | rather than accept a transfer to the Great Smoky Mountains | | No, he didn’t resign in protest. He RETIRED!!! If he had the courage of | his convictions he WOULD have resigned. | | I see no reason for him to sacrifice his retirement just to make the | point | that Bush is RED, not Green. | As we all know, the reason he left the NPS was because he was | unwilling to do Bush’s bidding. | And in fact, had he kissee axxes and do as they wanted, he would | clearly have got a larger retirement — so he did make a sacrifice. | | | | |

Response:

protest to the Bush administration’s environmental policies. The superintendent of Yosemite National Park, David Mihalic, has opted to retire rather than accept a transfer to the Great Smoky Mountains No, he didn’t resign in protest. He RETIRED!!! If he had the courage of his convictions he WOULD have resigned. The meadow lands in question belonged to the Cherokee long before the GSMNP existed. They should have just a little piece of their lands back. — Dave

Response:

And the whole north american continent belonged to native peoples. We should give that back, too, starting with YOUR land and home. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The meadow lands in question belonged to the Cherokee long before the GSMNP existed. They should have just a little piece of their lands back. — Dave

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Some links about this if interested: http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/breaking_news/4215129.htm http://www.ecomall.com/activism/sierra144.htm –0-459238875-1036567907=:5810 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Yosemite park official resigns in protest October 03, 2002: Another high-level government official is resigning in protest to the Bush administration’s environmental policies. The superintendent of Yosemite National Park, David Mihalic, has opted to retire rather than accept a transfer to the Great Smoky Mountains No, he didn’t resign in protest. He RETIRED!!! If he had the courage of his convictions he WOULD have resigned.

I see no reason for him to sacrifice his retirement just to make the point that Bush is RED, not Green. As we all know, the reason he left the NPS was because he was unwilling to do Bush’s bidding. And in fact, had he kissee axxes and do as they wanted, he would clearly have got a larger retirement — so he did make a sacrifice.

Response:

Good, If you don’t want to do what your boss tells you, that just what someone should do. GET OUT — Tight Lines Bill White / KM6SX "Fishing – Hours of boredom, with moments of intense insanity sprinkled in between" Remove " oon " from e-mail for address

Response:

You obviously don’t have a clue how CSRS works. He was at the maximum. The most he could have gained would be next years COLA (1.5%) The National Park Service and USDA Forest Service have been infested with starry eyed tree hugging Bambini. It’s about time for a little balance with real science, not the pap being tossed about. National Parks are NOT wilderness areas. From the first one (Yellowstone) they have been created for maximum access and recreation. National Forests are NOT wilderness areas. They were created as MULTIPLE USE areas which include timber and recreation. If you desire them all to be wilderness areas, have the courage of your convictions and petition Congress to designate them so. One caution, though. Wilderness Areas should be exactly that. NO human access for any reason. No hiking. No study. No human access of any kind. — Dave

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No, he didn’t resign in protest. He RETIRED!!! If he had the courage of his convictions he WOULD have resigned. I see no reason for him to sacrifice his retirement just to make the point that Bush is RED, not Green. As we all know, the reason he left the NPS was because he was unwilling to do Bush’s bidding. And in fact, had he kissee axxes and do as they wanted, he would clearly have got a larger retirement — so he did make a sacrifice. You obviously don’t have a clue how CSRS works. He was at the maximum. The most he could have gained would be next years COLA (1.5%) The National Park Service and USDA Forest Service have been infested with starry eyed tree hugging Bambini. It’s about time for a little balance with real science, not the pap being tossed about. National Parks are NOT wilderness areas. From the first one (Yellowstone) they have been created for maximum access and recreation. National Forests are NOT wilderness areas. They were created as MULTIPLE USE areas which include timber and recreation. If you desire them all to be wilderness areas, have the courage of your convictions and petition Congress to designate them so. One caution, though. Wilderness Areas should be exactly that. NO human access for any reason. No hiking. No study. No human access of any kind. — Dave

So true about a ‘real’ Wilderness Area! I used to do mtn biking and some people stated that it was perfectly fine for hiking in a Wilderness Area, horse riding was fine too, but mtn biking MUST be off limits at any costs!! Huh????? (ex. Yellowstone, hiking,horsing ok, mtn biking not(except on roads), wierd logic in my opinion, a NP the size of a nation or state but no room for a biker, wolfs ok as well, just a inconsistent picture to me, btw it’s ok for thousands of acres to burn, but not biking!!) As far as upsetting the wildlife, hiking is the worse! Studys showed that beasties did not recognize mtn bikes as a threat (unlike hikers) so were at least theoretically less impacting to the beasties. I say, NO Human activity whatsoever in Wilderness Areas! If Man sticks his face in these in any fashion, Wilderness Areas they are not!

Response:

How in the world is ‘running’ being courageous. If he truly felt it the ‘overall’ wrong thing to do, he would have stayed and fought it. Anyone, even screaming little girls, can run from a fight. Unfortunately, many of the ‘green’ people only think thru emotions and not facts and rational ‘real world’ thinking. Many ‘red’ people only think thru their wallets, who is correct? That’s the problem! The ‘regular’ people in this area are fairly poor, similar to any area with natural resources and little else, where some non green things will bring them a bit more money to live on (ex. Alaska). He would have had a somewhat a more visible position to fight his convictions. And besides, he may have not lose a single penny of his retirement income from the FedGov job (well maybe)!!! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Some links about this if interested: http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/breaking_news/4215129.htm http://www.ecomall.com/activism/sierra144.htm –0-459238875-1036567907=:5810 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Yosemite park official resigns in protest October 03, 2002: Another high-level government official is resigning in protest to the Bush administration’s environmental policies. The superintendent of Yosemite National Park, David Mihalic, has opted to retire rather than accept a transfer to the Great Smoky Mountains No, he didn’t resign in protest. He RETIRED!!! If he had the courage of his convictions he WOULD have resigned. I see no reason for him to sacrifice his retirement just to make the point that Bush is RED, not Green. As we all know, the reason he left the NPS was because he was unwilling to do Bush’s bidding. And in fact, had he kissee axxes and do as they wanted, he would clearly have got a larger retirement — so he did make a sacrifice.

Response:

He would have received no larger retirement for the simple fact of relocating. He’s a federal government employee, probably covered by the older Civil Service Retirement System. He’ll get his retirement based on the pay of the highest position he held for three years of service. (Usually the last three) If he was going from a supervisor’s position to a supervisor’s in a lateral movement he wouldn’t have changed his pay grade, but he might have gotten a greater locality pay. Locality pay is not used to compute retirement benefits. If he was going to a higher pay grade he would get a higher retirement, based on his high three. One or two grades don’t make all that much difference in retirement benefits. It’s not like his life would have been all champaign and caviar had he taken the transfer. I’ve been under the CSRS now for thirty years, so I have some expertise in this subject. When you say he would have clearly got(ten) a larger retirement — You just show that you don’t know Jack, and are making up facts to fit your own prejudices. B*2 – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I see no reason for him to sacrifice his retirement just to make the point that Bush is RED, not Green. As we all know, the reason he left the NPS was because he was unwilling to do Bush’s bidding. And in fact, had he kissee axxes and do as they wanted, he would clearly have got a larger retirement — so he did make a sacrifice.

