Outrage over Arizona 9/11 memorial ready to go nuclear? Update: Kossacks respond!
posted at 11:17 pm on September 23, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
There’s something about it on Drudge as I write this. Red-fonted. With a photo.
Getting the photo accompaniment on DR is like getting a guest shot on Ed Sullivan during his heyday. You’ve made it. You’ve arrived.
This story has arrived.
Ace told me the other night it would be big. Nuh uh, I said. No Drudge link; no alpha bloggers behind it either. LGF posted an item, but it was perfunctory. The boss, for whom stories like this are tailor made, hasn’t said much either.
But now Drudge is onboard. And he’s got a killer photo of one of the slogans: “You don’t win battles of terrorism with more battles.”
Which is true. You win them by watching Keith Olbermann.
We need a list of all the slogans. Espresso Pundit somehow missed the “battles of terrorism” thing when he took his photos. What else is on there that we don’t know about? Check this out:
It looks like it says “Feeling of invincibility lost” at the right. Even assuming that that’s an “event” concrete enough to warrant a place in the timeline alongside “Office of Homeland Security created,” who would think to use a memorial as a place for armchair psychoanalysis? It reads like Andrew Sullivan’s 9/11 diary. “10:29 – Tower collapses. Heart-ache.”
The other thing to do is to e-mail Russell Pearce, the Arizona state assemblyman quoted in the article. There’s a contact page at his website, but I errr don’t know how often he checks it. You might also reach him at rpearce@azleg.state.az.us.
The left should have no objections to any of this since, as they’re constantly reminding us, they care about 9/11 and its nonpoliticization as much as we do. They shouldn’t, but they will. Of course.
Update: From the article:
Tempe resident Donna Bird, whose husband Gary was killed in the attack, was among the 30-member Arizona 9/11 Memorial Commission created by former Gov. Jane Hull in 2002.
She said all the inscriptions were found factual by an Arizona State University history professor. She added that she wouldn’t have helped design the memorial, which names her husband, if it were political.
One of Ace’s commenters did some googling and came back with the minutes of the Arizona History Advisory Commission’s meeting of 1/31/06. One of the members is Noel J. Stowe, chairman of ASU’s history department. Is he the one who found it “factual” that you “don’t win battles of terrorism with more battles”?
Update: Another nice catch by “tommy1″:
“The attacks gave America a sense of what the rest of the world is feeling, sometimes on a daily basis,” architect Eddie Jones says.
“We’re certainly not as innocent as we used to be,” says Jones, co-designer of the Arizona 9/11 Memorial, which is being dedicated today at Wesley Bolin Memorial Plaza near the state Capitol.
Jones might not be responsible for the slogans, though.
Update: Here we go.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Ace of Spades is covering things to. Come on over, we are doing a little bit of digging into the matter:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/197975.php
tommy1 on September 23, 2006 at 11:35 PM
Allah I live in phoenix and if I can get over there in the next day or so i’ll take my cam and get a full set for you.
AZPatriot on September 23, 2006 at 11:42 PM
The question being, what will happen in 2008 assuming a Democrat President takes over, Peace in Our Times(tm) cometh, glowball vorming is pushed back, and the Near East, the Middle East, the Far East are instantly pacified? You know, when America assumes her historical role of paying all the price with nothing in return.
Will those slogans be airbrushed reminiscent of, uhm, much of the MSM’s screw-ups?
Niko on September 23, 2006 at 11:44 PM
That’d be awesome, AZ.
Allahpundit on September 23, 2006 at 11:46 PM
Another Democrat shrine to their jihadist comrades.
I wonder if such a sight would be standing for long if Washington, Lincoln or Roosevelt got wind of such a thing during their war times.
Perchant on September 23, 2006 at 11:56 PM
I think this story has legs as this ‘memorial’ is proof of how some people just don’t understand the ramifications of when America is attacked.
Oh really! Then how do you win? By bending over, and kissing the feet of terrorists? Dead terrorists never kill again. Not ever.
If some of the phrases of Osama were on that joke of a memorial it would at least be relevant. Instead, it is a liberal talking point.
DannoJyd on September 24, 2006 at 12:26 AM
I posted this at Ace’s under name “MikeZ”
“The attacks gave America a sense of what the rest of the world is feeling, sometimes on a daily basis,” architect Eddie Jones says.
Later in the article:
Jones has had to look carefully. Along with artists Maria and Matt Salenger, he has designed the Arizona 9/11 Memorial.
