windhaven exhalations

an irregular blog from Windhaven Press

A blog about New England, politics in New Hampshire, book publishing, rennovating a 200-year-old farmhouse & barn, knitting, cats & other mayhem.

Tuesday, September 07, 2004

tin-foil hats aside ...

Okay, I'm putting on my tin-foil hat, here. I'm all for weird conspiracy theories, as such, but with the current administration, I keep finding that my "conspiracy radar" is way off. Things I'd chalk up to nutbar conspiracy theories keep turning out to be true.

That said ...

There's a very interesting, and very insightful Flash movie going around that brings to light some of the questions I have been wondering about since I saw information about the Pentagon "plane hit" during 9/11:

Where is the plane wreakage? Where are the bodies? Why is the hole in the Pentagon, plainly seen by anyone watching news footage that day, a nice, clean, round hole -- just the right size and at the right height for a missile? How did a Boeing 757 manage to hit the Pentagon at only 2 feet above the ground and not shear off any of its parts, leave any wreakage or -- for that matter -- clear the crowded commuter highway that's adjacent to the Pentagon's main building?

I used to drive by the Pentagon at least once a week when I grew up in D.C. I know where the highway is -- you can't possibly clear a 757 over it without wreaking a whole lot of cars, not at less than 30 feet of clearance (when "the plane hit," the hole shows it was at 2 feet above the ground). I've been in the Pentagon, including in wedge A, which is the oldest one and where my father did some work in the 1970s. That's the wedge that was hit. If you look at the movie, pay attention to how the "plane" bore through the reinforced concrete walls (yes, steel reinforced concrete -- I've seen it and had it described to me lovingly by a Navy aide when I was there) as if it were cutting through butter, leaving a clean round hole. It went through many concentric layers in this fashion.

A Boeing 727 would crumble, wreak, and bust against a building like this, even "the old wedge" of the building. It would leave a mess, and all the fuel would be burning. There was no such wreakage, and the burning was from direct "explosions" (per descriptions of the day, from the Pentagon and FBI). Remember how the WTC burned from spread fuel? Didn't happen at the Pentagon. It went BOOM in a nice, clean, direct explosion instead. (Reports later said the plane "melted" or "disintigrated" on impact with the reinforced building -- if so, why didn't the building's metal also melt? All photos show it intact, with a nice hole cut through it.)

Everyone at airport control thought it was a fighter jet, and reported it as such. Eyewitnesses reported seeing a silver commuter-sized plane fly towards the point of impact, and hearing the whine or whoosh associated with a smaller plane. Or missile, for that matter. If a 757 flies within a few hundred yards of you, you will never forget the experience; you may, in fact, have lost a great deal of hearing from the engine noise alone.

Were we duped by a bait-and-switch on 9/11? (Look, over here, at the World Trade Center, everyone! No no, don't pay attention to the big elephant over on the other side of the stage. He doesn't exist.)

So, that leaves us with an even greater question: What happened to the plane and the bodies?

Watch the movie.

Ask questions. Then ask more. Don't stop asking when the media and the current administration tells you there's nothing to it.

Most important of all: Vote in November.

Make sure you are registered to vote in your state! (Check with your town clerk or call your state's capitol offices for information on voter registration.)

Friday, September 03, 2004

Dear author's wife...

Dear author's wife,

When I ask your husband, the author for corrections to his book, and you do the proofreading "for him," do you think you could follow the simple directions I gave him in the cover letter of his galley proofs?

I asked for corrected pages, either the entire book or only the pages with corrections on them, to be sent back here. You had an option to send an email with corrections listed in the mail.

I guess I wasn't clear enough: there were two options -- physically mail the pages, or email me a note letting me know what corrections you want on which pages/paragraphs. I repeat: I guess I wasn't clear enough. Why? Because what you sent me, dear wife of the author, was:

little .jpg images of the corrected pages attached to email.

What were you thinking?

No, no, belay that last question. I really don't want to know.

the production manager

(who is now tearing her hair out and printing all those little images)

Fun with graphics

Nifty illustrative representation of the "words" used by the Democrats and the Republicans in the first 3 days of their respective conventions.

From the New York Times, Thursday, September 2, 2004

Nice reminder of who's emphasizing what in their prepared messages.