or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Road Cycling › funny things to do on a bike
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

funny things to do on a bike - Page 3

post #31 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

>I've never heard of "smear the queer"...

Well, I have. It's basically a game played in an open field where
the objective is to tackle and remove the ball (usually a volley ball
or a soccer ball, but any ball will do) from whichever "queer" has it
at the time. The new ball possessor must then run with the ball until
such time as he is forcibly relieved of the ball (smeared).

It can get quite violent but it's very democratic, other than the
above there are essentially no rules.

If you are slow or unpopular this is not a game you want to play.

The "winner" is usually the biggest guy with the best wind.

Of course Native American cultures had similar games, as did every
culture I can think of off the top of my head.

America is hardly unique in fostering a warrior mentality, all peoples
do this to some extent.

But, and I think Zoot is right in this, America is unique in talking
out of one side of its mouth and perpetrating atrocities on the
other hand, if that isn't a mixed metaphor.

Don't read me wrong. Americans are disgusted by this prisoner abuse
and we aren't going to tolerate it. But at least we have the freedom
of the press to bring it to light and the character to condemn it and
hold those responsible, accountable.

And that includes Donald Rumsfeld, the generals involved, and the
local commanders. And the President. They are working for ME, I
cut them a check every week.

And that check has stop payment written all over it.


--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________
------------------"Buddy Holly, the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>cwhitman@texastwr.utaustin.edu__________
post #32 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:

> http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/6.1.html


A couple of weeks ago on a group ride, some riders were harassed by two
teenagers in a pickup truck. We stopped them at the next intersection to
"discuss" this.

During this discussion I tried to make the point that under the law, a bicycle
is the same as any other slow moving vehicle. I asked the young troublemaker if
he would harass someone driving a tractor in the same way he had harassed our
group. "That's differnt," he replied, "Maybe if you was doin' somethin'
worthwhile..."

Beat up pickup truck, Confederate flag bumper stickers, gun rack, wad o' chew in
the cheek, the whole nine yards -- redneck to the core. Only 15 too... what a
shame.

Anyway, one challenge in relating to people like this is the perceived class
difference. They see us as frivolous yuppies or something -- if not "the man"
himself, then probably his golfing buddies. What kind of person could be out
riding a bike in the middle of a work day? Obnoxious rich people, out playing
around, like a bunch of spoiled children...

Matt O.
post #33 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

tomk2003@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:

> And to stray cats.


I thought they broke up...

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
post #34 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

"Eric S. Sande" <esande@erols.com> wrote:

>Don't read me wrong. Americans are disgusted by this prisoner abuse
>and we aren't going to tolerate it. But at least we have the freedom
>of the press to bring it to light and the character to condemn it and
>hold those responsible, accountable.
>
>And that includes Donald Rumsfeld, the generals involved, and the
>local commanders. And the President. They are working for ME, I
>cut them a check every week.
>
>And that check has stop payment written all over it.


I agree that those who are responsible will be held accountable.

But to assume that means every time some private in the army does
something improper we need to eliminate his or her chain of command up
to and including the president is a little over the top, don't you
think? If we sign up for that program it'll be hard to know who the
president is on any given day. Heck, we'll probably get an
opportunity to hold the job for 15 minutes ourselves eventually.

The system will allow for those who 'perpetrated the attrocities" to
be punished - rightfully so. It'll also serve as an object lesson to
the Iraqis and to those in the region. In that regard, it's a good
thing.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
post #35 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

Mark Hickey writes:

> I agree that those who are responsible will be held accountable.


This time the military is not looking for Lt. Cally, they are looking
for Pvt Guilty while the generals claim they saw nothing. Not only
did they see it, they instigated it.

> But to assume that means every time some private in the army does
> something improper we need to eliminate his or her chain of command
> up to and including the president is a little over the top, don't
> you think? If we sign up for that program it'll be hard to know who
> the president is on any given day. Heck, we'll probably get an
> opportunity to hold the job for 15 minutes ourselves eventually.


