Saturday, October 16, 2004
SANDY TRAVEL
I realize it may well qualified me for being listed in the “Booby-Book of the Year”, but , until recently, it never occurred to me that navigation was a requirement in desert travel.
Without it one cannot be sure of getting wherever it was you thought you were going. Our Nabatean navigators have been guiding rich caravans across desolate desert terrain for centuries and they use a handy little instrument called a kamal. That's right - with a “K”.
“C-type” camels and deserts seem to go together naturally. A brand of cigarettes used to show a picture of a single-humped Bactrian camel and sugar-cured fruit such as dates, had a picture of a two-humped camel called a dromedary. Or, was it the other way around?
All you need to make a kamal is a flat piece of wood, smooth and about half the size of an old-fashioned HERSHEY Chocolate bar and about as thick as one used to be. You will need about a yard and half of string, too. You'd best go with two yards because you will be required to tie a series of knots in that string- how many depends on how many places you want to navigate toward.
Drill a small hole through the center of the board. Pull the string through the hole and knot it so it does no slip through.
This is the point at which he men are separated from the boys ; navigators from the would-be navigators or eternally lost souls. The technical lore which old timers pass on to the new generation are amazing clutter. Here's a sample explaining how you go about trying those critical knots.
“The science of qiyas is the simple method. There are 224 isba in a 360 degree circle. The width of four finger is considered to be 4 isba.” And there is more such hi-tech jargon you'll need to learn ,too if you want to make a career in this ancient scientific field.
What you need to do is to stop yakking about the waves rocking the boat if you are “at sea” or the wind and sand blowing your bernoose loose if you are “at sand”. You also have to hold the string between your teeth and let it slip through as you move the string out from the pole star placement until the proper knot is on the chosen star which allows you to think you now know what the exact latitude of your destination might be.
The Polynesian travelers, it is said had a version of the kamel made with a strip of bamboo and length of notched vine.
It amazes me that anyone got anywhere by such methods of computation. Perhaps those heading toward the Americas from the Pacific islands had a long coastline at which they might aim, and those going the other direction had a scattered host of many islands so they were sure to hit one of them.
A.L.M. October 15, 2004 [c501wds]
Friday, October 15, 2004
AND NOTHING BUT
How, you may wonder as I do, can otherwise decent men and women allow themselves to skirt the very fringes of dishonesty at times?
It happens more often than we might care to admit and most frequently by equivocation, elision, grafting and parenthetical references.
When a topic is being discussed, such as in the recent presidential campaign debates, the speaker is expected to stay on the subject for the duration of the set time period.
A noticeable trait of so many political speeches is to be found in the fact that so much that is actually voiced represents only a portion of the truth. The speaker, so often, purposely avoids, evades, hedges, skirts, parries, gets around or sidesteps any elements of truth which may make his or her statement seem less authentic. Is such a presentation honest? If one lists only the positive aspects of a plan and makes no reference to potential negative aspects, is it a true picture of the plan being presented? Any speaker who sets forth his idea in this this manner is, in effect, telling “half-truths”, we say, which suggests that the other portion may well be patently false or even a downright lie. In any portion of a speech in which numbers, numerals, percentages, figures, and pie chart graph proportions are mentioned one can expect elements of alteration, color, contortion, deception, dressed-up, embroidered, exaggerated, salted, trumped-up or misquoted - and they, in most cases, will be accepted and heard as intended- dramatically. Is this honest? Or, is it a planned deception, fully intentional and thought to be permissible?
The four men concerned in the 2004 Election Debates were all seasoned veterans of such speaking situations and one did not find elements which do, however, appear in the speeches of less adept speakers. It is certainly dishonest for someone called upon to influence the choice to be made by citizens to falsify, hedged, magnify, misrepresented or diluted. Some will even try to fabricate,cook up, fake, forge or simulate truth, and an amazing number of political speakers at all levels tend to be off balance, confused, irresolute, uncertain, wishy-washy, floundering around and, straddling issues and wearing funny hats and singing silly songs..
On the whole,I would say that this year's debates were successful. I still, however, doubt if they are necessary, except in that they do serve as a sort of wrap-up of all all that has been said, re-said and said again throughout the months of our woefully long election period. Such and summation is needed for large numbers of turned-off voters who have missed much that has been said during the stretched-out “election year”. The debates sum it all up for them - actually some of them learn for then first time who is running for what office. Then - “informed” - they rush to the polls eagerly.
