Nice Meeting You, Too

I went out for a ride yesterday in the Berkeley Hills. A short, slow ride due to the fact I haven’t really ridden for weeks. Near the top of Spruce Street, one of the main routes into the hills from the north side of town, a guy passed me and said, “Nice bike.” I looked over and he, like me, was riding a Bridgestone RB-1, which is kind of a cult classic steel production bike. “You, too,” I said. I’m given to talking to other cyclists when I’m out riding, so I sped up just enough to keep up with him. In just a few minutes, after we had hit the top of Spruce and turned on to Grizzly Peak Boulevard, I had learned that his wife had given him a dirty look when he left the house (“full of screaming kids,” he said) for his short ride and that “many moons ago” he had ridden for Harvard’s cycling team.

“It was a club sport, and we were part of something called the Eastern Collegiate Cycling Association. Twelve schools. As far south as Virginia and as far north as New Hampshire. In the winter we did lots of indoor workouts. Our coach would put on rollers. New Hampshire was tough — the mountains up there, and I think they all did cross-country skiing, too. One time we had a three-way meet — New Hampshire, us, and Columbia. All the New Hampshire guys finished together in front. Five minutes later, we all finished together. Then we went in and got something to eat and took showers, then wandered back out to see the wreckage of the Columbia team coming in. They just didn’t have any chance to train outdoors before the race.”

And so on. The whole time I had been conscious of riding fast enough to keep up with him. I was just trying to keep up a nice quick spin on the very gradual incline of Grizzly Peak. After about five or six minutes of this pleasant cycling talk, another cyclist, a non-Bridgestone rider, passed us. My companion’s response was dramatic: Without a word, he accelerated from our conversational pace to not just catch up with the new rider, but pass him, too. Not that he was in great shape to do it — he’d been complaining about his conditioning. But apparently, he found something a little intolerable about getting passed, even on a pretty Sunday afternoon on which there was nothing to do but enjoy the ride and sunshine. The funny thing was, he continued leading the second rider for all of about a quarter mile, then turned off onto a side street, apparently to head downhill and home.

I thought, see ya, bud; nice talking to you, too.

Snowflake Guy

Snowflake2_1

Kate pointed out an article in the January issue of Smithsonian magazine about Wilson Alwyn “Snowflake” Bentley. He was a Vermont farm boy who got to fiddling around with a view camera and microscope in the 1880s so that he could make images of snowflakes — or more accurately, the ice crystals that make up the flakes. And that,  to fit a lifetime into a sentence, is how we know that no two snowflakes are exactly alike.

Having never heard this guy’s name before, what’s a little surprising is how well known a figure he is and how much information about him is floating around. The historical society in his hometown, Jericho, Vermont, has a Snowflake Bentley site dedicated to his work (with a small but dazzling gallery of some of the original images. Dover has republished the book Bentley published just before he died in 1931, “Snow Crystals.” Since Bentley was curious about other precipitation phenomena — he published his research on raindrops — weather scientists eventually discovered his work and celebrated it, and one has written a biography, “The Snowflake Man: A Biography of Wilson A. Bentley.” There’s a critically well-received children’s book about him.

The reason for all the attention is apparent when you look at his work. He was meticulous and scientific in his approach, and he was convinced he was revealing something profound:

“Under the microscope, I found that snowflakes were miracles of beauty; and it seemed a shame that this beauty should not be seen and appreciated by others. Every crystal was a masterpiece of design and no one design was ever repeated., When a snowflake melted, that design was forever lost. Just that much beauty was gone, without leaving any record behind.”

(Image and quote from www.snowflakebentley.com.)

Gardening at Night

Sunset011505

That’s sunset today in Berkeley. This afternoon, I tried to take advantage of our little stretch of dry weather (the last rain was on Tuesday) to clean up some of the weediness in the front yard. As the sun went down, a layer of high, broken clouds caught the light. After taking the picture, I went back to the garden cleanup and, even though it was getting dark, decided to cut down a big blue potato bush that was growing so hardily it was obscuring the front of the house. Tom came home while I was still sawing off some of the bigger branches. He turned on the front-yard spotlight, then went inside. A couple minutes later I heard an R.E.M. song, "Gardening at Night," start to play inside the house. Tom opened one of the front windows so I could hear the song better.