Response:

Some links about this if interested: http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/breaking_news/4215129.htm http://www.ecomall.com/activism/sierra144.htm –0-459238875-1036567907=:5810 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Yosemite park official resigns in protest October 03, 2002: Another high-level government official is resigning in protest to the Bush administration’s environmental policies. The superintendent of Yosemite National Park, David Mihalic, has opted to retire rather than accept a transfer to the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, where he says Bush officials wanted him to approve two environmentally harmful projects: building a 28-mile road through the largest undeveloped wilderness in the eastern United States and conducting a land swap that would allow a local Indian tribe to develop nearly 200 acres of meadowland located within the park. These two projects have fueled political controversy for decades but the agency has so far stood firm in its opposition. Now, with added pressure from local congressional representatives who have the backing of the Bush administration, NPS officials in Washington want a new superintendent to finally push the projects through. Mihalic, a career NPS official with 30 years experience,

decided to retire rather than reverse long-standing agency policy. "President Bush’s foreign policy motto — ‘If you’re not with us, you’re against us’ — seems to extend to federal environmental agencies as well," said Chuck Clusen, director of NRDC’s parks program. "This latest resignation proves that the administration is hell-bent on pleasing political benefactors at the expense of the public interest." Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs – Search new jobs daily now –0-459238875-1036567907=:5810 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Aviation's friend, Mayor Dick Daley

admin — Wed, 24 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Has anyone got a phone number for his office? -Mark

Response:

my proposed flight plan for my trip to Meigs next week. -Mark

Response:

I just emailed him, too. I told him he should stick to extorting from contractors, fixing elections, and other Chicago political staples and stay out of aviation.

Response:

Has anyone got a phone number for his office?

Well, www.switchboard.com lists (312) 744-3081 as the number for the City Council as well as for Chicago Aldermanic Information, so if that won’t get you to the Mayor’s office, I’ll bet whoever’s on the other end of that phone number could tell you what phone number would. Not that I’m suggesting calling the Mayor every time you go flying would actually be useful. You’re unlikely to talk to him, and I doubt he cares if his secretary has to field a bunch more phone calls. Pete

Response:

Whats worse….Mr. Daley or the people who voted for him?

Have you no respect for the dead? –kyler

Response:

In article I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. The bastard reminds me of a recent poster to this NG who also wets his bed whenever a plane flies over

the long island looney bird is back? — Bob (I think people can figure out how to email me… ) (replace ihatessppaamm with my name (rnoel) and hw1 with mediaone) (WARNING: apparently some people consider decoding my email to ) (too difficult and challenging )

Response:

Its election day in cook county- Vote early, and vote often. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Granted, I’m no expert, but if I recall, politics has never been something What’s the old saying? "They have the best politicians money can buy." Gene Pallat

Response:

Oh, yes, he is alive and sick as ever, on alt.activism.noise.pollution, talk.environment and a few other "environmental" NG.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In article I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. The bastard reminds me of a recent poster to this NG who also wets his bed whenever a plane flies over the long island looney bird is back? Oh, yes, he is alive and sick as ever, on alt.activism.noise.pollution, talk.environment and a few other "environmental" NG.

Oh I just had to look, didn’t I – alt.activism.noise.pollution is about as active as a squashed turtle in the middle of the road. I think I found the person you are referring to – well, all he has to talk to is about a dozen other people on that newsgroup and apparently no one is listening. I wouldn’t be surprised if he starts bitching about all the F-16’s screaming around the skies. If he’s living on Long Island he should remember that two of the biggest companies on L.I. were Grumman and Republic (at least they were oh so many years ago when I lived in Hicksville, L.I.). Tom

Response:

Its election day in cook county- Vote early, and vote often.

and death is no excuse. George Patterson, N3162Q.

Response:

Its election day in cook county- Vote early, and vote often.

It is a big event in Chicago. Why the dead even rise from their graves to vote for Mr. Daley! — HighFlyer Highflight Aviation Services

Response:

I enjoyed the final quote from the cited piece in the Sun Times. But, she said, hopefully, ”the FAA will listen to reason when a mayor is saying, ‘We don’t want this in our city.’ " Seems to me that, so far at least, the FAA has figured out that listening to reason, and listening to the mayor, are not the same thing. Funny how Daley’s press secretary equates "listening to reason" with "do what we want". Especially since the city administration’s repsonse to the calls for "listening to reason" on the Meigs closure plan has been "go to hell, we’re building a park". It’s always delicious when the shoe is on the other foot. I just hope it stays there. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – AS you are aware the ECB around O’Hare opened today. Chicago’s Mayor and aviation enthusiast Mayor Daley has a bit to say about that. Check out the AOP web site an introduction of his remarks and then check out http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-plane24.html for more details. What a guy! I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. Scott — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

AS you are aware the ECB around O’Hare opened today. Chicago’s Mayor and aviation enthusiast Mayor Daley has a bit to say about that. Check out the AOP web site an introduction of his remarks and then check out http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-plane24.html for more details. What a guy! I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. Scott — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

I would love to see his reaction if the FAA banned ALL aircraft from Chicago, or at least the same types (part 121) that were used in the attack. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – AS you are aware the ECB around O’Hare opened today. Chicago’s Mayor and aviation enthusiast Mayor Daley has a bit to say about that. Check out the AOP web site an introduction of his remarks and then check out http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-plane24.html for more details. What a guy! I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. Scott — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

"Why is it they allow any plane, to fly any place…and no one knows who they are? So I can get a plane and I can fly from California to here, and not one person in Chicago knows about it?" I wonder if Mr. Daley has looked at the roads packed with mysterious cars and tractor-trailers lately? Whats worse….Mr. Daley or the people who voted for him? I think Garfield the cat put it best when he said, "….he needs to dragged into the street and shot." – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – AS you are aware the ECB around O’Hare opened today. Chicago’s Mayor and aviation enthusiast Mayor Daley has a bit to say about that. Check out the AOP web site an introduction of his remarks and then check out http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-plane24.html for more details. What a guy! I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. Scott — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

I would love to see his reaction if the FAA banned ALL aircraft from Chicago, or at least the same types (part 121) that were used in the attack.

I was thinking the same thing. But I did just get off the phone with FSS (1800Z) and they tell me that the ECB is indeed open AND Meigs and MDW are also open to VFR Part 91 operations. I mentioned the Daley stuff and FSS told me they went back and forth about Meigs and MDW a couple of times but decided to keep em open. At least for now. — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

What do you expect, his name is "Dick" after all…. guess he is just trying to live up to his name! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – AS you are aware the ECB around O’Hare opened today. Chicago’s Mayor and aviation enthusiast Mayor Daley has a bit to say about that. Check out the AOP web site an introduction of his remarks and then check out http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-plane24.html for more details. What a guy! I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. Scott — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

Whats worse….Mr. Daley or the people who voted for him?