The debates this year of 2004 were competent and capable. The audience conduct was exceptionally good being obscured by dim lighting and few or no microphones. And the planning was commendable and the moderators all proved to be competent. One incident occurred which was said, by some, to have been ”in poor taste.” It will be a hot issue for the next ten days, but it will prove to have been a minor flaw best forgotten by those most concerned.
A.L.M. October 14, 2004 [c563wds]
Thursday, October 14, 2004
NOTEWORTHY CHANGE
Each of us has some rather firm ideas about what we call a “change.” Most of us, I would say, like to see any new angle or modification appear to be an improvement on the previous condition . Each of us, too, might be ready to question change if it comes too suddenly upon us, without some hint that things might be son be different. Sudden change can come as and unpleasant shock. What about a change which is kept secret, or , at least not noised about so that many of us might come to know that a thing had been modified?
One change - a musical one which affects just about all of us at one time or another - has been put in place, it seems, and not made known publically.
It occurs at a rather solomn moment in the lives of most of us, too. It is applied in other, less serious circumstances, I'm sure, with the idea that if it works better, involve less expense can be used again-and-again accomplishes the desired result more effectively with less chance of error and with marked improvement in dependability. With all that in its favor it, automatically, seems better and should not excite any opposition.
Example: If you watched the Memorial Service honoring President Ronald Regan you were no doubt impressed by the scenic background of the vast Pacific Ocean segment in the background and by the general arrangement of the partricants during the ceremony. You also will recall that a young man in military dress then placed a trumpet to his lips, and in the traditon of the ceremony played the notes known as “Taps”. It is a touching passage and adds a traditonal coda to such ceremonies. You may not have listened too intently but you “felt” the tonal splendor of the simple notation deep within you and may may have wondered how that young musician could do it so perfectly, with such meaning and without any hint of error. The truth of the matter is that the so-called “bugle” is never used at such ceremonies. Instead, an electonic device is fitted in the instrument puts to the musician's lips and he carefully syncs his apparent breathing to the sound emitted from the bell of the horn. The perfect union of tone with movment results. He lowers the saluting instrument and you never realize it was recorded.
It is, somehow, disturbing to me.
Have we become so enamoured of perfection? Do we deem it necessary that emotional qualities be exorcized? Must we have the nth in everything? Must we do so in a mechanical way? Somehow it detracts from the entire cemmony it is intended to enhance.
We do this more often than we think we do. The vast majority of the shows you watch so avidly on television have been long ago been taped ,edited, cut, patched, enhanced and colorized to provide you with a program timed to the very second, edited to remove all obvious errors (even to the point of adding a few unintentionaly, such as a sudden flicker or flash where a portion of the film has been cut to shorten the length so that it will fit in the exact space between commercials.) We demand such detailed preparation in the TV shows we watch, and movies had been that way for decades. More and more we are realizing that some producers of News Progamming on radio and TV, are applying such methods to bring about ”perfection” - in their light - for events we share.
You have, no doubt, heard taps blown poorly. We all have. It is a difficult thing for a musician to be called upon to do, and some are not more ready to do so than some vocalists who try to sing our national anthem at sports events. On such occasions we may feel sorry for the inept player or singer, but they are part of an emotional moment and even the best artists may vary a bit from perfection ...just as did the life of the deceased, perhaps, or the status of the sports teams in the arena when someone butchers our banner song.
It's here. We go with the change, like it or not. It time we will come to accept such modifications and wonder why were disturbed by such a petty thing.
A. L. M. October 13, 2004 [c740wds]
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
ONE USED FORT
It has had at least three names.
The original drawings for a much-needed fort to be built out near the middle of the main channel of Hampton Roads, Virginia, were all labeled ”Castle Calhoun.”
Andrew Jackson was President at that time and while the place was under construction he used it as a summer White House and get-away spot for several years. For a brief time, a young engineer by the name of Robert E. Lee was on the staff as one of those charged with creating an island for in the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay and with placing thereon a sizable fortification. Both the army and navy did not like to recall that the national capital had been attacked – not once, but twice - by British warships which sailed past this very spot on their way into the Chesapeake Bay area.
Work started on the fort in 1818 when not too many islands that size had been constructed so it took a while.. In more recent island building islands Japan used compacted urban waste in hundred pound “bricks”, but the builders of the island in the Chesapeake Bay used rock ...mostly granite - and they kept dumping more and more rock until, finally, an “island” began to show. The average depths at the site measured from ten to eighteen feet in depth - almost three fathoms - and the rock and concrete they poured in - an estimated l.2 million cubic feet of the hard stuff - tended to go to the bottom and keep sinking. Five years after they started the island measured about seven feet above the surface. It took three years more for it to settle. Work was started, but had to be stopped indefinitely when newly build walls split as their foundations sank at a rate of about seven inches per year. It was in this phase, it is said, that Robert E. Lee no doubt, shared some worry with other young engineers on duty Certainly, it was in no condition to support extensive fortifications.
The original design was by a Frenchman Simon Bernard. The fort was attached to Fort Monroe on the mainland north of the site about a mile in an administrative sense. Fort Monroe was the largest masonry fortification ever built in the United States and that influenced the name given to the new, extended fortification supplementing Fort Monroe. The old designation honored John Calhoun, President Monroe's Secretary of War, who was deemed to be a southern sympathizer. Several names were. It could have been Fort Scott for General Winfield Scott,of Mexican War fame but , instead General John Ellis Wool, also a Mexican War hero and commandeer of Fort Monroe at time.
When I was just a young kid in Norfolk, Va. we spoke of the place as ”The Rip-Raps”. I have no memories of our ever having called it “Fort Wool.” That name came to be during the Civil War when it came under Union control and occupancy. Those in command were perturbed when the Confederate “Virginia” went safely past it to attack the Federal fleet off shore. Furthermore, it passed the fort on returning to its base in Norfolk, an suffered no damage whatsoever even from the firing of Fort Wool's celebrated new gun called “The Sawyer”. It is said that radar personnel stationed on the rocky little island during World War II called it “The Rock” - suggesting an Alcatraz-like state of isolation.
Today, the “Rip-Raps” is a public park area. It was given to the Commonwealth of Virginia in 1967 and then, in turn, to the City of Hampton in 1970. Much of the original structure remains, but not all of the island is used because portions of it are declared to be unsafe. The reason: the island is still “settling” and , it is assumed, will - in time - sink beneath the waters and be no more.
A.L.M. October 12, 2004 [c665wds]
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
THEY STARTED IT!
Oregon was the first state to adopt a tax on gasoline. That was done in 1919 and by 1929, all of the ,then, forty-eight states had decided that was a good way to bring in additional revenue. One has to wonder about just how many cars infested the highway system of Oregon in 1919. I doubt that traffic was extensive enough to support an argument that it would “bring in millions” and I can't imagine what they used to argue their cause for imposing a tax on fuel for 1919 cars It may have been just another way to fight the growth of the horseless carriage
A Federal gasoline tax was started in 1932 set at a cautious one-cent per gallon. By 1929 it was 4-cents per gallon . Since that time it, along with state and, some local taxes have increased noticeably. The main intended use for such funds as were gathered from gas taxes has always been for the maintenance of existing highway and for the construction of new or better ones as needed.
The other area of taxation which has shown growth is that set upon tobacco and products thereof. They have varied a great deal depending on the section of the nation and their ability to grow, process or ship tobacco products to the world markets. The State of Iowa was the first to put a tax to put a tax on tobacco in 1921 and all the states got on the wagon promptly. Some states prefaced tax action by prohibiting smoking in various locations. Louisiana , for example, in 1890, decreed: “No smoking on street cars.” Tobacco raising states Virginia and North Carolina lagged far behind, however, even when the thing became endemic. They , too, in recent actions have now increased their tax take, as well, but it is still small compared to that imposed by other states. Between 1970 and 1975, forty-two different laws went into effect concerning tobacco use and taxation schedules. Fines have been imposed on the tobacco industry to an unprecedented degree and the business does not face a bright future unless it would in in the possible expansion of their overseas potential.
More than we might realize, taxation tells the tale when we study human social and governmental systems. The Boston Tea Party was one such gathering we all remember.
A.L.M. October 11, 2004 [c408wds]
Monday, October 11, 2004
FRANK – PLUS
During most of my fifty-eight years of living here in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, I have always thought that the fine little town of Franklin, in Pendleton County, just across our western border in West Virginia , was named after Benjamin Franklin. After all he was a national hero, inventor, writer, printer, diplomat, a much revered conversationalist and our first Postmaster General, and much of the area which is now West Virginia, at one time, they considered naming the state after him.
I was a bit disappointed when the editor of the Pendleton 'TIMES”,
the newsworthy weekly published in Franklin, pointed out that the name of the town was, in no way, connected to that of Old Ben.
Early residents called the community “Frankfort”, which is logical because the 160 acre for their farm surveyed by Francis and George Evick. George built a log house on the east side of the river at the South Branch river at the mouth of what is known as Evick Gap, and Francis built one near a spring which is now just in back of the Volunteer Fire Company building in downtown Franklin. That was around 1769 following a decade or so of such new towns along the western edge of the nation built to withstand the depredations of the Indians. They were often known as “forts”, I say it was a “logical” choice, because it is only natural that the house built by Francis was often thought of as Frank's Fort. Hence the town he established there was known as Frankfort.
All that changed abruptly on December 19, 1794, when an act if the Legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia designated the name of the town to be “Franklin”. They had , shortly before that, (in 1788) named a town in Hampshire County “Frankfort”and they didn't want two of them Also in that year of 1788 the fire c meeting in Ruddle, decided to locate the county seat on the Evick farm. Francis E Evick then laid off the site of the proposed town .It was 46-1/2 acres along the foot of a ridge above his meadows. In contrast of usual treatment, he laid the new town off in a methodical manner and that factor can be seen in the town's growth to this day.
The Virginia legislative act named gen trustees run he town,and hey took their job seriously. By Christmas 1800 they had established ordinances locally which protected property from fire, kept hogs from running at large, new ones to prevent the galloping and racing of horses through streets and alleys and many more to preserve proper order among the populace. It is recorded that George Evick sold his interest in the farm forr about 250 pound or around $800.00.and on the same day the new Sheriff bought the first building lot offered for sale - a ½ acre plot for 5 pounds or about $16.00. By 1800 the town had one hundred inhabitants.
Had yellow page directories existed at that time, the town of Franklin would have listed two general stores,, two carpenters, two shoemakers, one cabinet shop, one chair maker, three saddlers, one tailor, one hatter, one gunsmith, two tanning yards, plus two lawyers, one physician, a Temperance League Chapter and a Bible Society
There is a good book on the history of Pendleton County - written in 1910 by Oren F. Morton - in which he says: “Franklin in its present guise is one of the handsomest of the small towns of West Virginia.” It remains so today.
A.L.M. October 11, 2004 [c598wds] .
Sunday, October 10, 2004
STEWART
Now that Martha Stewart has been safely confined behind the no-bars Alderson minimum-security Federal Prison for Women, in West Virginia, we can all sleep better at night knowing justice has prevailed.
It is time, however, for a question which I have been wanting to set forth for some time.
Agreed, Martha Stewart is in jail for lying about her activities in regard to the sale of ImClone stock.
The point I would like to see clarified is one which would be little or no trouble at all for the team which hunted Martha Stewart down valiantly and threw a big chunk of the book at her.
Is it possible for authorities to go back to existing records - those of the brokerage houses concerned, the phone companies, e-mail and delivery services - all the means used to bring Martha Stewart to justice, to determine who else might have sold ImClone stock in the week before the demise of the stock's price. Is it logical that Martha Stewart, a relatively small investor, could possibly have been the only person so “favored” with a warning to sell. Certainly, she was not the only holder of such stock which “moved” during that critical week or so. If there were others who sold, they should be asked to explain why they did so. If they deny having done so because of any suggestions by insiders are they, then to be considered as fabricating, decorating the facts - lying?
Certainly, Martha Stewart's sale was not the only piece of business brokerage firms did during that time period. Isn't it only fair that further investigations be done to find out who did sell and why at that particular moment in time? How many will say they don't remember? How many will be hoping the records have been properly adjusted or conveniently misplaced or accidentally destroyed or lost to minimize any possibilities of retracing business activities of those dated, contact made and actions taken?
We owe it to Martha Stewart to investigate the “also rans” in this
seeming series of mis-deeds.
And another thing that irks me no end: this media thing of calling the[prison “Camp Cupcake”. No prison is, in any way, like any “piece of cake” in whatever form or shape. An individual never knows what the attitude of fellow prisoners might be or become, and, that alone, makes residence therein potentially a property leased from Hell itself.
A. L .M. October 10, 2004 [c414wds]
|
