[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[at-l] Sense of Wilderness and Town Stops
In a message dated 3/20/2002 9:37:59 PM Eastern Standard Time,
spiriteagle99@hotmail.com writes:
> RnR -
> You've made a career on the list out of misunderstanding and/or
> misinterpreting what I say (i.e. - lying?). If you can't understand what
> MacKaye is saying when it's publicly written for "anyone" to read - why do
> you think I'd take you seriously about this?
*** Try that again Jim. I find it almost funny that several voices in
here can get caught saying outright false things on record and turn around
try and squirm out of it by claiming I was taking them out of context or
misinterpreting them. To then have that turned around on me and be called a
liar is stupefying. Jim said that that Wingfoot had nothing to do with Putnam
Mine. Mr Leutze clearly provided that he very much did. That's all in the
archives Jim, don't make me dig it up. Score: R'nR 1 - Jim 0. That is *not* a
good vantage point to be launching more of the same type of offhand
accusations at me as you did with Putnam. There's a difference between
understanding what is written and avoiding hearing what you don't want to
hear.
>
>
> >He chose not to respond to the
> >Putnam Mine letter by J. Leutze calling it a "waste of bandwidth"...
>
> I did respond to your presentation of Wingfoot's letter - how did you fail
> to understand how little I respect that kind of fluff?
*** No you didn't. Eventually you posted some name-calling and
indifference after it was clear you were disproven. There's a lot you clearly
disrespect. Much of it isn't "fluff". I thought I was talking to honest Trail
brethren who would admit when they were wrong and acknowledge the precise
point that was being made and why...
>
>
>
> So - you're still ignorant about who and what MacKaye was, huh? But you're
>
> still willing to twist his words to fit your agenda. Your capacity for
> self
> deception never fails to amaze me.
*** May I ask if you also suffered a similar self-deception with your
previous view of Trailplace's effectiveness? MacKaye didn't break with Avery
over the Skyline Drive because R 'n R was suffering a "twisting" of his
meaning. What are you so afraid of admitting here Jim?
>
> It's one thing to dislike cell phones in the backcountry. It's an entirely
>
> different proposition to tell others that they shouldn't use them.
> Especially when you base your "logic" on a twisted "interpretation" of
> something you don't understand to begin with - like MacKaye's writings.
*** I don't see any Trail community organizing against Baxter Jim. Why?
Because they know deep down that the exclusion of phones helps keep Baxter
wild. I suppose Baxter was twisted and delusional and imposed a strict ban on
hikers because of some deranged fringe agenda? Is this fluff too Jim? What
are you after here Jim, an ill-advised AT-L poster posting a radical agenda
that he inappropriately attaches to the AT? ...OR, is something else bugging
you? Like maybe that this view has some serious merit that you can't bridge
and need to defeat for purposes only known to you. What is there to fear so
much in such an AT? Who's afraid of the big black wilderness?
>
>
> So once again - What does this have to do with anything that's being
> discussed here? As Shane said - you're rambling. I'll add - aimlessly.
*** Shane accusing me of rambling? Hmmmm... No, actually you seemed to
proffer a complacent view on global warming in a previous discussion. A Rhode
Island-sized chunk of Antarctica disagrees, as does the atmosphere and
glaciers... At what point does the reactionary knee-jerk approach look silly
Jim? (And a nasty one at that)
>
>
>
> >And during the years that he bowed out of AT matters, he worked to create
> >the Wilderness Society.
>
> True - but as one of his best friends said - MacKaye was a man who knew how
>
> to use a bulldozer as well. RnR's vision of MacKaye is one dimensional -
> and insulting to the man.
>
> Jim
>
*** There could be no greater insult to MacKaye than to gloss over and
minimize his profound wilderness views and AT intentions as represented in
his writings. The people who built the Trail after being influenced by him
were obviously more impressed than several posters who seek to make the AT
look like a pleasant accident. The bulldozer part is fulfilled Jim, the
wilderness one, well... For any AT person to take a side against something
MacKaye felt so strongly about as to separate himself from the Project after
it veered from his plan is the insult here. Jim's view of the AT is
'a-dimensional' and an insult to clearly elaborated plans by MacKaye and the
wilderness task he hoped we would take up enthusiastically instead of seeking
to discredit...
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---