Granted, I’m no expert, but if I recall, politics has never been something Chicago’s been able to be proud about.

Response:

The bastard reminds me of a recent poster to this NG who also wets his bed whenever a plane flies over.

Response:

A couple of weeks ago somebody posted a great idea. Everytime you go fly anywhere in the United States, call his office and let them know. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – AS you are aware the ECB around O’Hare opened today. Chicago’s Mayor and aviation enthusiast Mayor Daley has a bit to say about that. Check out the AOP web site an introduction of his remarks and then check out http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-plane24.html for more details. What a guy! I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. Scott — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

Come to think of it, he appears to be a "Dick" on a "Daley" basis… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – What do you expect, his name is "Dick" after all…. guess he is just trying to live up to his name! AS you are aware the ECB around O’Hare opened today. Chicago’s Mayor and aviation enthusiast Mayor Daley has a bit to say about that. Check out the AOP web site an introduction of his remarks and then check out http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-plane24.html for more details. What a guy! I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. Scott — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

Granted, I’m no expert, but if I recall, politics has never been something

What’s the old saying? "They have the best politicians money can buy." Gene Pallat

Response:

Bam! Daley slammed twice in one day. It is not a good day to be a demagogue. From AOPA: VFR flight restrictions lifted at Meigs and Midway operations at Meigs and Midway. The City of Chicago requested the ban shortly after the tragedies of September 11th and local FAA officials issued the VFR ban via notam, despite the fact that this kind of directive can only come from FAA headquarters. After repeated requests from AOPA, the FAA corrected its earlier action by removing the VFR restrictions at Meigs and Midway. Regional FAA officials also informed the city that any future requests for airspace restrictions should be directed to the FAA in Washington, D.C. — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

That was me, and I still think it’s a good idea. I have to admit I’m curious: is he really that stupid or just that ignorant? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A couple of weeks ago somebody posted a great idea. Everytime you go fly anywhere in the United States, call his office and let them know. AS you are aware the ECB around O’Hare opened today. Chicago’s Mayor and aviation enthusiast Mayor Daley has a bit to say about that. Check out the AOP web site an introduction of his remarks and then check out http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-plane24.html for more details. What a guy! I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. Scott — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

That was me, and I still think it’s a good idea. I have to admit I’m curious: is he really that stupid or just that ignorant?

Have you ever heard him speak? Or should I say try to speak. It isn’t just how he says it but what he says. If I lived in Chicago I would be pretty embarassed having him represent me to the world. Then again a lot of the residents and the mayor are on pretty equal footings. Unfortunately he is in for life or until he no longer wishes to run for re-election. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A couple of weeks ago somebody posted a great idea. Everytime you go fly anywhere in the United States, call his office and let them know. AS you are aware the ECB around O’Hare opened today. Chicago’s Mayor and aviation enthusiast Mayor Daley has a bit to say about that. Check out the AOP web site an introduction of his remarks and then check out http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-plane24.html for more details. What a guy! I wrote and asked if he is at all worried about truck traffic in the Chicago area and what he thought about people being allowed to jump into cars and come to Chicago from all over the country without seeking his or anyone else’s permission. Scott — Scott F. Migaldi PP-ASEL MSDT 150972

Response:

Wood goes Trout

admin — Tue, 21 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

\ (considerable insight snipped)\ Wayne – I didn’t know you were a fan of the extremist Pat Buchannan. Those are his words….. Ouch. -Muskie

Response:

Can’t say I’ve ever listened to anything Pat Buchannan has said. Since I’m an officer of a non-profit organization [IRS 501(c)(3)], I do go to seminars and meetings with other non-profits in the D.C. area. Many of those enviromental organizations have offices or headquarters near here. Amazing the things you see and hear from those people when they are not trying to stir up the fanatical volunteers or garner donations from their regular contributors. Some maintain a vision of the ideals their organization claims to profess, some do not. All make a living at it, and most a darn good one. Wayne (no matter who says it, reality is reality) to fish is human….to release Divine!!

Response:

Some maintain a vision of the ideals their organization claims to profess, some do not. Amazing, I never woulda thunk it. You mean that these people are like everyone else ?

have in common. Wolfgang striving to be as etypical as the next guy

Response:

Don, That should be sent to every newspaper in the country, every TV and radio station and every congressman. Wonderful. Frank Reid

Response:

(considerable insight snipped) — Don Thompson Another Thompson Scion

Another aspect of environmental and animal rights groups which gets overlooked is their non-profit business focus. While certainly not limited to these missions, environmental and animal rights organizations have a built-in heart string for soliciting contributions. Many of these organizations have overlapping public agendas and eagerly compete with each other for funds. Overhead varies between groups but when salaries and travel expenses and project grants are counted, most will have an 80% overhead or better. Their staffs travel the world where they meet with each other over and over to discuss the same issues and solicite more donations. Meanwhile, the conference attendees enjoy fantastic boondoggles to Stockholm, Tokyo, Vienna, Geneva, and many other venues. They eagerly recruit the most fanatic volunteers to generate publicity for fund-raising and to give the appearance of taking action. In most cases this fanatic element has little real effect and the parent organization could care less. Check the behind-the-scenes books of the organizations (they are usually structured as non-profit corporations) and you will find high salaried core staff who vanish in the night if funding dries up. In some cases low or no salaries are paid but such business expenses as "cost of housing, food, transportation, clothing, and utilities" for staff are paid. Environmental activism and animal rights advocacy is a multi-billion dollar business. This business is no less sinister in environmental issues than strip miners, and timber companies. Of the various perspectives which may be taken of these issues, only that of sound management practices for conservation and multi-use utilization lacks the big funding and emotional appeal of the others. Wayne to fish is human….to release Divine!!

Response:

Wood to Trout Christopher A. Wood, senior policy and communications adviser to former U.S. Forest Service chief Michael P. Dombeck, will be joining Trout Unlimited, a cold-water fisheries conservation group, in September as director of watershed programs.

Response:

"Environmentalism is now well on its way to becoming the third great wave of the redemptive struggle in Western history, the first being Christianity, the second modern socialism … the dream of a perfect physical environment has all the revolutionary potential that lay both in the Christian vision of mankind redeemed by Christ and in the Socialist, chiefly Marxian, prophecy of mankind free from social injustice." If one would seek evidence for this insight of Prof. Robert Nisbet (Prejudices, 1982) – that environmentalism has become an ideological and religious movement – look around. As Communist parties have atrophied in Europe, Green parties have sprouted. In Sweden, animal rights legislation now guarantees that cattle are given grazing rights, that pigs have separate feeders and bedding (no more unseemly communal slopping at the trough), that chickens are let out of their cages and given the run of the yard. In New York, 2,000 militants marched up Fifth Avenue on "Fur Free Friday" recently to protest the raising and killing of minks, foxes and sables for women’s coats; sympathy demonstrations were held in 50 states. Hunters of duck and deer are finding themselves accompanied into the fields by animal lovers with bull horns to frighten off the prey. The new movement of social protest also has its own Carrie Nations and H. Rap Browns, who torch furrier shops in California, and plant pipe bombs outside Connecticut companies that use dogs in medical research. When men cease believing in God, C.S. Lewis wrote, they do not then believe in nothing, they believe in anything. Just as the ideal of a Marxist Utopia, where man would no longer exploit man, captured the hearts and commanded the devotion of 19th century men who had ceased to believe in Paradise, so the environmental movement has, in the late 20th century, taken on the trappings of a new religion. "A person is not religious solely when he worships a divinity," wrote Gustave Le Bon in The Crowd, "but when he puts all the resources of his mind, the complete submission of his will, and the whole-souled ardor of his fanaticism at the service of a cause or an individual who becomes the goal and guide of his thoughts and actions." As today’s environmental movement is, in part, the legacy of progressive Republicans Theodore Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot, where did we jump the track? Prof. Nisbet contends there was always a divide between the "conservationists" of Theodore Roosevelt’s time, dedicated capitalists who wanted to conserve the forest for man’s use, for recreation and lumber, and the "preservationists," who wanted to protect the forest from man’s spoliation. But modern preservationists have gone beyond their forebears. With the ’60s as point of departure, and Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring as sacred text, environmentalism "without losing its eliteness of temper," writes Nisbet, became "a mass Socialist movement of, not fools, but sun worshippers, macrobiotics, forest druids, and nature freaks generally committed by course, if not yet fully shared intent, to the destruction of capitalism." Capitalism, then is the unacknowledged enemy of the new environmentalism. Yet, because the "destruction of capitalism" is not seen as the militants’ goal, the movement has enlisted fellow travelers by the millions, from Americans concerned about nuclear power and the ozone, to Humane Society supporters appalled by TV footage of the clubbing of baby seals on the Canadian ice. Needed is a divorce, a parting of the ways between traditional conservationists – those who believe that animals, as God’s creatures over whom He gave man dominion, ought to be treated as such, that historic battlefields like Bull Run, hollowed by the blood of patriots, ought not to be turned into shopping malls, that people who put medical waste in sewers and pollute ocean beaches ought to be horse-whipped – and zealots whose beliefs are rooted not in Judeo-Christian concepts, but, as Nisbet notes, in the "man-abasing, nature-worshipping, pantheistic monism of the East." Like all heresies, environmental extremism, with its hostility to technology and progress, is not something new under the sun. In the time of St. Francis, his more radical followers, elevating his rule to the level of Gospel revelation applicable to all, wound up before the Inquisitor of Toulouse, en route to the heretics’ pyre. Needed to answer this new ideology is a little common sense. Is it not better for 246 million turkeys to be born, live and be slaughtered each year to feed Americans, than to have the militant vegetarians take over, and have no turkeys hatched at all? Is it wrong that of the 100 million cats and dogs in the U.S.A., one million each year are used in the kind of medical research that gave us cures for rabies and polio? Why is it worse for a duck or deer to die from a hunter’s bullet, than of starvation, cold or old age? It is nature – not men subduing it – that is red in tooth and claw. Not only farmers and furriers, medical researchers and hunters, but all of us have a stake in a conservationist ethic that keeps the "man-abasing" nature-worshippers in the political wilderness, while seeing to it that environmental outrages like Boston Harbor are tended to. — Don Thompson Another Thompson Scion

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Wood to Trout Christopher A. Wood, senior policy and communications adviser to former U.S. Forest Service chief Michael P. Dombeck, will be joining Trout Unlimited, a cold-water fisheries conservation group, in September as director of watershed programs.

Response:

Action Alert – Proposed Oil Drilling In Alaska

admin — Wed, 07 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Heads up for anyone interested! Just got this in. Please read, take appropriate actions, and forward. Thank You! Many Blessings, Tegan :) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – We hope you’ll join our urgent campaign to stop an environmental outrage our president has made a top priority. In a deeply cynical maneuver, President Bush is citing California’s short-term energy crisis in an effort to push through approval of long-term oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, one of the nation’s most important and fragile wildlife breeding zones. It is up to everyone who cares about our environment to step forward and take action on this crucial issue. http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/action.cfm?ItemId=1244 Tell our senators they must protect this national treasure! By using the link above you can take action right now from your computer in just a few quick clicks. Simply click the link, or copy and paste it into your browser. The oil industry has long campaigned for the rights to drill in the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge with potentially devastating consequences for the region’s fragile habitat, native communities and unparalleled wildlife. The 1.6 million-acre coastal plain of the refuge is the United States’ premier birthing and nursing ground for arctic wildlife, including grizzly and polar bears, musk oxen, the arctic fox, wolves and wolverines, 135 bird species, and a migrating herd of caribou which supports thousands of native people still living in harmony with this rugged land. "The Arctic Refuge is a unique environmental cathedral — a 19-million-acre expanse where mountains meet ocean, where grizzly bears meet polar bears, where 130,000 caribou migrate each spring to give birth on the coastal plain, where an entire ecosystem is preserved and where Mother Nature is totally in charge," wrote journalist Thomas L. Friedman in the New York Times (3/2/01). "This is not Yellowstone Park, with campsites and R.V.’s. The original idea behind the Refuge’s creation was to save an area of pure wilderness, in which there would be no maps, virtually no roads and no development. When the Bush team says it can drill in such wilderness without harming it, it’s like saying you can do online trading in church on your Palm Pilot without disturbing anyone. It violates the very ethic of the place." And the arguments Bush and his oil cronies make for drilling this cathedral just don’t hold up: CLEAN, UNOBTRUSIVE DRILLING? An average of 409 spills have occurred annually on Alaska’s North Slope since 1996, while operations produce tons of nitrogen oxides, which cause smog and acid rain, and large amounts of sewage, garbage and scrap metal. The drilling sites in the Arctic Refuge would be strewn throughout the delicate coastal plain, linked by pipelines and roads. ENERGY FOR THE FUTURE? The U.S. Geological Survey estimates the oil that could be extracted would fuel the U.S. market for less than six months. Consider that increasing fuel efficiency standards for new vehicles to an average of 39 miles per gallon over the next decade would save 51 billion barrels of oil over the next 50 years — more than 15 times the likely yield from the Arctic Refuge! LOWER GAS PRICES? The oil market is global, and oil from the Arctic Refuge would expand global oil reserves by just 0.3 percent — a quantity far too inconsequential to affect prices at the pump or elsewhere. CALIFORNIA POWER CRISIS SOLUTION? Drilling in the coastal plain would have no impact on California’s electricity problems or any other state’s electricity problems. Most U.S. electric power plants do not use oil. Less than 1 percent of California’s electricity is generated by burning oil, and the average for the United States as a whole is only 3 percent. Besides, no oil from the Refuge would flow to refineries for at least a decade. Despite all this, Alaska’s Congressional delegation continues to push for oil development in this fragile corner of the Arctic, which will fill the state’s coffers with oil drilling royalties. On Feb. 26, Sen. Frank Murkowski (R-Alaska) introduced a sweeping piece of energy policy legislation that would allow Arctic Refuge drilling, while also weakening nationwide power plant standards designed to fight global warming. Please stand with us as we fight this attempt to ravage one of the last truly wild landscapes in the United States. To take action, simply click on the link below or copy and paste it into your browser. http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/action.cfm?ItemId=1244 There is strength in numbers! So once you take action, please forward this e-mail to friends and associates so they can speak out, too. You can also take action on these and many other crucial, timely actions at ActForChange: End Use of Human Antibiotics in Livestock Feed http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/action.cfm?itemid=1075 Tell Ford to Offer Environment-friendly Cars http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/action.cfm?itemid=4452 Ban Special Interest Money in Elections http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/action.cfm?itemid=10601 And, if after taking action, you want to do even more to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, go to http://www.giveforchange.com and make a donation to Defenders of Wildlife or Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) who are working on protecting this natural resource. Or you can donate to the Sierra Club through the link below. Sierra Club (Donate now and get a free expedition pack!) http://www.workingforchange.com/shop/vendorgo.cfm?PageID=154 With appreciation, Michael Kieschnick President, Working Assets