Official Boycott List

The New York Times has a little story today on fund-raising for Bush’s second inaugural. The story is accompanied by a list of donors, both individuals and companies, who have given $250,000 for the festivities (the official inaugural committee has the complete list). My first reaction on seeing it was — great, I’m not having anything to do with anyone who’s given money to this thing (although one of Bush’s money men points out in the story that in the case of the companies, they apparently set aside cash for the event no matter who wins because they want to be good and sure they make friends with the government people who might oversee their business). But then, looking down the complete list, you see that ceasing business with all the donors is not a casual decision. No Microsoft, Oracle, or Dell. No cars from Ford, GM, or Toyota. No Pepsi, no Coke. No Bud, either, but that’s OK. No fine distilled petroleum products from ChevronTexaco, Exxon. or Marathon. No phone calls on MCI or SBC. No checking accounts at Bank of America. No packages from UPS or FedEx.

What Are We Fighting For?

From an Army journalist/blogger who is returning from 11 months in Iraq:

“This war started out as a means to find weapons of mass destruction. Then, it was let’s give the Iraqi people freedom. Now, politicians say let’s fight the terrorists there and not on American soil. To be honest, soldiers don’t care about the cause. We’re not fighting for any of the above; we are fighting for the guy on our left and right. You form a bond so tight with fellow soldiers that you never want to let them down. I’ve seen it displayed every day for a year.”

Later in the same post, the blogger (whose observations are certainly worth reading, whether you agree or not) talks of his resentment that wire services and newspapers have seldom picked up on the personal stories of American troops killed in Iraq:

“We learned our lesson of spamming a memorial story to the larger outlets like AP. The editors deleted the story and used the photo of a crying soldier hugging the memorial display of an M-16 bayoneted into a box with the soldier’s helmet on the buttstock and dog tags on the hand grip. The photo cutline read: A soldier mourns the loss of a fellow comrade. Elsewhere in Iraq, 14 killed in a large explosion outside… you get the point. Just a single sentence. No name. No family. Just a sentence and then elsewhere in Iraq. That’s hardly justice for a soldier who gave that reporter the freedom of press.”

It’s the last sentence of that paragraph — especially in combination with the sentiment expressed in the first quote — that really gets to me. “We’re only fighting for our buddies and their survival … but we’re giving all you media ingrates (and those who express questions, doubts, criticism or outright rejection of the war) the freedoms you enjoy.” It’s as if, yes, the corruptness of the reasons given for going to war in Iraq — and for putting all the troops at risk there — is recognized. But at the same time, there’s a belief that the fight is preserving our rights.

I don’t get it. “Soldiers don’t care about the cause” (can’t help but think of the Country Joe lyric here: “One two three, What are we fighting for? Don’t tell me I don’t give a damn, Next stop is Vietnam. …”) Yet, as one person lectured me a couple months ago, they’re keeping me safe to sit here and blog my brains out.

You know, I don’t believe any of this is keeping us safe. And as for rights, I think the people who launched this war with their campaign of untruths are a bigger menace to our future as a democracy than Saddam ever was.

Tale of a Remade City

Yes, a vote will happen in Iraq later this month, and it will be a remarkable feat. Whether it amounts to an election and how many people will die in the course of trying to stop it and trying to make it succeed remains to be seen. But here’s a story you need to keep in mind when you listen to the comfortable people, safe in Washington or, if they’re quite daring, in Baghdad’s Green Zone, talk about the march of liberty they’re leading.

It’s a dark fairy tale, really, and it has taken place in Fallujah, a city that’s not a fantasy. Just two months ago, our president and his commanders launched wave after wave of young men into the city, a stronghold for the anti-American insurgency. Scores of those young men died and hundreds were wounded. On the other side, facing the best-trained and best-armed military in the world, hundreds of other young men died, too. In the aftermath, the city looked much like any other battlefield: a ruined place, a place where sanctioned murder had taken place on a large scale.

Despite the grim scene — after two weeks of battle, many of the blown-apart enemy fighters were still lying in the streets — U.S. commanders and civilian officials said they were ready to put Fallujah back together again. The hundreds of thousands of residents who had fled the violent prelude to the battle would be welcomed back. Millions and millions and millions of dollars would be spent to make the city a peaceful and prosperous place. And it would all happen quickly. Grateful Fallujans would get to vote in the elections at the end of January. Like everything else Iraq is to become with our help, it sounded great and not all that hard to figure out or get done.

But first, the Americans had to find and eliminate the last enemy fighters. They had to pump sewage out of the streets and truck in drinking water and get the electrical system working again. And, finally, before the people of Fallujah could come back, the U.S. military needed to devise a way to make sure enemy fighters didn’t come back among the future peaceful and prosperous citizens. A strict identification system was suggested, including retina scans, a DNA database, and badges that would be displayed at all times. Security comes at a price.

