going to Kalalau

(originally written October 1st, 2007)

I've had a little change of plans. I was going to stay with a friend in Kapaa (the same town where the hostel is) starting today and for the next week or so, and help her getting her house fixed up to sell, as she's moving to Europe. But it turns out she has a big project to do on the computer for the next several days, so it was better if I come at the end of the week, or else next week. So I shifted things around and instead I'm going camping at the Na Pali coast tomorrow. I'm in Lihue (the biggest town on the island) and just got my camping permits, then I'll probably get a ride out to the trailhead with some people at the hostel.

So I'll probably stay out there roughly a week, give or take a few days. It might just depend on how long the food lasts, or else whenever I get bored and want to come back to civilization. But I'll be at the Kalalau Valley, on the Na Pali coast here on Kauai. That's the section of the island where there's no road because the cliffs are too rugged. But even the trail ends after 11 miles and there's no trail after that because it's too steep even for a hiking trail. But at the end of the trail there is a nice beach with a campground, and then another trail going inland a couple of miles that's great for hiking and exploring, plus a small river for swimming in, so it's easy to find stuff to do out there. Also when I went to get the camping permit he said I was lucky because it's almost full, so it sounds like there'll be plenty of other campers out there.

Anyway the last couple of days has pretty much been the usual. I went snorkeling yesterday with some people at the hostel, at Poipu beach, which is in the same area where my mom and brother stayed back in 1989. It was okay snorkeling, saw some interesting fish but nothing like the Andaman islands, or Thailand by the sounds of it.

Beaches and waterfalls

The last couple of days have been pretty packed. The first few days the weather was a little funky and besides I wasn't feeling particularly ambitious anyways. Gilbert (the Canadian I met the first day) has a rental car the whole time he's here (unfortunately he's taking off tomorrow, there goes my ride), so both Saturday and Sunday he and I and Eamon (from Ireland) did some exploring of the island. Saturday we went to Secrets Beach, which is an amazing beach I'd been to before. Then we continued on along the north shore looking for this one beach I hadn't been to, Tunnels Beach. We ended up at the end of the road, which meant we'd passed it (that's also where the trailhead is for the Kalalau Trail) so we got out there and hung out at Ke'e beach, which is supposed to be good snorkeling. It wasn't great snorkeling though, in fact I just swam around and didn't even bother trying the snorkel. We did see a couple of nice fish but mostly just enjoyed the water as the waves were mellow, because there's some reef in the way of the waves, then it opens up into this nice sandy area, so it's perfect for just swimming around. Then I showed them the nearby "Blue Room" which is little known because it's a little ways off the road. You hike up this little hill beneath a cliff and then you come to this lake that's sort of buried in the base of the cliff. It's a good place to get a refreshing swim and wash off the salt water. So after that we went back and found Tunnels Beach, just down the road. But by then we were beached out so we just headed back to the hostel and then Gilbert, who's a good cook, instigated a barbecue (maybe instigated isn't the right word, but you get the idea).

Anyway then yesterday we drove up to Waimea canyon, which is called the Grand Canyon of the Pacific, and it's about as impressive. From the top of it we were able to get a view down into the Kalalau Valley, which was amazing. Then we headed back down to Lihue as Eamon had to catch a plane and fly to San Francisco. After that Gilbert and I went to these waterfalls where the locals like to jump off the top into a deep pool. It's about 25-30 feet or so, but it's actually pretty safe as the water is plenty deep, so I did it a couple times. Some of the guys there were doing various tricks, backflips, dives, etc., etc., but feet first was all I was about to attempt. Gilbert's digital camera had video capability, and we got a short clip of each of us doing it. So I'm hoping he can email that to me okay, in which case I'll forward it. Well I should wrap it up here. Today I'm not sure exactly what I'm doing yet, although I may go on a hike with Gilbert, or else I may just go to another beach that I want to check out. It's already time for me to start making some decisions though, as I'm only paid up at the youth hostel through the end of this week. Then I have to decide whether I'm going to fork over the money ($25/day) for the hostel, which is way over my budget, in which case I'll need to find some work. Or else I'll be camping somewhere, we'll see.

on Kauai

(originally written September 20th, 2007)

Nothing too exciting to report so far, other than that I made it here. The flights were pretty boring and uneventful, since there wasn't too much to look at over the Pacific Ocean. I met a guy from Canada at the youth hostel who was checking in at the same time as me, and since he had a rental car I got a ride with him to the local grocery store to do some shopping. While I was there I ran into Eric, the guy from my work back in Portland who I had discovered was flying here the same day I was for a week vacation. I'll probably end up hanging out with him and the folks he's with in a couple days.