“We were careful not to politicize the memorial,” he says. “Because we’re human beings and feel pain like anyone else, there was a political turn on the events, but I’m proud we have avoided that.
“It is significant that the spectrum of emotion in the memorial is expressed in light, not shadow. Not material but sunlight, which is historically symbolic of optimism, something uplifting and hopeful.
“It deals with this painful issue in a way that subtly suggests hope. I love that part,” Jones says.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0911nine-eleven0911.html
tommy1 on September 24, 2006 at 12:34 AM
Not a problem Allah the wife and I’ll swing by tomorrow afternoon and snap some pictures.
AZPatriot on September 24, 2006 at 12:34 AM
Haven’t you ever wondered why they do this? Why they seem to turn every patriotic thing to their sick twisted view of the world? Liberals are always asking us why we didn’t “CONNECT THE DOTS” prior to 9/11. That would have been nice but while we can’t do that WE CAN CONNECT A FEW DOTS about LIBERALS!
DOT-Liberals CLAIM to be for “free speech”, yet they do everything in their power to limit “Christian”or “moral” speech! They put the “Speech Codes” on college campus’ while proclaiming them to be places where there is a “free exchange of ideas”, ask Larry Summers about that one! They recently put the weight of the U.S. Congress behind a threat to ABC’S broadcasting license over the “Path to 9/11″. Conveniently forgetting that when we objected to a CRUCIFIX BEING PLACED IN URINE, or Mary being degraded with DUNG, they told us, “that’s the price of FREE SPEECH, Christian, so just “SUCK IT UP”! (Clinton reference unintentional)
DOT- Liberals CLAIM to be for “the separation between church and state”, yet liberal teachers in the Ohio school system, were caught taking middle schoolers on FIELD TRIPS TO MOSQUES! They were even BUSTED TEACHING ISLAM IN OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS! Recently they have even found the legal “rationale” to allow Jewish and Muslim symbols during the holiday season YET FOUND A WAY TO EXCLUDE THE NATIVITY! , maintaing that the Christmas tree which is pagan AND is in fact, SCOFFED AT BY THE LORD HIMSELF (Jermiah 10:2-5), was sufficient for our holiday display.
DOT- Liberals bristle at being called “un-patriotic”, yet all of their heroes are communists, communist spies, communist dictators, traitors to America, or foreign leaders who HATE America. Every play, book, movie or intellectual treatise that is celebrated among them, somehow involves the lessening of Americas influence in the world, and that influence, prior to being lessened, is generally seen as negative! Hmmmm.
DOT- Liberals claim to be Christian (ROFLMAO), yet strangely they don’t uphold a SINGLE TENENT OF CHRISTIANITY, preferring general statements like “love they neighbor” while scoffing at SPECIFIC STATEMENTS like this one…..
1Corinthians 6:9,10)
9. Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
10. nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. ( seems to me, “Loving your neighbor”, would be telling him to stay off the just mentioned list, huh?)
They even, while “being Christian” mind you, manage to brag about, “Not being led by their faith in their policy decisions”. (kinda like muslims being allowed to lie about their loyalties, to deceive their enemies, huh?) Not to mention the fact that every television show in prime time, produced by these “Christian” liberals, advocates divorce, homosexuality, and features a plethora of Leading Characters who are “agnostic” or even outright atheist! How many times have you seen a show where the Lead character is asked, “Do you believe in God” and the answer is invariably, “I don’t know”, “No”, or “What kind of God would allow….(insert horrible tragedy here)?”
DOT- Liberals claim to be “honorable” yet after entering a “powersharing” arrangement with the gullible Trent Lott, they bribed Jim Jeffords to switch sides and promptly kicked all of the Republicans off of the “shared” committees, LOL. Then there’s the Paul Wellstone funeral/fundraiser, Hillary’s mystical stock picking, and Al Gore’s, buddhist temple, “I didn’t know it was a fundraiser and even if I did, there’s no controlling legal authority”. ( Which of course, he just “happened” to know).
DOT- Liberals claim to “love the youth”, yet they have killed more than 45 million “youths” since Roe vs. Wade was enacted. As soon as they got God out of the classroom they promptly began HAVING SEX WITH THE STUDENTS! Then of course there was the “Sex Ed” course in Michigan for 11 yr olds that featured ANAL FISTING and GOLDEN SHOWERS as topics du jour! They also attack the Boy Scouts like rabid dogs for not wanting to be sodomized on camping trips! (Which clearly a large percentage of homosexuals will do, given the chance, NAMBLA anyone?)