But something’s not working. U.S. troops control the city, but they can’t seem to weed out all the guerrillas. Putting the city back together has proved much harder than the optimistic Americans guessed. Foul water still stands in the streets. There’s still little power, and that situation is unlikely to improve for months. The districts where the fighting was fiercest are still wrecked.

And the Fallujans?

Despite all that’s been done for them and all that’s promised, they appear reluctant to come back to their renewed city. In the last several weeks, about 85,000 of them, less than a third of the city’s pre-battle population, have lined up for the hours-long wait at the American checkpoints outside town. After they’re cleared to enter, they go to see what’s left of their homes. They seem angry with the destruction they find. Some talk of exacting revenge on those they believe responsible. Fewer than 10,000 have decided to stay in the city; the rest prefer refugee camps or whatever makeshift arrangements they’ve made to survive until the trouble passes.

So, where’s the new Fallujah our military and officials promised? A guess: The same place as Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction. The same place as Saddam’s cooperation with al Qaida. The same place as our easy victory in a nation that would greet us as liberators. All just stories, it turns out, but with real enough consequences for all the people who have died to find that out and for the rest of us, too.

Now the same people who spun these tales have crafted the inspiring story of Iraqi democracy. Let’s hope we’ll be able to find some trace of it before we go on to our next adventure.

Fallujah After the Battle

A quick roundup on how U.S. military and media sources have described the reconstruction and resettlement of Fallujah since the battle in November.

Fallujah Reconstruction Effort to Begin Soon

American Forces Press Service

November 19, 2004

Fallujah reconstruction to begin

Army News Service

December 6, 2004

Returning Fallujans will face clampdown

Boston Globe

December 5, 2004

Pockets of Resistence Remain in Fallujah, Myers Says

DefenseLINK News

December 14, 2004

Fallujah Residents Return to Ruins

The News and Observer (on Military.com)

December 24, 2004

In Fallujah, Marines Try a New Tactic

Los Angeles Times (on Boston.com)

January 9, 2005

Fallujah Residents Angry over Destruction

The Associated Press (in the MInneapolis Star-Tribune)

January 11, 2005

As Residents Return to Fallujah, Marines Help Them Rebuild

DefenseLINK News

January 12, 2005

Fallujah voters still scattered by war trauma

The Washington Times

January 13, 2005

’24’: The Final Verdict

We finished watching the second two hours of the new “24” (“the most critically acclaimed show on television”) last night. In my expert opinion, the show as written is simply too ludicrous to be saved. The appearance of one after another (after another after another) dumb soap-opera subplots simply overwhelms the alleged main story line and the action attendant thereto.

However, I have to admit some of the plot twists are so mind-bendingly idiotic that they’re entertaining in themselves, and they make you wonder whether the show’s creative geniuses have given up on action and suspense in favor of remaking “Dallas,” only with automatic weapons and mass casualties and bad guys with foreign accents. My favorite subplot so far involves the tight-assed Counterterrorism Unit boss, Erin Driscoll, who gets a call in the midst of a national emergency from her schizophrenic daughter Maya, who is wigging out and refusing to take her meds. She wants Erin to say she loves her, which Erin does with all the enthusiasm of a prisoner facing a firing squad. Minutes later, a neighbor calls to report that Maya has been terrorizing the neighborhood. Erin’s response is to bully a subordinate into waving off the Los Angeles police officers responding to the incident and sending a CTU medical team to deal with Maya instead. As bad as that sounds, it’s actually worse when you factor in the comic-book dialogue and very limited acting skills of all involved.

The question now is whether I’m really done with “24” for the season or whether I’ll respond the way my friend Endo did: “I’m burned out on ’24’ — UNTIL NEXT WEEK!!!”

The Mini Is Not ‘Miniscule’

Apple just announced the Mac mini (which, thinking about it for a minute is bound to draw cracks about Mini-Me). Although I’m not given to copious salivation over tech devices, this machine seems very cool: It’s only 6.5 by 6.5 by 2 inches, it’s a fully loaded computer (basic model comes with a 1.25-gigahertz G4 processor, 40-gigabyte hard drive, Ethernet connectivity, and USB and Firewire ports) and is going for $499. Monitor, keyboard, mouse, and wireless capability extra. Even with all that, I’m sure you can get away with a full system for less than $1,000.

But the real reason I’m writing about this has nothing to do the interesting little Mac box. It has to do with this sentence from the Mac mini page: “And it boasts a miniscule price to match: Mac mini starts at $499.”

No: That’s m-i-n-u-s-c-u-l-e. With a “u.” (Pre-emptively, I reject the suggestion that it’s OK to misspell the word to stay consistent with or highlight the product name.)

Thank you.