Wally Lamb is reading from his book (a novel about school shootings) at Third Place Books tonight, if you're into that kind of thing.

Also, Harman Leon reads at Elliott Bay Book Company. His book is titled The American Dream: Walking in the Shoes of Carnies, Arms Dealers, Immigrant Dreamers, Pot Farmers, and Christian Believers. I, at least, am intrigued by that title.

And in Olympia, David Ray Griffin, who has written several 9/11 Truth books with titles like Debunking 9/11 Debunking, is reading at the Capitol Theater. I have written about Griffin's books here.

After I posted the event in my reading calendar, I got an angry e-mail from somebody involved with the event:

Attached is the press release I sent in to your publication...You'll notice that what was published [in The Stranger] has nothing to do with what I sent you other than the name of the presenter:

"Noted crackpot theorist David Ray Griffin talks about how September 11th was caused by lizard people wielding experimental laser weapons in an effort to eventually get Barack Obama elected president. Or something."

I'm wondering if you frequently alter press releases in this way so as to slander the advertised event or did you make an exception for this one? I would appreciate it if you remove the current event description and replace it with the one attached or at least give me an explanation as to why you chose to go this route.

I sent this e-mail along:

My job is not to reprint press releases. My job is to describe events for my readers and recommend the good ones. I have read two books by David Ray Griffin. I called it as I see it.

And got this e-mail back:

I understand you have no obligation to print a press release as submitted or at all for that matter. I also realize you have every right to believe what you want regarding 9/11 and to inject your personal opinion into the event calendar recommendations. My problem with what you printed is where you make this assertion: "David Ray Griffin talks about how September 11th was caused by lizard people wielding experimental laser weapons..." Having read two of his books, I'm sure you're well aware that the particular "theory" you attributed to him is in fact a bold-faced lie. I'm not asking you to become a 9/11 truther; just that you maintain some semblance of professionalism.

All I have to say to that is: in the spirit of fairness, I did put "or something" in there; Griffin is not David Icke, after all. Most of what he does is point out what he perceives to be errors in common 9/11 logic. He doesn't really present a theory. But many of his fans do support those theories, and that's why I wrote what I did.

And this is as good a time as any to point out something the 9/11 Truthers haven't really acknowledged yet. If 9/11 was a vast plot to take over America and steal our civil liberties & etc. & etc: How the fuck did Obama win? If you're going to tell me that Obama is the same as Bush, you're totally fucking hopeless. I know he's not the perfect Truth-approved American hero candidate that Ron Paul is, but his plans to leave Iraq, shut down Guantanamo, and stop all kinds of illegal things that the government has been doing is certainly not a step forward for the Evil Twin-Tower-Bombing Conspiracy. The only argument I've seen thus far has to do with Obama pushing toward globalization. This is weak sauce. History has officially rolled over the 9/11 Movement.