So that pretty much covers things for now. It's great to be here, but it's been a bit stormy so I might not be getting much of a tan right away. And also the guy from Canada, who is a scuba diver, said that the water has been bad for diving and snorkeling as a result. Kauai weather is pretty unpredictable though so I'm sure it'll change soon enough.

General Petraeus' report

I've said it before and I'll say it again, now that General Petraeus has said what we all knew he would say (essentially, the surge is working, and they need more time): The Bush administration's plan for Iraq is to pass off this botched war to the next president, so that they can avoid the stain of failure.

Their plan so far is going brilliantly. When the Iraq Study Group report recommended withdrawing troops from Iraq, they did just the opposite. They devised a plan that would allow them to kick the ball further down the field, and put off taking any responsibility for what they've created. They figured out how to "stay the course", without actually saying they were staying the course. They came up with a new slogan, "the surge". In short, they increased troops, in order to delay talk of withdrawal for 9 months.

And now they'll delay for another 9 months, as they decrease the very troops they increased, which will bring everything back to where it was when the troop surge began, and they will have bought themselves some more time. By then, next spring, we'll be in the heat of the presidential campaign and upcoming Congressional elections, and neither party will want to take any big risks. Bush will leave office with his war still in limbo, with the next president stuck cleaning up and taking responsiblity for his catastraphic mess in the Middle East.

In terms of his legacy, this may in fact be the best option President Bush has left. In terms of the future of our country, and the world, however, he is simply sugarcoating disaster for the sake of his own ego. The question is, are the American people, and the Congress, and the press going to continue going along with this charade for another year-and-a-half? Or, are they finally, truly fed up with this web of lies? I, for one, see only two reasonable paths left for Congress to take: One is to recognize that an ongoing U.S. military presence in Iraq is not the solution to the problems there, shift priorities big-time, start focusing on diplomacy and political reconciliation, and cut off funding for this immoral war. The other is to impeach those who led us into it.

My traumatic experience with RedState.com

If you'll indulge me for just a minute or three, I have a little story to tell. A couple days ago I visited the site RedState.com just to see, for once, what they were saying on the other side of the blogosphere. It was basically what you would expect. The usual right-wing talking points, ranting and raving (not that we do that or anything, of course). But at the same time, I'll admit, it was a mite intriguing. Here I was cavorting with the enemy, so to speak.

So, for the fun of it I decided to enter the fray and join the discussion. I commented. I blogged with abandon. I danced and weaved my arguments with great passion, and parried when attacked, which was often. It was just what I was in the mood for. All was going so well, I almost forgot about the potential pitfalls...

And then, it happened. Quite abruptly and without warning (despite the fact that their rules state they will give notice first) I was banned. Upon trying to login at one point, I was informed that my username was blocked or deactivated. My heart sank. I couldn't believe it. Surely this was a mistake. They weren't actually THAT petty and cowardly, were they? But sadly, apparently it was so.

And yet, I had experienced such heights of joy, I couldn't surrender so easily....I quickly created a new email address and lickity-split I was back in action, blogging merrily away amongst the hordes of Fox-defenders and Bush-lovers, defying their simplistic arguments with actual evidence and critical thinking.

This was where I wanted to be! This was my calling! Maybe, just maybe, I could manage to turn one or two away from the ravages of Darth Cheney, and give them a glimpse of the light! Yes, I would show them the truth, and they would love me for it!!

But no, it was not meant to be. Tragically, it happened again. After successfully sending through a particularly witty comment, I went on to write yet another response, satisfying those deep primal urges like only blogging can. And then, I was denied. My comment failed to post this time. I was informed, once again, that my username was no longer recognized, barely an hour after it had been created.

But it was even worse than that, my friends--much, much worse. I can barely even speak (errr...blog..) the words. So, I'll just shout it out loud, for all to hear. I then tried to reload their homepage, to see if at least my previous comments still remained on the site, only to encounter......stark whiteness. Nothing. A mysterious, unrelenting vaccuum staring out at me from my dusty pc. THEY BLOCKED MY COMPUTER!!!!!!!! The horror!!

Seriously, they blocked my computer from entering their site whatsoever. (Luddite that I am, I didn't even know this was possible.) And no, folks, I was not using loads of four-letter words, threatening people with metaphorical uzis or suggesting (like, for example, Bill O'Reilly once did on the air) that terrorists attacking a certain American city would be just fine. No, I was simply blogging away as bloggers do, opinionated and quite possibly annoying, but not much worse than that. But apparently, if you don't follow in single-file lockstep behind their right-wing credo, then you are not allowed to exist in their corner of the blogosphere. Some democratic, free speech forum they have over there.

So, my fellow progressives, liberals, dems, rebels-with-a-cause, I'm calling for action. If you feel the call, (or rather hear it, I guess, smell it, whatever) go to RedState.com. And......blog! Comment! Opine! Because, apparently, that is what they fear most.

And by the way, if you happen to be curious who this offending liberal is (because my comments might still be up there, they were from my first username) it's gabejedmo (or else gabejedmo1, my second ill-fated username). Look around and you may find the faded shadow of my ghost lurking in the corners of that website, somewhat dejected, but certainly not down for the count. I'm simply keeping my profile low, I tell you; awaiting the most auspicious time to come forth again and make my presence known. Because, god willing, I shall not cower in vain. I will not be pushed around by people in suits and ties, with perfectly-cropped side-burns and glaringly-white teeth, and expensive watches, and fancy, silken underwear and large belt buckles and....well, whatever right-wingers wear. I will be back...I WILL BE BACK!!! But if not, maybe you will redeem me, stand up for freedom all across this great nation of bloggers and help fight against the voices of tyranny and insanity (seriously) and blog a little for me. RedState.com. Check it out. And let them feel the wrath (but in a generally polite sorta way) of the liberal.

Don't trust Gen. Petraeus' September report

The Bush administration has made it clear that September is a critical point in the war in Iraq, when General David Petraeus will go before Congress and give a (supposedly) unvarnished account of how well the troop surge is going. But those who think that Petraeus is an unbiased and objective individual, a straight-shooter who has no political motivations or allegiance to President Bush, should be alarmed by the following revelation in a story by ABC News:

"The senior U.S. commanders in Iraq -- Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno and Gen. David Petraeus -- want the surge to continue until at least December and expect to report enough progress in Iraq by September to justify it, officials told ABC News' Martha Raddatz."
(here's the link to that story: http://abcnews.go.com/WN/IraqCoverage/Story?id=3236822&page=1)

So, how exactly can you call yourself an objective observer, if you're stating beforehand that you expect to be able to report progress about what hasn't yet happened, namely events in Iraq between now and September?...Especially, when the report so far is that violence in Iraq has not decreased at all over the past 3 months of implementing the troop surge? This news report is simply further proof that the plan all along was for the surge simply to act as a stalling option, a punt to kick withdrawal from Iraq further down the field, ultimately to some point past January, 2009, when President Bush leaves office.

This is President Bush's plan for Iraq. It's simple and straightforward: leave it to the next President. Avoid taking responsibility for defeat in Iraq at all costs. It doesn't matter how many more people die. It doesn't matter how much it breaks the Army. It doesn't matter how much taxpayers' money is spent. It doesn't matter what the generals say; it doesn't matter what the Iraq Study Group says; it doesn't even matter what Republican members of Congress say, or will say soon enough, as they start to feel the political heat.

The plan is, come September, for General Petraeus to go before Congress and, regardless of what is actually happening on the ground, report that although it's a "mixed picture", there are "signs of progress", "it's not all bad news" in Iraq, and we need to "give it more time", not "cut and run", because then the terrorists will "follow us home". They will say precisely what they have been saying for the past four years, with a few meaningless variations; which is that they have no intention of pulling American troops out of Iraq anytime soon, no matter what. It's about time that the press, the Congress and the American people see through these lies, and demand some real accountability for the fiasco that is Iraq.

the desperate state of Iraq

President Bush, John McCain, Joe Lieberman and other fervent Iraq war supporters are attempting to paint the recent "troop surge", aka escalation, and the war in general as an improving situation, that is showing positive signs of progress. John McCain lambasted reporter Wolf Blitzer on CNN yesterday, for not accepting the prognosis that one could now walk freely and safely through various neighborhoods of Baghdad, in contrast to a few months ago. Unfortunately, and regrettably, McCain and Bush are flat wrong in their rosy optimism, according to someone who has truly assessed the situation on the ground, retired General Barry McCaffrey, who just visited Iraq:

"The population is in despair," McCaffrey wrote in an eight-page document compiled in his capacity as a professor at West Point. "Life in many of the urban areas is now desperate."

Iraq is “ripped by a low grade civil war which has worsened to catastrophic levels.” He added, “the U.S. Armed forces are in a position of strategic peril.”

"There is no function of government that operates effectively across the nation … There is no province in the country in which the government has dominance. … No Iraqi government official, coalition soldier, diplomat, reporter, foreign NGO, nor contractor can walk the streets of Baghdad, nor Mosul, nor Kirkuk, nor Basra, nor Tikrit, nor Najaf, nor Ramadi — without heavily armed protection.

"In total, enemy insurgents or armed sectarian militias…probably exceed 100,000 armed fighters. These non-government armed bands are in some ways more capable of independent operations than the regularly constituted ISF [Iraqi Army]."

When, oh when, will the Bush administration tell us the truth??



source: The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/27/AR2007032701923.html

9/11 was an inside job

I had never seriously considered the 9/11 conspiracy theory, that the Twin Towers were brought down by explosives rather than the results of the planes hitting them, until seeing 3 online videos recently. The evidence is beyond compelling, maybe not quite conclusive, but damn close. Only further investigation can determine that; but that investigation needs to happen. The more I look at those clips of the buildings falling, the more impossible it seems that they were a result of an internal fire that weakened the structures and then caused them to collapse.

A few key points to keep in mind: In the history of burning skyscrapers, there are only 3 instances of steel buildings collapsing as a result of fire: World Trade Center 1, World Trade Center 2, and World Trade Center 7, all on the same day, 9/11/01. Skyscrapers have burned for days and still stood, their basic structure still mostly intact. The Twin Towers were built specifically to be able to withstand hurricanes, earthquakes, fires, and yes, even jetliners flying into them. And yet they both crumbled to the ground after only an hour of internal fire that was confined to a few of the upper floors. And WTC 7 collapsed without having been hit by an airplane, and with even less internal fire damage than the Twin Towers.....anyway, I'll quit blabbering on the subject, but if you're interested in seeing a lot more detailed evidence that supports this theory and others, then check out these movies:


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4194796183168750014&q=genre%3Anews

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4026073566596731782

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501&q=loose+change

President Bush's crappy 9/11 speech

The Bush Administration went out of their way to state that President Bush's speech today, on the 5-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, would not be political in nature. But I was actually (somehow) surprised at how overtly political it was. It sounded much like any recent speech trying to bolster public support for the war in Iraq, and to justify the invasion of Iraq by tying it with the September 11th terrorist attacks.

This was shameful in one regard: that he should have stuck to the issue of the terrorist attacks, and simply honored the memory of those who died and the tragic events that occurred that day, rather than using it as an opportunity to justify his foreign policy decisions and kick off the mid-term campaign season.

But it was an even more egregious act in that just 3 days ago, on Friday, the Senate Intelligence Commitee, chaired by a Republican, approved and released a report stating officially that not only were there no known ties between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks, nor any real support by Saddam Hussein of Al Qaeda; but that this was all pretty well confirmed PRIOR to the invasion of Iraq, when we were being told that "there was no doubt" that there was an Iraq-9/11 connection.

In short (not that I didn't know it already), the President, Vice-President, Secretary of Defense, National Security Advisor and others deliberately manipulated the known facts in order to link Iraq and the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the minds of the American people. And here, 5 years later, the President is still trying to do just that. I have one word for you, that it is time to seriously start considering: Impeachment. If lying our nation into war doesn't justify it, then what does?

Steve Irwin dies

I'm totally bummed about the death of Australian "Crocodile Hunter" Steve Irwin. In one sense, maybe it shouldn't be a big surprise: he's been putting himself in the path of dangerous animals for years. It's a wonder that he didn't die from a snakebite to the crotch a long time ago. But seriously, it's tragic. He just seemed like such a good guy, obviously brimming with enthusiasm and vigor for life, and he did a lot to bring about awareness of all kinds of animals and nature in general. And unlike most wildlife TV personalities, like Marty Stouffer (sp?), who tend to be the quiet, boring types (although I liked his show as well), Steve had an electrifying personality that poured out of the screen at you. He could make a pile of dung exciting. Man, what a drag that he had to go. He'll definitely be missed; but at least he'll still be around for years on TV screens around the world...