Then there are the sex surveys for 10 yr olds that they have delivered to every school district in the nation, with questions like, “Where do your negative views of Homosexuality come from? Could it be from your parents and if so, do you think they could be wrong?” and the always pleasing, “How do you know homosexuality is bad, if you haven’t TRIED IT?” The clothing for pre-teens with JUICY printed on the rear, is charming as well.
So in the end, these seemingly nice people, at least they tell us they’re nice, seem to be diametrically opposed to all that you hold dear, yet you strangely draw no conclusions as to their motivations! Perhaps, just in this ONE instance, you could examine this like the liberals always want us to, you know, “Why do they hate us so much”? Maybe then you’ll search the Lord, and come up with THE ANSWER. IMHO, I am reminded of the Parable of the Wheat and the TARES. While the original statement of this parable confused the Apostles( Matt 13:24-30), the explanation given later in the chapter was pretty clear, IF you believe Jesus Christ.
( Matt 13:36-41)
36. Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
37. He answered and said unto them,He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
38. The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
39. The enemy that sowed them is the DEVIL; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
40. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
41. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
THAT’S WHY YOU CAN’T UNDERSTAND THEM, they are DIFFERENT, they are ANATHEMA, They are diametically opposed to all that is good and decent. Patriotism, that feeling of pride that you got when Bush stood on that damn rubble and promised those murderous bastards that they’ll get what’s comin’ to ‘em, isn’t shared by them, they weren’t proud, they wished he’d be quiet. They don’t want to do anything but tear down and take away from all the you hold dear. They have a different Father and it IS NOT JESUS CHRIST. As Christ once told them….Their father is the DEVIL and it is HIS WORK that they are desirous of doing. JOHN 8:44
Soothsayer on September 24, 2006 at 12:45 AM
Hardly a smoking gun, but something kind of darkly humorous:
Here is a quote on the memorial from Napolitano:
“This (the memorial) will not only commemorate the losses but reaffirm the history,” Napolitano said.
Gotta love that shit!
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/1118911memorial.html
tommy1 on September 24, 2006 at 12:55 AM
Soothsayer …
Please contact me. WorldsReality@yahoo.com
Gregor on September 24, 2006 at 2:06 AM
How is it that these America-hating assholes always seem to highjack these projects, going all the way back to the Viet Nam wall? Where are the citizens and taxpayers and right-headed people to look over these jerk-off’s shoulders? Instead of a stink after the damn things are in place, this crap should be stopped before they’re even off the drawing board. Or actually, these inane people shouldn’t even be chosen to do the project.
Jeff on September 24, 2006 at 2:34 AM
Ugh. I think I’m going to hurl.
Liberals.. there is a line and you have crossed it.
Theworldisnotenough on September 24, 2006 at 3:02 AM
What is this horror / freakshow? I must’ve been out of the news for some time now, because this whole thing still makes absolutely no sense.
RD on September 24, 2006 at 4:23 AM
If being “factual” is the only criteria, the USS Arizona memorial at Pearl Harbor should have inscriptions mentioning Commodore Perry and the Enola Gay I suppose.
Wait…what am I saying? Haven’t been to Pearl in decades. The memorial probably does now mention both. And more.
Essex on September 24, 2006 at 7:11 AM
/
LZVandy on September 24, 2006 at 8:25 AM
There is nothing factual in history departments of liberal universities anymore.
LZVandy on September 24, 2006 at 8:26 AM
Looks like a great site to demo a Daisycutter for the students of AZ.
Hening on September 24, 2006 at 8:47 AM
After I’m done taking the pictures today i’ll pop smoke lol!
AZPatriot on September 24, 2006 at 9:16 AM
Soothsayer…
Fantastic post. I’ve saved it for posterity and for those times when I need to remind myself the motivation of the hippies on the left.
That’s not too often necessary, though.
I’ve e-mailed Representative Pearce. Probably won’t have too much effect given that I’m not a constituent. Hopefully he turn his shock into action and have those slogans removed.
Funny that Olby’s name doesn’t appear on the committee roster…
Corky on September 24, 2006 at 9:56 AM
I thought the East Valley Tribune article had a liberal bias. For instance, it did not even mention the crescent moon design of the memorial.
Whoever designed it knowingly designed it with a Muslim design because the crescent moon design is immediately apparent. Someone needs to find out who the architect was and why he was inspired to have a Muslim motif for a 9/11 memorial.
januarius on September 24, 2006 at 10:01 AM
An real memorial for Donna Bird’s husband, Gary Bird.