—–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

I see you’re still fomenting idiocy, batboy. You should form the Church of Idiots and you could be it’s high priest. hehehehehehe We all knew this was coming. The truth is there is no energy crisis in California. Those price hikes were artificially created so that Bush would have an excuse to exploit Alaska. We have an evil President. He is a dishonest President and he will steal our freedom if we don’t keep a close watch on his activities. Don’t underestimate Bush. He may act like a moron but there are powerful people doing clever and tricky things and he is aware of that and letting them. He knows full well what he needs to do to push his agenda through. He will cheat.

Gargoyle – The Living Ghost =;)-~~~`~` Weirdness Is Good Thing! hehehehe

Response:

That is wonderful Leelly! Its a great thing reelly that both you and Teeg keep up on these things and inform us.Yes, sarcasm for the spelling of Tegan..not on the cause though.

Actually, I was under the impression that her name was pronounced with a long e sound, so I didn’t want to write Teg (rhymes with peg, leg, nutmeg, etc). Im for any of you who stay on top of these things.Kudo’s to you both. Dont mean to burst your bubble here but the White House tends to bulk e-mail and hand write mail from their staff with the Presidential seal and sig.

I know that the responses were bullshit, but I’m hoping that if they get "elevendy million" of them that it might do some small amount of good. I have several as do members of my family. Its an honor to get recognized but unfortunately doesnt mean they really do much.That will take continued effort by people such as yourself and Teeg!

I don’t think it is an honor to get recognized by those assholes, and frankly, I take my honor in being a thorn in their sides… ~Lilly — Anek Khepera… Ankh OodJa Seneb!

Response:

The 2 responses I got from the white house were ridiculous at best, but it’s a start! ~Lilly – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thank you Lilly and Caliban. I just got this in my e-mail which is why I forwarded to the ng. I didn’t see your previous post as my computer was down for a while. "Act For Change" is a different activism organization. Same cause, though *slightly* louder voices. It all makes a difference though. I also sent the e-mail from your website below. Thanks! Many Blessings, Tegan :) Teeg, I posted this on deja a month or so ago, and got great results. Have you sent the email yet from this link??? I got 2 emials back from the white house even, lucky me… Newsgroups: alt.religion.wicca View complete thread I thought some of you might want to stop by this site and sign this petition for the arctic… if not… c’est la vie! http://www.savearcticrefuge.org ~Lilly — Anek Khepera… Ankh OodJa Seneb! —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

– Anek Khepera… Ankh OodJa Seneb!

Response:

We all knew this was coming. The truth is there is no energy crisis in California. Those price hikes were artificially created so that Bush would have an excuse to exploit Alaska. We have an evil President. He is a dishonest President and he will steal our freedom if we don’t keep a close watch on his activities. Don’t underestimate Bush. He may act like a moron but there are powerful people doing clever and tricky things and he is aware of that and letting them. He knows full well what he needs to do to push his agenda through. He will cheat.

Well said, Ren. Here’s an article I posted to sci.environment that you might find informative. I think it was originally in the SF Bay Guardian: Energy wars and the fate of the planet CRISES ARE OPPORTUNITIES , platforms on which futures are built. This week’s cover package gives you the real story behind the deregulation fiasco

Amsterdam Schiphol Environmental Activism?

admin — Sun, 21 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

On the official web site for AMS airport, I found the following statement: "Panorama terrace – Due to interfering with operational processes by environmental activists the panorama terrace is closed for the public." Anyone have any further details on this???

–Last year some extreme leftwing environmental terrorists (well that’s what I call them) climbed over the edge of the observation deck on to the roof of one of the piers and then over an airbridge to sit on top of a KL 767 which caused some delays. I think the web site info is a bit out of date, because last time I was there, about 6 weeks ago, part of the terrace was closed because of building works on the expansion of pier D and the old part of the terminal, but the other end of the terrace near piers E and F was open. –==++AJC++==–

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – On the official web site for AMS airport, I found the following statement: "Panorama terrace – Due to interfering with operational processes by environmental activists the panorama terrace is closed for the public." Anyone have any further details on this??? –Last year some extreme leftwing environmental terrorists (well that’s what I call them) climbed over the edge of the observation deck on to the roof of one of the piers and then over an airbridge to sit on top of a KL 767 which caused some delays. I think the web site info is a bit out of date, because last time I was there, about 6 weeks ago, part of the terrace was closed because of building works on the expansion of pier D and the old part of the terminal, but the other end of the terrace near piers E and F was open. –==++AJC++==–

AJC: let’s not start a discussion about environmental policy here, but to call these people "extreme leftwing terrorists" is a bit overdone. They are just people who are rightly concerned about the environmental damage flying airplanes causes. While I do not agree with their methods, I do agree with their idea of taxing kerosine heavily. Isn’t it strange that such a demerit good as flying is not taxed at all? Sjoerd

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – On the official web site for AMS airport, I found the following statement: "Panorama terrace – Due to interfering with operational processes by environmental activists the panorama terrace is closed for the public." Anyone have any further details on this??? –Last year some extreme leftwing environmental terrorists (well that’s what I call them) climbed over the edge of the observation deck on to the roof of one of the piers and then over an airbridge to sit on top of a KL 767 which caused some delays. I think the web site info is a bit out of date, because last time I was there, about 6 weeks ago, part of the terrace was closed because of building works on the expansion of pier D and the old part of the terminal, but the other end of the terrace near piers E and F was open. –==++AJC++==– AJC: let’s not start a discussion about environmental policy here, but to call these people "extreme leftwing terrorists" is a bit overdone. They are just people who are rightly concerned about the environmental damage flying airplanes causes. While I do not agree with their methods, I do agree with their idea of taxing kerosine heavily. Isn’t it strange that such a demerit good as flying is not taxed at all? Sjoerd

–Well Sjoerd, you will have gathered from my posting that I don’t think much of these people. As far as taxes go, although they are not taxes on kerosine, when I buy a ticket AMS-LGW-AMS on HV for NLG 178.00, the governments add an extra NLG 62.65 in taxes on the ticket, that’s nearly 35% and what do they do with that money? In my opinion, which I’m sure plenty of people will dissagree with, those who truly cared about the environment would be promoting Schiphol for what it is, one of the most environmentally friendly major international airports in the World. They have quite rightly forced the vast majority of airlines that use AMS to upgrade their fleets to use the quietest, most efficient, least polluting aircraft, just look at and listen to the difference at a major US airport, with lines of 727s, DC9s, 737-200s waiting to take off. I look at it this way, Schiphol has been where it is for over 75 years, so everyone that moved in to a house that is affected by aircraft noise knew what to expect. The airport has inevitably grown, hardly a surprise to anyone. The noise levels must have peaked in the 70s, but since then with the introduction of quieter aircraft those levels will have decreased. So many of the residents that complain bought their houses at reduced price because they are affected by aircraft noise, and they now want the airport, closed, moved, or scaled down, so their houses will increase in value and they can make a pile of money. Lastly don’t forget some of the tricks these environmental groups use to falsify their claims. There was a noise measuring device supposedly placed along one of the runways, and some horrendous figures were quoted, until someone realized that this device was actually detecting the noise of traffic on the A4 (a major highway for those who don’t know the area), and the traffic noise was much higher than that of the aircraft! Well forgive me for ranting on, but it is a subject about which I have strong views! –==++AJC++==–

Response:

PNEWS: Are environmental organizations really grass-roots?

admin — Thu, 19 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Wow!! Thanks for unmasking this COMMUNIST activity! It sure ends discussion of environmental issues when you point out that it’s all STRAIGHT OUT OF THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO!! From now on I will not engage in pro-environment activism, thanks to your stunning EXPOSE!!! THANK YOU!

Response:

http://utopia.knoware.nl/users/ptr/pfloyd/start.html

Response:

Are environmental organizations really grass-roots? Recently, I compared the budgets of several major environmental organizations to see if they should be considered "grass-roots," truly representing the thinking of average Americans, or, if they are elitist in nature, receiving a large percentage of their budgets from well-financed corporate interests. The following figures are from the "Encyclopedia of Associations" (31st Edition; 1996): Sierra Club Annual budget: $35 Million Membership: 550,000 National Audubon Society Annual budget: $44 Million Membership: 600,000 Environmental Defense Fund Annual budget: $24 Million Membership: 300,000 Nature Conservancy Annual budget: $131 Million Membership: 880,000 Now use the above figures to calculate the budget dollars per member ratio for each group: Sierra Club: $64/member National Audubon Society: $73/member Environmental Defense Fund: $80/member Nature Conservancy: $149/member Now compare these figures to that obtained for a well-known grass roots organization: the NRA. National Rifle Association of America Annual budget: $66 Million Membership: 2,524,000 Budget dollars per member ratio: $26/member We see here that the major environmental organizations are elitist in nature, and, thus do not truly represent the thinking of average Americans with regard to environmental issues. Take special notice of the huge budget dollars per member figure obtained for the Nature Conservancy ($149). They have created a "cash cow" that ensures a steady source of "contributions" from reluctant property owners. They’re scheme transfers private property to the government at great profit to themselves. In the early to mid 1990’s, the Nature Conservancy, the largest environmental group in the country, backed by a host of large tax-exempt foundations, was purchasing over 1,000 acres of private property per day. Most properties are quickly posted for sale to federal agencies at enormous profit. Sales are often forced by getting a federal agency to threaten environmental action, forcing the property owner to "contribute" to the Nature Conservancy by selling at greatly reduced value. In 1993 alone the Nature Conservancy sold $73 million worth of private land to the federal government. By now it should be obvious that environmentalism is not about "saving" the environment, it’s about *STEALING* the environment. Stealing from you. Stealing from your children. This is no secret among the environmentalist elite. According to Bruce Babbit, Secretary of the Interior, "Endangered Species is the wedge for imposing a new land ethic that compares land ownership to slaves and involves discarding that concept of property and trying to find a different understanding of the landscape." In other words, in Babbit’s world, owning land is considered just as repulsive as owning slaves. But don’t hold your breath waiting for Babbit to give up *HIS* property. There is nothing new about the "new land ethic" referred to by Mr. Babbit. In 1848 Karl Marx wrote the first plank of his Communist Manifesto which called for the "abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes." Peter Berle, President of the National Audubon Society, confirmed the true nature of environmentalism when he stated "We reject the idea of private property." One American has already tasted eco-fascist shoe-leather. John Pozsgai is a mechanic who came to America in 1956, escaping the tyranny of the Soviet Army. He thought when he immigrated from Hungary he had escaped the excesses of government. Pozsgai bought property, zoned light industrial, in 1986. The property had been a debris strewn dump yard for years before Pozsgai purchased it. After obtaining state and local approval to construct a truck repair garage, he began clearing the junk and debris. Shortly thereafter, Pozsgai was arrested in a raid conducted by 12 federal agents. The Army Corps of Engineers decided he had violated federal "wetlands" regulations. They hired Pozsgai’s neighbors to spy on him and prosecuted him in federal court. The jury was shown pictures of "wetlands" with ducks on it. They were not allowed to see the actual property, which had no such "wetlands." Pozsgai was convicted, fined $200,000 and sentenced to 3 years in prison. Even though he payed his fine and served his time, Pozsgai still has not been permitted to build on his land. However he is still required to pay the property taxes. Is this your idea of "saving" the environment? If it is, then you can count me out. Preserving the environment takes a back seat to preserving our inalienable rights. Our American Bill of Rights is more precious than any plant or bug. Like thousands of Americans before me, I’d rather fight than switch. Spread the word. When dealing with environmentalism, not all that glitters is green.

Response:

Experience with Sierra Club…

admin — Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

I thought the Sierra Club was founded by John Muir who had a lot more to do with Yosemite National Park than Berkeley philosophy dep. What’s your source of information?

1) I was a student of Rod Nash who wrote Wilderness and the American Mind (and of the Club’s history committee), and Al Runte one of his students. 2) Cohen (History of the Sierra Club) is another decent source (not without controversy). 3) About a half a dozen other books on panel 28. The Club without question is the original Yuppie organization decades before the term Yuppie existed (Young urban professional). You can see Berkeley influence from guys like LeConte, et al. even to this day with guys like Rowell. It began as guys smoking and sherry sipping society (quite common in the 1890s). It began as a strictly California organization, but Muir was a good publicist, and he was quick on his political education. I had an interesting question about Muir on a mid-Term in Rod’s class. Muir favored private cars in Yosemite. But in today’s context if you brought Muir to Yosemite today: would he like Yosemite? (to this post, not part of the question, Would he like the Sierra Club?) The TA (Jeff) took issue with my answer. The problem would be whether Muir would have access or education to the events from his death (1914) to the present. Jeff wanted a more "fixed" philosophy answer. Unfortunately Rod gave "grading authority" to the TAs on the midterms keeping the final for himself. Rod gave me a great placating answer: I could come back and teach the class anytime I wanted, because he knew I could do it. And that was from a math major, not a history major. Muir’s vision wasn’t limited to CA. His Alaskan and other world trips were great experiences for him. The interesting thing to me was Muir’s political education. The nuclear physicists from Los Alamos had the same upbringing in 1946. Generations aren’t learning.

Response:

When I was 16 I wanted to backpack soooo bad. My family didn’t even camp much less backpack. A science teacher sponsored me into the Sierra Club and I went on many marvelous hikes with memorable older folks who told tall tales around the campfire. I’ve been hiking all over the western united states since then (am 43). Don’t hike with them anymore, but still belong. Dee

Response:

Your experience will the Club can vary a lot. It tends to be governed by the local Chapter climate. I’ve seen about five operating Chapters. By far and the away, and my first Chapter was the Angeles Chapter. It is probably the most structured, bordering on truly autocratic is some ways (but I can think of even more autocratic outdoor organizations: this is not necessarily bad, but it makes for amusing situations: not the Bob Cram cartoon in Backpacking One Step at a time by Harvey Manning of a bunch of people marching down a trail using an ice ax as a baton: that’s not the SC he’s spoofing). Surprisingly, the three Bay Area chapters closest to the National office are fairly unstructured, and reasonably loose. You will find people who are purely "into it" for the outdoor activity. I’ve listened to LA leaders sneer at the Club "environmentalists" and similarly know politicos who don’t do outdoor activities. LA in particular seems to be influenced by the nature of the industry there: it produced one sociology PhD thesis (Mitchell’s) and LA’s psyche reflects in other writings (like Levy’s book Hackers [he attributed the difference to highly structured aerospace/defense industries]). Meeting at the offices of the DWP doesn’t help either. ;^) That Sierra was published a long time using non-recycled glossy paper, and the little Angeles chapter handbook similarly was criticized (change comes slowly to all large bureaucracies unfortunately). In 1964 the Club was very pro-Nuclear power. To many in the environmental movement, it was perfectly logical at the time. Most of the Club did a 180 degree turn on that, except Ansel Adams (most noted proponent in the Club to the day he died). So does the fact that they did the 180 make them hypocritical? Naw, that just says the finger pointer is more concern with the consistency of an organization than it’s philosophy. Being a member of the Sierra Club does not preclude you from joining say the Auto Club (but I know SCers who think that) or that knowing that Barry Goldwater was once a Life Member. The fanaticism of certain members of the Club is legendary. I doubt I would want it any other way myself. It’s another one of those academic tradition things. You find the people in the Club you want to hang out with, and you hang out. In some ways, I bet Muir would be a little disappointed, and in other ways he’d be impressed. I think far more fanatic (and misunderstood organizations) exist.

Response:

I disagree. I am actively involved with the wilderness Basics Course and run whenever I hear the mention of political stuff. I lead many hikes and never get into anything but good old wilderness stuff. I realize that someone has to do the political business and I appreciate them for it. but there are those that do only the outback stuff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In article "Daniel The Sierra Club has always seemed to be more of a political/social institution than one who gathers to do outdoors stuff and have fun. I’d rather be alone to have the full wilderness experience than be with a bunch of people I don’t really agree with. -Dan Hear, hear! I couldn’t agree with you more. Ken B.

Response:

The Sierra Club has always seemed to be more of a political/social institution than one who gathers to do outdoors stuff and have fun. I’d rather be alone to have the full wilderness experience than be with a bunch of people I don’t really agree with. -Dan

Response:

Depends on the city. For example in L.A. probably far more people are involved in their extension outings program (3000+ trips a year) than environmental activism beyond sending in a check.

Response:

In article The Sierra Club has always seemed to be more of a political/social institution than one who gathers to do outdoors stuff and have fun. I’d rather be alone to have the full wilderness experience than be with a bunch of people I don’t really agree with. -Dan

Hear, hear! I couldn’t agree with you more. Ken B.

Response:

Oh, I know groups and people like this. Very "social." I avoid them, too. them some of their food. The campers didn’t want it and then the leaders told them that because of the steep climb the next day and the inexperience of the group that they would have to bury the extra food right there in the wilderness. It sounds to me like the Sierra Club needs to learn some wilerness ethics.

The leadership training in the Club is somewhat inconsistent (I’ve had it). The problem is that the base skills are quite widely varied. And the stuff happening with insurance contributes to problems downstream in time. I operate wilderness summer camp for kids 10 to 15 yrs old in the sierra and we teach the kids to travel in small goups and leave no trace as promoted by NOLS. The "Leave No Trace" program by NOLS is a great program and will help preserve our wilderness areas for generations to come. As for the Sierra Club !!!!

NOLS has (Petzolt) certainly had made it’s contribution to the wilderness and climbing specifically: e.g. standardized belay signals. The Club has its strengths and weaknesses. The usual other comparisons include local groups like the CMC/Mountaineers, Mazamas, AMC, the Audubon Society [remember he killed all those birds in order to paint them], the Wilderness Society, the I. Walton League, etc. The real problem is that this type of education does not scale well.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I thought the Sierra Club was founded by John Muir who had a lot more to do with Yosemite National Park than Berkeley philosophy dep. What’s your source of information? 1) I was a student of Rod Nash who wrote Wilderness and the American Mind (and of the Club’s history committee), and Al Runte one of his students. 2) Cohen (History of the Sierra Club) is another decent source (not without controversy). 3) About a half a dozen other books on panel 28. The Club without question is the original Yuppie organization decades before the term Yuppie existed (Young urban professional). You can see Berkeley influence from guys like LeConte, et al. even to this day with guys like Rowell. It began as guys smoking and sherry sipping society (quite common in the 1890s). It began as a strictly California organization, but Muir was a good publicist, and he was quick on his political education. I had an interesting question about Muir on a mid-Term in Rod’s class. Muir favored private cars in Yosemite. But in today’s context if you brought Muir to Yosemite today: would he like Yosemite? (to this post, not part of the question, Would he like the Sierra Club?) The TA (Jeff) took issue with my answer. The problem would be whether Muir would have access or education to the events from his death (1914) to the present. Jeff wanted a more "fixed" philosophy answer. Unfortunately Rod gave "grading authority" to the TAs on the midterms keeping the final for himself. Rod gave me a great placating answer: I could come back and teach the class anytime I wanted, because he knew I could do it. And that was from a math major, not a history major. Muir’s vision wasn’t limited to CA. His Alaskan and other world trips were great experiences for him. The interesting thing to me was Muir’s political education. The nuclear physicists from Los Alamos had the same upbringing in 1946. Generations aren’t learning.

Well I ran into a group of sierra clubers this summer. They had more that the allowable 15 so they went in two groups on two different permits and just met in the backcounty to travel together. Very illegal and unethical. They approached some neighboring campers and wanted to give them some of their food. The campers didn’t want it and then the leaders told them that because of the steep climb the next day and the inexperience of the group that they would have to bury the extra food right there in the wilderness. It sounds to me like the Sierra Club needs to learn some wilerness ethics. I operate wilderness summer camp for kids 10 to 15 yrs old in the sierra and we teach the kids to travel in small goups and leave no trace as promoted by NOLS. The "Leave No Trace" program by NOLS is a great program and will help preserve our wilderness areas for generations to come. As for the Sierra Club !!!! Geo

Response:

Very true. For a list of free climbing and hiking activities in California, you can visit these web sites: http://reality.sgi.com/csp/pcs/index.html http://www.edgeinternet.com/sps/index.html The first site (pcs = Peak Climbing Section) contains plain text and postscript versions of a climbing newsletter. You can also get on an email list where hikes and climbs are announced (all free!) by sending this two-line message to info lomap-peak-climbing info lomap-day-hiking The first list carries a plain-text version of the PCS newsletter, with trip reports, gear for sale, private expeditions to other continents, etc. The second list is primarily for the San Francisco and Silicon Valley areas. No charge to subscribe, and no charge for any of the activities (well, maybe you have to reimburse the leader for permit fees, and the big expeditions have travel and guide costs, but the normal stuff is BY DEFINITION free). Enjoy! — SRE * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * ftp: 192.100.81.1 415-508-0500 fax: 415-508-0501 * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * TRY THIS: echo ‘[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq’|dc

Response:

snip dislike. It started with and is populated with teachers (started with the UC Berkeley philosophy dept.).

I thought the Sierra Club was founded by John Muir who had a lot more to do with Yosemite National Park than Berkeley philosophy dep. What’s your source of information? to the person inquiring: Might also point out that you get a slick monthly magazine, which is interesting reading. Such a magazine would easily cost the $25 -per yr. National group trips are, I think, cheaper than commercial-for-profit trips. Yet a good place to learn how to cope with the outdoors. The Club has the same overhead as any business: on-going expenses of staff, rent, etc. I’ve volunteered in the Outing Department and seen the volume of requests they handle. Costs at least a couple of dollars to mail a brochure. Joan, San Francisco

Response:

I’m a member of the Sierra Club. They do a LOT to support the security of existing wild areas, and try to create new ones for all to enjoy. I consider THIS to be what my $25 is going to. If you are spending $25 in hopes of joining an outdoors "Network", save your money. All the Sierra Club trips are very costly. I assume this is for insurance purposes and the like, but the fact is, outdoor activity can be done WAY more cheaply than this. If you don’t mind the added expense (an outing will cost about 60% more than you could do it yourself for), I’m sure you will meet many new people. Read the descriptions carefully. Each outing is kinda geared to a particular interest group. If you’re interested in long-distance hiking, don’t go on a birdwatching stroll.

Note: there is a difference between the official Club-wide outings listed in the magazine and the outings of local chapters. The listed outings are ridiculously expensive; local outings can be very, very efficient in cost versus what you get. one of God’s peculiar< people "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, God’s peculiar people." — the Apostle Peter (KJV)

Response:

The Club is quite a mixed organization. Only something around 10% partake in outings. You will find people you will like, and others you will dislike. It started with and is populated with teachers (started with the UC Berkeley philosophy dept.).

I might add that the conservation wing of the Club is somewhat separate from the "outings" (read "activities") wing of the Club. There are major splits, for instance, on desert protection and bolting climbing routes… so don’t assume the first person you talk to is like all the rest! — SRE * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * * ftp: 192.100.81.1 415-508-0500 fax: 415-508-0501 * * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * * TRY THIS: echo ‘[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq’|dc

Response:

If you support the SC philosophy, join anyway to protect the environment. If you just want to see how the activities go, you can join the local hikes without being a member. In the worst case, you might have to pay a dollar or 2 more if there is a cost to the event. However, 99% of all Club events are free. David Eisenberg Hundred Peaks Section, Angeles Chapter http://www.edgeinternet.com/hps/

Response:

The high cost is only for National Outings. 99% of all local activities are free. David Eisenberg Hundred Peaks Section, Angeles Chapter http://www.edgeinternet.com/hps/ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m a member of the Sierra Club. They do a LOT to support the security of existing wild areas, and try to create new ones for all to enjoy. I consider THIS to be what my $25 is going to. If you are spending $25 in hopes of joining an outdoors "Network", save your money. All the Sierra Club trips are very costly. I assume this is for insurance purposes and the like, but the fact is, outdoor activity can be done WAY more cheaply than this. If you don’t mind the added expense (an outing will cost about 60% more than you could do it yourself for), I’m sure you will meet many new people. Read the descriptions carefully. Each outing is kinda geared to a particular interest group. If you’re interested in long-distance hiking, don’t go on a birdwatching stroll. You get a cool calendar with your membership. Try it for a year to see if you like it. Your $$$ will help out the cause, and you get a cool calendar out of the deal. That’s my advise. =) NTrepiDon

Response:

Hi, I like doing outdoor activities, but lately I haven’t been doing anything because I don’t like doing it alone. So, I have been looking for clubs in Philadelphia area that support these kind of activities. A friend of mine told me that Sierra Club organizes a lot of outdoor activities; and many of them at a discount rate, and I am interested in being a member. I have the form in front of me, but before I commit $25 introductory fee I would like to get a feedback from more experienced members. Thanks. Arbin PS: I support the philosphy of Sierra Club…

Response:

I joined the Sierra Club at the insistence of my wife who had just quit smoking and was going through a vegetarian, tree-hugger phase. I expected to meet a bunch of namby-pamby wine and cheese types. As it turned out, I have never known a group of more experienced backpackers, canoeists, and skiers. I have enjoyed every outing I’ve been on and am a better outdoorsman because of it. My wife and I have since divorced but I’m still a member of the Sierra Club. Craig

Response:

For many trips, membership is not required. Just go on one of those trips. And most meetings tend to be free. The Club is quite a mixed organization. Only something around 10% partake in outings. You will find people you will like, and others you will dislike. It started with and is populated with teachers (started with the UC Berkeley philosophy dept.). Michael Cohen wrote The History of the Sierra Club if you have time to read it. It is popular in some circles and not popular in others.