I see you don't understand management. Let me repeat. In this area
bicyclists were harassed by Sheriff deputies who wrote plenty of
tickets. One spot in particular was a T-intersection with a three way
stop. Straight through bicyclists passing on the non-intersecting
side of the street, when there was no traffic far and wide, would be
cited for failure to stop while equestrians could ride merrily through
on the same shoulder.

All this action ceased when we got a new sheriff and suddenly the
patrol cars became our friends. That is how effective management is
felt at the lowest echelons. The tone of prison guards is molded by
the instructions and attitudes of superiors, what they encourage and
what is rewarded. Managers who say they didn't know are either
incompetent or outright lying. Take your choice with Rummy.

> The system will allow for those who 'perpetrated the attrocities" to
> be punished - rightfully so. It'll also serve as an object lesson to
> the Iraqis and to those in the region.


To whom?

> In that regard, it's a good thing.


This seems to me a non-sequitur. Could you link that with what it is
that is good about this and what it is doing for Guantanamo prison?

Jobst Brandt
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org
post #36 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

On Tue, 11 May 2004 18:54:10 GMT, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org
wrote:

>Managers who say they didn't know are either
>incompetent or outright lying. Take your choice with Rummy.


With multiple levels of command, it only takes one level that is
incompetent to disrupt your scenario. Otherwise there would be no
difference to report between units with similar missions across the
military.

Whatever her other responsibilties or guilt, there appears to be a
consensus of reports that the general in charge of the unit had lax
discipline, with the authority of command open to anyone that claimed
it at the ground - for that she needs to go.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
post #37 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

Curtis L. Russell writes:

>> Managers who say they didn't know are either incompetent or
>> outright lying. Take your choice with Rummy.


> With multiple levels of command, it only takes one level that is
> incompetent to disrupt your scenario. Otherwise there would be no
> difference to report between units with similar missions across the
> military.


That is already a failure to perform. I've served in military units
that were well managed and in these there was accountability for
performance of the troops all the way up to the top. That is why we
have AGI inspections and ombudsmen who hear scuttlebutt. The
commander who has incompetence in the chain of command is responsible
to weed that out. That function is a major error of commercial
enterprises that fail. That is often called MBWA (management by
walking around) an essential part of knowing what's going on. The
manager who doesn't know what's going on at the action level is not
managing.

That excuse is like the car driver who runs down a bicyclist and is
excused when he claims "I didn't see him". Rummy says "I didn't know
about it." That ignorance is a court martial offense because not
knowing about it is as bad as initiating it.

> Whatever her other responsibilties or guilt, there appears to be a
> consensus of reports that the general in charge of the unit had lax
> discipline, with the authority of command open to anyone that claimed
> it at the ground - for that she needs to go.


I don't believe that for a minute. These orders came down from the
top and were reinforced by positive feedback for having "softened up
the prisoners". It's like Juliani telling his police force to rough
up street people to get rid of them. That was illegal as well.

The same goes for out former sheriff who told his foot soldiers to get
tough with those law braking bicyclists. You got the impression that
the sheriff deputies had a personal grudge against bicyclists. Of
course their subsequent courtesy after change of Sheriff was equally
fro the top down.

It is na?ve to think that these atrocities were generated at the
lowest levels.

Jobst Brandt
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org
post #38 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:

>Mark Hickey writes:
>
>> I agree that those who are responsible will be held accountable.

>
>This time the military is not looking for Lt. Cally, they are looking
>for Pvt Guilty while the generals claim they saw nothing. Not only
>did they see it, they instigated it.


.... and you know that how, exactly (other than possibly the one female
reservist general who was supposed to be in charge)? I thought one of
the principles of justice we're trying to protect here was the
"innocent until proven guilty thing".

>> But to assume that means every time some private in the army does
>> something improper we need to eliminate his or her chain of command
>> up to and including the president is a little over the top, don't
>> you think? If we sign up for that program it'll be hard to know who
>> the president is on any given day. Heck, we'll probably get an
>> opportunity to hold the job for 15 minutes ourselves eventually.

