The Flight 93 Memorial is fast approaching the point of no return and we still have a memorial that has been hijacked. Error Theory, who has been working tirelessly to get this thing fixed, has the update:
At the Memorial Project’s public meeting, I learned from Flight 93 Advisory Commission member Tim Baird that every member of the Advisory Commission is fully aware that a person facing into the giant crescent is facing almost exactly at Mecca. They don’t just know that I have been trying to warn them of this basic fact for a year and a half. They all acknowledge that it is correct, even as the Memorial Project sends out spokesman after spokesman to tell the public that my claims are false and preposterous. Yet there was no outward hint of qualm as the Memorial Project announced, with numerous statements of relief and satisfaction, that the Crescent/Bowl of Embrace design has finally been approved at the highest levels of delegated authority.
~~~After Tim Baird told me that everyone was aware that a person facing into the giant crescent would be facing Mecca, I asked him what else they knew:
Do they know about the separate upper section of Memorial Wall, inscribed with the 9/11 date, centered exactly on the bisector of the giant crescent, putting the date exactly in the position of the star on an Islamic crescent and star flag? Do they know about the 44 memorial glass blocks emplaced along the flight path, equaling the number of passengers, crew, and terrorists?
"It’s all in your report, right," said Mr. Baird. "Your report has been passed around at the meetings." He suggested that everyone has looked at it, and that everyone knows what is in it. It seems they are all just making excuses for it, including Mr. Baird.
"I won’t be concerned unless you can prove intent," Baird said, "and it is impossible to prove intent." He presented this as an impenetrable redoubt, as it to say, "let’s see you get past that defense." I looked at him like he was crazy. Did he not understand what he had just said: that he would not be concerned no matter what was in the design?
Mr. Baird seems to think that if intent cannot be proven, that implies that it is somehow disproven, and we have to assume that things like the Mecca orientation of the crescent are coincidence. That is nonsensical enough, but what is really nonsensical is the idea that if these features are coincidence, that makes them okay, and even makes it okay to deny and suppress the geometric facts of the design.
He also has other examples of commission members making excuses:
As one of my compatriots was walking a reverend on the Commission through our graphical displays, the reverend said: "But so what if these are mosque features? If visitors are unaware, what difference does it make?" A lawyer on the Commission told another of my compatriots why he thought that the almost exact Mecca orientation of the giant crescent had to be a coincidence. He claimed that it couldn’t have been intended to honor Islam because the in-exactness of the the Mecca-orientation would be "disrespectful" to Islam.
Does this lawyer think he is an expert on what is seen as "disrespectful" in Islam? Any Muslim knows that a Mecca-direction indicator does NOT have to be exact, because traditional Islam follows the example of Muhammad, and every Muslim knows that Muhammad’s mosque was not exactly oriented on Mecca. It was originally built to face Jerusalem. Only later in his career did Muhammad order his followers to change their qibla direction (their prayer direction) to face the Kaaba in Mecca. In his own mosque, Muhammad just switched the mihrab from one end of his mosque to the other, which had not been built to face Mecca. Thus when Muslims are looking for a suitable place to pray, they are allowed to face any wall that leaves them facing even very roughly towards Mecca. Practicing Muslims are all well aware of this allowance, because they have to avail themselves of it every day.
This memorial has been questioned for sometime but now construction starts. Unless there is a huge outcry from the public this memorial WILL be build and Muslims worldwide will have the worlds biggest mosque on the spot of the United States first victory in the War on Terror.
This cannot be allowed to happen. The only way to stop this is now at the Congressional level. Please, call your Senators, your Congressmen and women.
Alec Rawls, the owner of Error Theory, has written a book about this subject
due out at the end of this month. Check it out here.
See author page
So we have to show “intention” by the designers before any change could be made?
It’s not “impossible.” It’s simple.
If the intent of the designers is NOT to reflect some screwed up recognition of Islam, then change the desingn. Remove the blocks honoring the terrorists. Reorient the center which corresponds to the Islamic Star and encircle the entire memorial with trees, not simply show a crescent.
It’s clear that the desingers and commissioners supporting this flawed memorial do not understand, or are totally indifferent to the symbolism which is obvious to the rest of us.
If this is allowed to persist this will be a slap in the face of every victim lost in this incident from 9/11.
Has there been any reactions from the families of the victims?
This really needs a blog flood to get the message out and get something done before this thing is fixed and done.
Many thanks, Curt, for helping to tackle this hijacker. You are in the book, by the way, for overturning the Jamil Hussein rock.
Crescent of Betrayal is about more than just the memorial debacle itself. What the memorial debacle provides is an up-close look at the mindset of partisan dishonesty that has allowed Paul Murdoch’s terrorist memorial mosque to get so far. What is seen is an anti-spirit of Flight 93.
Where the heroes of Flight 93 faced harsh truths and saw there what was required of them, those charged with the memorialization of Flight 93 started with the idea that critics of the crescent design were bigots, and refused to credit any information that would carry them to this “bigoted” side. Thus they have felt themselves morally superior throughout, even as they suppress the most glaring truths.
This same mindset is also at work on the national stage, where again it directly abets our Isalmo-fascist enemies, most obviously by trying desperately to secure American defeat in Iraq. The lesson of the memorial debacle (the abetting of evil that results when people put imagined partisan advantage ahead of trust in truth) needs to be carried outward to the larger phenomenon of partisan dishonesty, and that is what I do in the last third of my book. Thus the whole book is really about the spirit of Flight 93 and how this crazy memorial story gives the nation a chance to comprehend that spirit in contrast to its opposite, at this crucial time when partisan dishonesty has succeeded in gaining majority power.
If the nation can rise up and tackle the hijacker of the Flight 93 memorial, it could fire just the resurgence of trust in truth that the nation needs to knock back the purveyors of partisan dishonesty on the national stage. I think of it as one last gift from Flight 93: a crucial lesson to the nation, in this time of misdirection.
The Memorial debacle provides a startling look at person after person who somehow imagine that it can be right or in their interest to avoid or suppress the truth, and they are still going full bore. They are going to help Paul Murdoch stab his terrorist memorial mosque into the heartland of America to the very last, even directly lying to the public at this point to suppress what they know to be the factual truth of my claims.
Very cool to know I’m in the book Alec, appreciate it. I agree completely that this is just one more example of the hijacking of our national pride by the left. Everything has to have some sort of moral relativism included since no true evil exists. Except George Bush of course….sigh.
We need to act on this and get the word out. Everyone who reads this blog should email the story link to any other blogs they read.