MamaAJ on September 24, 2006 at 10:38 AM
I’m trying to get my mind around that quote:
“You don’t win battles of terrorism with more battles.”
Pray tell, how do you win any war then?
I’m going to start calling people who say irrational things like that Vichy-Americans as it’s the closest comparison I can think of.
I think one of these liberals needs to get in touch with God ’cause He’s planning a final battle at the end of it all. The libs better inform God that one doesn’t win battles by having a battle because He’s under the impression that one does.
(People like this lib make my brain hurt)
Mojave Mark on September 24, 2006 at 11:19 AM
The wording made me think of Mao’s Little Red Book so I set up to find some quaotations to compare and lo and behold on a Marxist site I found:
Chairman Mao lives! Viva the big fat mass murderer! He has left many children.
I would ask who these memorializers think the enemy is. It looks like the enemy is not the memorial commision crowd. The enemy is not the terrorists. Could the enemy be us?
entagor on September 24, 2006 at 11:57 AM
Mojave Mark,
The libs don’t believe in God; they believe in Man.
And the question of how one wins a battle, much less a war, really hasn’t occured to them. That’s because they’re completely opposed to armed conflict of any kind, for any reason. I think this is why we’re not hearing any real solutions out of the Left. When you boil it all down, all they can come up with is “Bush Lied!” and “more U.N. talks.”
They are like the kidnapped Fox News people. When a gun is pointed at their head, they’ll take the path of least resistance and convert to Islam.
Dave Shay on September 24, 2006 at 12:02 PM
Dave Shay, libs believe that Man ruins everything he/she touches, thus I must disagree with your assessment. They will even refute their own ideologies if they can use that to gain a political advantage.
Getting back to the monument, does anyone know what that piece of
@#$!trash cost, and who payed for it?Someone needs to be held accountable for that travesty.
DannoJyd on September 24, 2006 at 12:10 PM
Feeling of invincibility lost?
This from the state that can’t keep the little guys with sombreros from swarming them?
Cancel thought. Maybe having hordes of little guys who will pick lettuce for $50 an hour until the sun don’t shine makes these nutters feel invincible. It sure made McCain feel invincible.
You may have nukes and fatwas, but we have more lettuce pickers than you can shake a stick at, and they will obey our every command if we pay them, and cut our lawns too!
Cancel thought. These nutters must be projecting the invincibility shield onto the Bushies: think you are invincible Mr. Big Shot Unelected President just because you have a war and everything? Well how do you like 911 Mr. Big Shot. Oops, 911 came first. Think a war will stop an attack Mr. Big Shot Commander in Chief? When did a war ever win anything?
Maybe 911 took away the nutter’s sense of invincibility. Perhaps they fear the little guys in Sombreros will stop mowing their lawns.
entagor on September 24, 2006 at 12:36 PM
Since Hitler’s Germany and Tojo’s Japan were de facto terror states (Battan Death March, etc. /Nazi Holocaust) I guess we made a mistake in fighting them?
Maybe they could add that quote to this laughable insult posing as a “Memorial” (before a flight of A-10 warthogs sends its sorry ass surrenderology to Allah)?
profitsbeard on September 24, 2006 at 3:16 PM
Another wrong perpetrated by the left.
It won’t be destroyed and the faithful (of the left) will eventually go there to be married in a place that they can relate to (politically).
Only one place, hopefully.
tormod on September 24, 2006 at 3:19 PM
Ok Allah, I’ve got the pictures taken and should have them for you here shortly. I have to say my radar was jammed on this one because I didn’t see it coming. The design is of a crescent but it’s done in a way that it only stands out when your standing in the middle of the memorial. It also isn’t facing east, it’s more south facing.
I’m going through the photos and clearing up where one message bleeds over into another one. The way it’s laid out all of the messages are situated between the points of the crescent and are kind of crammed together. Also I’ll be including pictures of both of the plaques that are there.
AZPatriot on September 24, 2006 at 4:35 PM
Ok it’s a big zip file but I decided not to edit any of it so that know one can make any accusations.
AZPatriot on September 24, 2006 at 5:12 PM
Whoops link didn’t take Memorial.zip
AZPatriot on September 24, 2006 at 5:13 PM
Dave Shay: Liberals are only pacifists when it comes to fighting in wars that start during Republican administrations. Remember Clinton and Serbia, an unilateral, illegal war of choice without UN sanction against a country that had no WMDs, didn’t attack us, and was no threat to us (all of the lib talking points against the Iraq war). And if you examine the placards wielded by the hard left in their ANSWER-organized “anti-war” demonstrations, they clearly don’t mind war — as long as it’s against Americans, Israelis, or other Western interests.