>
>I see you don't understand management. Let me repeat. In this area
>bicyclists were harassed by Sheriff deputies who wrote plenty of
>tickets. One spot in particular was a T-intersection with a three way
>stop. Straight through bicyclists passing on the non-intersecting
>side of the street, when there was no traffic far and wide, would be
>cited for failure to stop while equestrians could ride merrily through
>on the same shoulder.


I guess I don't understand management if you describe it that way.

>All this action ceased when we got a new sheriff and suddenly the
>patrol cars became our friends. That is how effective management is
>felt at the lowest echelons. The tone of prison guards is molded by
>the instructions and attitudes of superiors, what they encourage and
>what is rewarded. Managers who say they didn't know are either
>incompetent or outright lying. Take your choice with Rummy.


So your mimimum standard of performance for the Secretary of Defense
is that he knows precisely what every one of the hundreds of thousands
of his soldiers are doing all the time. He's gonna be a very busy
guy. Do you suspect the CEO of HP knows what every one of his (or is
it her?) employees is doing this week? It wouldn't be any more
difficult (probably considerably less). If you "understand
management" you'll know the answer to my question.

>> The system will allow for those who 'perpetrated the attrocities" to
>> be punished - rightfully so. It'll also serve as an object lesson to
>> the Iraqis and to those in the region.

>
>To whom?


I'll type slower... "to the Iraqis and those in the region". They're
not used to accountability.

>> In that regard, it's a good thing.

>
>This seems to me a non-sequitur. Could you link that with what it is
>that is good about this and what it is doing for Guantanamo prison?


Sure. They'll see that we really DO take justice seriously when the
folks who were responsible get punished. That's not the way it's
worked for 30 years in Iraq.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
post #39 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

>Sure. They'll see that we really DO take justice seriously when the
>folks who were responsible get punished. That's not the way it's
>worked for 30 years in Iraq.


Nah, man, they'll just behead a few more Americans on television.

IMHO, the Abu Ghraib fiasco has basically put the last nail in the
coffin as far as the credibility of the US is concerned with regard
to the war in Iraq. It's not My Lai but it doesn't have to be My
Lai, all it has to be is a major mistake.

If you think there's any chance of establishing a democracy of any
stripe in Iraq now that we've lost any hope of the moral high ground,
well, I think that's unrealistic.

We (Americans) don't have to convince Arabs that we are strong and
essentially brutal when it comes to war, that's a given. And our
enemies, our real enemies, respect that.

But our public relations suck. And our enemies are going to exploit
that all the way to the American living room, and the Congress, just
as has been done in the past.

We as a nation have never liked a shadow war, we like it clear cut
and obvious. But I suggest that our enemies know that, there aren't
any stupid planners in Al Qaeda.

But they are a deadly enemy that must be confronted, we have not
necessarily chosen our ground well but we are attracting the enemy
to us on that ground and we are killing them. And, as is a maxim
of war, we are doing the official killing overseas.

I wish I could find a way to make this on topic. Or make this into
a bicycle metaphor.

Well, maybe I can. We're adjusting the derailleur when the immediate
problem was a flat, but the derailleur needed adjusting.

But we can't ride until we fix the flat.

--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________
------------------"Buddy Holly, the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>cwhitman@texastwr.utaustin.edu__________
post #40 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

On Wed, 12 May 2004 00:34:39 GMT, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org
wrote:

>That excuse is like the car driver who runs down a bicyclist and is
>excused when he claims "I didn't see him". Rummy says "I didn't know
>about it." That ignorance is a court martial offense because not
>knowing about it is as bad as initiating it.


Nonsense. Whatever the final outcome, the issue was exposed and is
being dealt with. Resolving failures of command are not instantaneous.
Never have been if you are talking top to bottom.

And the idea that the military sees not knowing about it as bad as
knowing about it and failing to control/correct/command is also
nonsense. Depends on the circumstance and why the information was not
conveyed upwards - or downwards. This isn't specualtion - the history
of the U.S.military is rife with courts martials and reviews based on
exactly that issue - including some of the most famous historical
military 'issues' from the revolutionary war on.

>I don't believe that for a minute. These orders came down from the
>top and were reinforced by positive feedback for having "softened up
>the prisoners". It's like Juliani telling his police force to rough
>up street people to get rid of them. That was illegal as well.


The issue is probably not whether or not there were a series of orders
that resulted in the mistreatment, but whether or not the final
application of the original mandate exceeeded at the ground what was
permissable or expected. That is an issue that occurs everyday in a
warzone and it cuts both ways. You have a marine commander relieved
because he chose to interpret his orders to put his men at less risk:
you have other people that choose to take a general order too far.

Prediction: This year they will rellieve some brigadiers, correctly,
for failing to exercise control in two chains of command. Next year
they will relieve a couple more in the reserve command for failure to
properly train and prepare the troops. And ten to twenty lower ranked
troops will be discharged at various less than honorable disharges.
Maybe three or four will do stockade time.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
post #41 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

Curtis L. Russell <curtis@the-md-russells.org> wrote in message news:<lor3a017dm7l0gqv1afeqfgqqjhdoi33k3@4ax.com>...

> Prediction: This year they will rellieve some brigadiers, correctly,
> for failing to exercise control in two chains of command. Next year
> they will relieve a couple more in the reserve command for failure to
> properly train and prepare the troops. And ten to twenty lower ranked
> troops will be discharged at various less than honorable disharges.
> Maybe three or four will do stockade time.
>

That seems a little harsh. After all, Rumsfeld has already "accepted
responsibility" and Bush Himself apologized to the King of Jordan. If
that isn't a shining example of American justice for the rest of the
world to emulate, I don't know what is. **** Cheney says "Don
Rumsfeld is the best secretary of defense the United States has ever
had. . . . People should get off his case and let him do his job."
All you people parsing the words 'torture', 'orders' and 'ignorance'
should just shut up and trust him.
Dietrich
post #42 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

Mon, 10 May 2004 23:39:57 -0700, <tfsp7c.ap5.ln@bud.garden.local>,
tomk2003@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote, in part:

>> But, and I think Zoot is right in this, America is unique in talking
>> out of one side of its mouth and perpetrating atrocities on the
>> other hand, if that isn't a mixed metaphor.

>
>I don't think America is so unique in that regard.


Me either, but it is the nation that's been most adept at capitalizing
on its atrocities.
--
zk
post #43 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

Mark Hickey <mark@habcycles.com> wrote:

> Sure. They'll see that we really DO take justice seriously when the
> folks who were responsible get punished. That's not the way it's
> worked for 30 years in Iraq.


There won't be anything like the sprouts of the seeds of justice in
Iraq until sometime after the US is out of there. There is no
retrieving a humane situation from a boondoggle like this.

http://www.independent.org/tii/news/040511Higgs.html

Chalo Colina
post #44 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

Mark Hickey writes:

>>> I agree that those who are responsible will be held accountable.


>> This time the military is not looking for Lt. Cally, they are looking
>> for Pvt Guilty while the generals claim they saw nothing. Not only
>> did they see it, they instigated it.


> ... and you know that how, exactly (other than possibly the one female
> reservist general who was supposed to be in charge)? I thought one of
> the principles of justice we're trying to protect here was the
> "innocent until proven guilty thing".


I hope you are not avoiding hearing about this the way Rummy and the
Bushman claim to have been. More and more is coming to light about
who knew and who didn't want to know. International Red Cross
reported extensively about these atrocities in detailed written
reports, including names of people involved, a year ago through
official channels to London and Washington.

Not knowing required diverting ones eyes from the cover letters and
where the documents originated. To me that is a solid sign that top
military officials didn't want these reports to interfere with the
"good results" they were getting in their interrogations. The report
had medical assessments of the cause of death and that these occurred
in detention under military control.

>>> But to assume that means every time some private in the army does
>>> something improper we need to eliminate his or her chain of
>>> command up to and including the president is a little over the
>>> top, don't you think? If we sign up for that program it'll be
>>> hard to know who the president is on any given day. Heck, we'll
>>> probably get an opportunity to hold the job for 15 minutes
>>> ourselves eventually.


>> I see you don't understand management. Let me repeat. In this
>> area bicyclists were harassed by Sheriff deputies who wrote plenty
>> of tickets. One spot in particular was a T-intersection with a
>> three way stop. Straight through bicyclists passing on the
>> non-intersecting side of the street, when there was no traffic far
>> and wide, would be cited for failure to stop while equestrians
>> could ride merrily through on the same shoulder.


> I guess I don't understand management if you describe it that way.


>> All this action ceased when we got a new sheriff and suddenly the
>> patrol cars became our friends. That is how effective management
>> is felt at the lowest echelons. The tone of prison guards is
>> molded by the instructions and attitudes of superiors, what they
>> encourage and what is rewarded. Managers who say they didn't know
>> are either incompetent or outright lying. Take your choice with
>> Rummy.


> So your minimum standard of performance for the Secretary of Defense
> is that he knows precisely what every one of the hundreds of
> thousands of his soldiers are doing all the time. He's gonna be a
> very busy guy. Do you suspect the CEO of HP knows what every one of
> his (or is it her?) employees is doing this week? It wouldn't be
> any more difficult (probably considerably less). If you "understand
> management" you'll know the answer to my question.


You may not have heard but the Bush administration has turned a deaf
ear and blind eye to anything that does not fit their imagined
scenario of freeing and democratizing Iraq, a nation that would love
to sell oil to the United States. It was done under false pretense
(aka lies) and it is going down the drain under those same pretenses.
Unfortunately none of the principals, including Tony Blair, look to
history and the same debacle in 1917 when the British tried the same
thing and failed miserably for the same reasons.

>>> The system will allow for those who "perpetrated the atrocities"
>>> to be punished - rightfully so. It'll also serve as an object
>>> lesson to the Iraqis and to those in the region.


>> To whom?


> I'll type slower... "to the Iraqis and those in the region". They're
> not used to accountability.


What does Iraqi accountability have to do with this. There is no
Iraqi government on which to paste that label. You think a show trial
will placate the muslim population of the world. The underbelly of US
brutality has been seen and we have seen it here at home in police
beatings and killings of unarmed people.

>>> In that regard, it's a good thing.


>> This seems to me a non-sequitur. Could you link that with what is
>> good about this and what it is doing for Guantanamo prison? The
>> principals of the Abu Ghraib prison came from warm ups in
>> Guantanamo where similar stories abound.


Try to Google "Iraq prison deaths".

> Sure. They'll see that we really DO take justice seriously when the
> folks who were responsible get punished. That's not the way it's
> worked for 30 years in Iraq.


If you believe that then you probably believe we won the Viet Nam war
and that the problems encountered were only a bunch of peaceniks in US
cities. What is it from the last 30 years that we are going to set
straight? I hope you notice that more civilians and military Iraqis
have died in this campaign than in the last 30 years of Sadam Hussein
civilian rule. That isn't counting the dead in desert storm or those
we instigated by arming Sadam Hussein in the war against Iran.

Maybe you missed the stories of tank commanders driving over desert
trenches of untrained Iraqi "cannon fodder" and grinding them into the
ground by turning donuts with their tank treads. These American
troops will be suffering from nightmares of having been part of that
for the rest of their lives while families in Iraq will not forget the
accountability we showed.

Jobst Brandt
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org
post #45 of 346

Re: Why they hate us, was (Re: funny things to do on a bike)

>These American troops will be suffering from nightmares of having been
>part of that for the rest of their lives while families in Iraq will
>not forget the accountability we showed.


War is Hell. But we're in one, and there isn't any percentage in
undermining effort when it comes to the final objective, that being
the destruction of Al Qaeda and the securing of the oil reserves.

Neither of which is trivial, strategically we have to look at a
conquered Iraq as a bonus point vice Afghanistan, which is not exactly
critical but does give us a military presence along the (nuclear armed)
Pakistan border.

Good victory points.

Why we invaded Iraq is open to question, any junior high school war
gamer would have avoided that situation on the basis of too expensive.




--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________
------------------"Buddy Holly, the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>cwhitman@texastwr.utaustin.edu__________
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Road Cycling
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Road Cycling › funny things to do on a bike