As for why the left always gets their say in memorials such as this: The problem is there are very few conservatives in the arts. Conservatives need to get more involved in the arts, so the left doesn’t have a monopoly.
Cato on September 24, 2006 at 6:03 PM
Okay, now I’ve looked through AZ Patriot’s photos (thanks, AP!).
There’s at least one other questionable statement on the memorial that hasn’t been highlighted thus far: “Patriotism peaks.” What the hell do they mean by that? I suppose the ASU professor signed off on its factuality too.
Cato on September 24, 2006 at 6:18 PM
Sorry to keep posting, but I can’t help myself:
One more outrageous statement on the memorial: “Middle East violence motivates attacks in US.” Yup, that about sums up Osama’s motivation. 9/11 was really a cry for peace.
I counted at least seven multi-culti statements on there, such as “fear of foreigners,” “foreign-born Americans afraid” (actual quotes — btw, my wife and my parents are foreign-born, and not one of them was afraid) and “interfaith… understanding.” One would never know who the hijackers were from reading these statements, only the sense that they might be “foreigners.” (Btw, my wife and my parents are foreign-born, and not one of them was “afraid” — except of radical Islamists.) The word “Muslim” is used only once, as part of the phrase, “Standing with Muslims against terrorism.”
There is a brief mention of Flight 93, thusly: “9:35 AM FLT 93 PASSENGERS FIGHT HIJACKERS.” No mention of who the hijackers were, or what happened to the plane. And of all the quotes on the memorial, they couldn’t find room for one of the most famous from that day — “Let’s roll.”
The last line on the plaque is also very dubious: “Decisions make history. Moving memories reveals it. The sun shines on us all.” Taken in the full context of the memorial’s statements (”fear of foreigners,” “cultural understanding,” “you don’t win battles of terrorism with more battles,” etc., etc.), and you get the sense that the creators were trying, however subtly, to pin the blame for 9/11 on America.
One of my favorite juxtapositions: The statement, “Last faint words, ‘Help me,’” is followed by, “People of Yuma plant trees.” That completely sums up the left’s preferred response to terror.
Cato on September 24, 2006 at 6:56 PM
Originally posted at Ace’s:
I posted the transcript of the KAET interview with designers of the memorial on a previous thread [at Ace's]. However, just in case nobody else noticed it, Eddie Jones isn’t the only designer talking like a peacenik. Referring first to an interfaith meeting [with about 10 religions; wanna bet the Muslims were there] and then to the memorial, Matt Salenger says:
I think the most important thing that they did was really — they were calling for peace. And all the memorial, the most important thing I think about the memorial is that we need to remember, you know, the events of 9/11 because of where it’s brought us today. And it’s important to understand those pieces. It’s led us into war and it’s important to understand if there were misleadings into that based on 9/11. We need to remember those things. And they brought all that up and brought up peace.
http://www.kaet.asu.edu/horizon/transcripts.asp?ID=368
tommy1 on September 24, 2006 at 8:06 PM
More info. I shot Professor Stowe an email earlier today. I’ve already posted what I have to say at Ace’s, I’ll just post it here for the record:
—
Noel Stowe seems to be indicating that he played no real role in planning the memorial. (Though there may be a bit of ambiguity.)
I shot Professor Stowe an email earlier today asking him a few questions such as what role he played and to what extent he was involved in the decision making process and he simply responded with this short reply:
Hi—we had a grant to work on the memorial through the department but I was not directly involved in the planning of the memorial.
Does that mean he played no role at all? I don’t know, but that is all he said.
Another possibility for the fact checking historian might be Catherine May (Senior Historical Analyst/Archivist) according to the minutes. I see on an ASU page that she is listed as an alumni of the University. I’ll have to check whether or not she is actually a professor there.
It is also possible that it went through a professor not mentioned in the minutes: I guess the Al Gore-obsessed Professor Longley [mentioned on a thread at Ace's] might be back in the running after all.
It’s a whodunit.
tommy1 on September 24, 2006 at 8:21 PM
Here’s a question for the fact-checker, once he or she is revealed: just what the hell is a “battle of terrorism”? Maybe they can collaborate with the English department on some kind of joint statement, so we can all better understand this fascinating new use of the English language and its “factuality”…
I’d like some reporter (with balls) to press him on this question, right after he’s assured them all the engravings are “factual”.
RD on September 25, 2006 at 8:42 AM
Comment pages: