Tom Burnett’s father asks for son’s name to be removed from “Islamic” Flight 93 memorial
posted at 10:40 am on August 20, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Remember this? After the initial blog furor, the designer closed up the crescent a bit (but not entirely) to make it into what they now call “the Bowl.” Most of us let it go at that point, but … not everyone. Follow the link and just keep scrolling, just keep scrolling, just keep scrolling. As I said when I wrote about this last year: if you need a protractor to properly express your outrage, you’ve probably gone too far.
Tom Burnett’s father evidently disagrees:
“It’s something I’d rather not do, but I can’t get anyone to listen,” said Tom Burnett Sr., of Northfield, Minn. “In a sense, I’m asking for a call to action.”
Mr. Burnett, who served on the Stage II jury that picked the winning design originally named “Crescent of Embrace,” said that he raised his concerns about using a crescent-shaped grouping of red maple trees around the crash site then.
“It’s almost as though it’s intentional,” he said. “This design should not invoke any Islamic impression of any sort.”…
[Memorial superintendent Joanne] Hanley said she wants to be respectful to the Burnett family and his next of kin, but she continued, the design, including all 40 names, was approved by the families and the Department of the Interior, and that is the design that will be built.
Follow the link for a bullet-point list of some of the, um, more “lucid” claims about the memorial’s alleged Islamic pedigree. Exit question: Isn’t this really Deena Burnett’s call?
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: 1 2 Next »
I thought the site already had enough of an Islamic ‘impression.’
James on August 20, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Another reason why I hate the park service. Why not have a landscaped park with a visitor center instead of some big-ass memorial?
Blake on August 20, 2007 at 10:52 AM
Ditto
right2bright on August 20, 2007 at 10:53 AM
We could just add yet another crescent of trees (red ones) around the perimeter, close it off with more red trees, and connect one side of the “crescent” with the other with a straight line in red trees….
THAT would be more appropriate.
(Okay, if you can’t picture it, I’m suggesting a Big Red Circle and slash through it, around the crescent.)
tickleddragon on August 20, 2007 at 10:54 AM
Or at least, we could wait until it’s already built and just draw the big red line ourselves in red spraypaint.
tickleddragon on August 20, 2007 at 10:55 AM
I guess we should have made the Pearl Harbor Memorial in the shape of a rising sun… /sarc
I’m all for being tolerant but this reflexive multi-culturalism gets really old.
rockbend on August 20, 2007 at 10:55 AM
Okay, I’m no wild-eyed conspiracy theorist, but DUDE…that design sure looked like the Islamic crescent. Still does after the “redesign.” I don’t blame Mr. Burnett for being offended. What a stupid design to use for that particular memorial.
aero on August 20, 2007 at 11:03 AM
I cannot express to you the support Mr. Burnett is getting here. The local liberals and democruds are scurrying for cover here because they want no part of an interview where this is the topic. Mr.Burnett is a hero just like his son. Cindy Sheehan hang your head in mortal shame…. Let’s roll!
MNDavenotPC on August 20, 2007 at 11:07 AM
I cannot think of words strong enough to express the outrage I feel over this. Those in charge of the Flight 93 Memorial Project are obviously going to intentionally build a Mosque to celebrate the terrorist victory of 9/11/01. Were I to speak freely and suggest what I think should happen to these people Allahpundit would probably find it necessary to ban me with extreme prejudice.
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 11:12 AM
sometimes a crecent is just a crecent.
zane on August 20, 2007 at 11:12 AM
I’m not going to take sides. I will say, that having seen it (it’s only a 90 minute drive from here), I think they should leave it just as it is and build nothing. If you don’t understand that, I suggest you visit Shanksville and see for yourself.
rightwingprof on August 20, 2007 at 11:19 AM
A crescent should never have been visualized in the first place. There were plenty of other geometric shapes to choose from. That being said, I believe Mr. Burnett is only seeing what he wants to see in the final design.
We should do less dilly-dallying over memorial designs and more bludgeoning of these Islamist bastards into submission. That way we won’t need any more memorials.
awake on August 20, 2007 at 11:21 AM
And no matter how hard you try to polish it, a turd is still a turd.
Kowboy on August 20, 2007 at 11:22 AM
That point to Mecca…
That can be used to calculate the Islamic prayer times…
Just a big coincidence really… The crescent being a popular shape throughout American history and Western history for that matter.
TheBigOldDog on August 20, 2007 at 11:24 AM
Not if its being used in a memorial for victims of Islamic terrorists.
EnochCain on August 20, 2007 at 11:24 AM
http://errortheory.blogspot.com/
TheBigOldDog on August 20, 2007 at 11:27 AM
zane:
sometimes a fool is just a fool.
To Everyone else…
Remember the Crescent Anti-American 9/11 Arizona Memorial?
http://hotair.com/archives/2006/09/26/arizonas-moonbat-memorial/
VinceP1974 on August 20, 2007 at 11:31 AM
I think if they would just use a non-crescent shape, there wouldn’t even be an issue.
Bad Candy on August 20, 2007 at 11:36 AM
A protractor is precisely what the imams use to calculate the proper angle to Mecca.
A bit off-topic; about time you guys got that preview button in here. It works like a charm.
steveegg on August 20, 2007 at 11:37 AM
So zane and I are the only ones who think this is a tad overblown?
Oh well.
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 11:39 AM
yeah but take heart, i am the only polished turd.
zane on August 20, 2007 at 11:41 AM
zane on August 20, 2007 at 11:12 AM
And sometimes people with names like zane choose to follow lying murdering thieving pedophiles, not that you personally are a member of a homicidal death cult that walks in circles around a rock that fell from space proving that it’s favorite pedophile really was gods only prophet. I’m just saying, you know sometimes…
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 11:45 AM
Sorry, AP. A memorial where the most-obvious orientation is in line with Mecca and only Mecca, and where the most-obvious layout is that of the Islamic crescent stinks like a fresh roadkill skunk to me.
steveegg on August 20, 2007 at 11:46 AM
I guess we were overdue for a Truth movement on the right. Enjoy!
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 11:48 AM
I think the entire area should be carved into a giant representation of Mohammed’s face.
It will leave an “islamic impression”, but think of all of the riots in the muslim world over it.
I’m just saying….
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 11:48 AM
I would be willing to bet you that he was PAID by some Wahabbi person to implement the Islamic symbols into the design. The problem is that most non-muslims in America won’t even know. This is why Islam is dangerous to America. Most of America doesn’t know, so whatever they say (either lie or not) is what American’s ‘know’ about Islam.
This is dangerous. Most Muslims want to celebrate 9/11 as a victory. They won’t actually SAY those words in English, but they believe them. In our town where KSM (9/11 mastermind) went to college, we have the Fox American Idol concert ‘celebration’ in town ON 9/11. I’m sure it is coincidental, and I wouldn’t go to it no matter what day it was. But I don’t think there should be celebrations on that day.
The sharia creep takes many forms. Lots of sharia creep comes because Americans are ignorant.
zane, to YOU it is probably just a crescent. BUT to MUSLIMS, it is ‘proof’ that their religion is ‘the greatest’. The symbolism is everywhere and their ‘god’ made it that way.
But everyone, I hate to say it, but there is nothing you can do about it. Just be aware and watch it happen. Americans do not care as a whole because they don’t see it as significant.
Sorry for the long post.
ThackerAgency on August 20, 2007 at 11:50 AM
So, AP, is it that you don’t think it looks like the Islamic crescent, or you don’t think it matters if it does, or something else? Just curious about your point of view on this.
Truthfully, I have no idea if it points to Mecca or not and don’t particularly care. But the choice of a red crescent seems tasteless all by itself, regardless of measurements, direction, etc. Just a dumb choice, that’s all. I’m not worked up about it, though I’m mildly irritated that smart people would choose this design and then act surprised when people question its symbolism.
aero on August 20, 2007 at 11:53 AM
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 11:39 AM
Well you are after all an atheist, so it really would be surprising if you were to be offended by having a memorial to those resisting Islam turned into a Islamic symbol.
Exit question: Are atheists encouraged to practice taqiah?
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Well Allah, what do you make of the extra markers at the site for the hijackers? Do you think they should be honored? Or maybe you think there just needs to be extra space in case there are another few people who happen to ‘pop up’ as victims in this crash. Were the hijackers victims too? Did they victimize themselves and need to be honored?
Maybe you think they should be celebrated as heroes in a prominant place in the memorial. Because without the hijackers there would be no memorial anyway, so they obviously are the most important.
You are right though, we are all just paranoid at the ‘coincidences’ that cannot be changed at any cost.
ThackerAgency on August 20, 2007 at 11:55 AM
My collie says:
CyberCipher on August 20, 2007 at 11:56 AM
All kidding aside, if you follow this logic to it’s end, then no Christian should attend the Super Bowl, because, after all, a bowl is merely two connected crescents!!!!!!
OMFG ISLAMIC PLOT!!!
I never understood religous symbolism. For example, the number one religion of the world uses as it’s primary symbol a representation of the device that was used to torture and kill their saviour.
Now, if I were beaten to death with a baseball bat and somehow was brought back to life 2000 years later and found two billion people wearing symbolic representations of the same bat that was used to beat me to death, I would get the willies.
In other words, like most other parts of religion, the symbology also makes no sense and therefore who gives a shit about this subliminal crescent.
However, if a significant portion of the families representing the slain passengers wished to change it, it should be changed out of respect. I do not think it whould be done for just one.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 11:57 AM
Now maybe people are a touch sensitive about this crescent thing, but it is kind of a kick in the teeth. What if it were a cross, or a star of David, or a Buddha? No one would think those appropriate because they’re “religious.” The Crescent is the symbol of Islam and people who followed Islam perpetrated 9/11.
It’s probably something akin to a swastika being used in a Holocaust memorial.
mjk on August 20, 2007 at 12:03 PM
Allah, that’s like saying someone is a little bit pregnant. There are no degrees of overblownness here. This is not a coincidence. As someone said above, if they’d just put up a monument with some names, this would not be an issue.
This has obviously been hijacked by multiculti America haters who see Islamist terror as the appropriate response to America’s “crimes.”
rivlax on August 20, 2007 at 12:03 PM
Why build anything? If it were my land, I’d plow it under, and plant corn. In the shape of a cross of course.
Masscon on August 20, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Demonstrating that same clear, lucid, rational thinking that led you to believe there’s a giant man in the sky that will punish you for thinking the wrong thoughts?
A rational persons ability to see through the god delusion does not negate our self preservation skills.
I would be more offended by a Mosque being built on that site than a Christian church simply because a mosque is also a symbol of the “political ideology” that Islam represents, and it is a political ideology that wants to kill me.
However, a crescent is merely half of a circle. Most memorials involve circles somewhere in their design. People that see a cresent in that design see it for the same reason that they saw two random steel girders as representing a cross at ground zero.
For most of human history, if we didn’t practice taqiah, we would be tortured, beaten or ostracised by the ignorant masses that believed in their sky god and gods.
(Counts the number of posts until some ignorant theist brings up Stalin, Hitler and Mao and thinks they won the debate with their irrelevent and easily disputed point)
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 12:09 PM
Let’s turn this around with a thought experiment…
Say 19 Christians flew planes into various places in the ME. They did it in the name of Jesus.
Then as a tribute to the Middle Easterners who were on the plane, the Islamic Parks Department decides to build a memorial in the loose shape of three crosses…
What would happen? What would be a possible reaction?
benrand on August 20, 2007 at 12:12 PM
Why don’t the beaurocrats at the Park Service build a Mosque there?
The Mosque of the Holy Mass Murder.
…Perfect!
Mojave Mark on August 20, 2007 at 12:12 PM
How about a smoking half-mile wide crater situated precisely at the center of whatever Pakistani goat-herder village Bin Laden is currently hiding in?
Now that’d be a nice memorial.
They can even put a crescent of pretty red trees around it, if they want.
Come to think it, they can even have a big arrow pointing towards Mecca. Might come in handy.
Professor Blather on August 20, 2007 at 12:19 PM
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 12:09 PM
Now that you have once again dazzled us with your grasp of logic I guess you have no problem with crosses placed in federal buildings since a cross is just two lines that intersect at a 90% angle with the horizontal intersection occurring at 80% of the distance of the vertical.
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 12:21 PM
I have no problems with crosses in public buildings.
Go meditate on that.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 12:22 PM
How anyone reads that and then calls Burnett’s concerns “a tad overblown” is just plain frightening.
Proof that we perceive things through our ideologies and shape events to appear just as we want them, I guess.
Professor Blather on August 20, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Seconded.
Where do I donate?
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 12:24 PM
You have got to be kidding. That comment falls so far down on the asshole meter I’m not even certain how to address it. IT’S A FREAKING CRESENT AND IT’S CALLED THE “CRESENT EMBRACE” and if you don’t care that the symbol of our enemies is sitting on the graves of the 9-11 heroes then Malkin should fire you, yesterday. What about it Michelle is this the kind of blogger you want on your staff?
Allah I just finished listening to Mr. Burnett on KSTP here in Minnesota. A voice from a father, an American. On the other hand you sir are one sick pathetic condescending prick. How dare you drivel your dismissive spit on the memories of 9-11 victims of Islam.
I was there in New York after the FIRST Islamic terrorist attack on the World Trade Towers. It let an impression. We Americans remember that and 9-11. We care that our nation has been attacked by Islam, we remember that, you clearly don’t.
Timber Wolf on August 20, 2007 at 12:25 PM
I cannot think of words strong enough to express the outrage I feel over this.
shooter on August 20, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Once it was known that the memorial was a monument to Islam it should have been scrapped, not altered slightly. Building a memorial to celebrate the ideology that motivated Jihadi’s seeking paradise to kill so many people would be a final and lasting indignity to the victims. If they want to put a symbol of Islam at the site, it should be a mosaic on the pathway to the memorial that everyone will have to walk across to access the site.
FloatingRock on August 20, 2007 at 12:31 PM
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 12:22 PM
This coming from a guy who has dedicated his life to eliminating the delusion of religion, yea, right
There is that taqiah thing of yours involuntarily kicking in again I guess.
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 12:31 PM
It left an impression? I was two blocks away on 9/11. I heard the second jet go in and people screaming outside my window. Don’t you lecture me on who cares and who doesn’t. And the next time you call me or anyone else on this site a “prick,” you’re banned. Got me?
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Just HAD to see that again.
thx timberwolf, I’m with you 100%
shooter on August 20, 2007 at 12:35 PM
its ALL about the timing.
NUANCE!
shooter on August 20, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Sometimes a swastica is just a swastica.
gmoonster on August 20, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Me thinks your natural inclination to play devils advocate hath invoked itself upon the wrong subject here AP. You may be the uber-webmaster-super-sysop-god here, but that doesn’t prevent you from being insensitive and just plain stupid at times.
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 12:40 PM
Give me some evidence of intent, then. Writings, interviews, video clips, something showing that the designer or the park officials purposely set out to do this. And then explain to me why Tom Burnett’s father is the only family member objecting to the memorial notwithstanding the two-year campaign to “prove” to them that it’s actually an Islamist trojan horse.
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 12:43 PM
While the Mecca-facing crescent may well be a (very unlikely, IMO) co-incidence, the fact that there are 40 blocks to commemorate the victims – including the 4 hijackers – ought to send out alarm signals.
Also, while one may disagree about whether or not Islam is worth honoring at all (until such time that most people wake up to what it really is), the fact remains that on that flight, the only Muslims on that plane were the 4 hijackers. As a result, it’s plainly despicable that this memorial (of any memorial) should even appear to be a monument to Islam. The Paul Murdoch foundation ought to be fired from this job, and that should be granted to a different organization that doesn’t have Shariah as its agenda.
Why aren’t more families of the passengers raising an outcry over this?
infidelpride on August 20, 2007 at 12:43 PM
Pardon me, dorian? I’ve had one commenter here call me a “prick,” another one second the motion, and you accuse me of being an Islamist apologist despite the literally thousands of posts I’ve written on this site about the Islamist menace, all because I disagree with the concerns over the memorial. Who’s being insensitive?
Standard disclaimer time: you’re invited to e-mail Michelle and ask her to replace me. Be sure to call me a “prick” who’s no better than Ted Rall in your e-mail so that she notices.
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 12:43 PM
But then maybe you just have a reading comprehension problem……
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 12:47 PM
People can be more complex than you seem to understand. I understand that, you prefer simple explanations. If all things can be broken down to God or Satan, then thinking isn’t nearly as hard.
Having a cross in a public building does me no harm. Neither does lighting a Christmas Tree, a Menorrah, building a statue of Shiva or building a temple of Poseidon. FOr that matter, a statue of Harry Potter.
I am not afraid of symbols.
When laws start being changed to implement one religion or another and taking away my rights then I am afraid. Until then, enjoy parading your symbolic representation of the torture device that was used to kill your deity if it makes you happy.
I, however, will pass on wearing the Dawkins T-Shirt as there is safety in taqiah.
I know I am in a minority in the Republican party, but associating with Christians is a small price to pay to keep America hating sociolists out of power. So, although I do not accept your beliefs, I accept that your beliefs help me politically.
Now consider this, if secular conservatives like me (even if we only constitute 5% of the republican party) are cast out and go Democrat, how many elections will Republicans win.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 12:51 PM
May I suggest a mosaic of the Danish cartoon depicting their
prophetpedophile wearing the turban bomb?Texas Nick 77 on August 20, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Pull your pants up and act like a man AP, I am not the one who called you a prick or accuse you of being an Islamist apologist, nor even suggested that Michelle fire you. I happen to like your work and think that for the most part you do an excellent job here.
What I did suggest is that you are being very insensitive to the feelings of your readers who unlike you are of religious faith and who happen to place a very significant value upon religious symbols. I also pointed out that your being editor and chief here does not make you infallible or immune to making mistakes, for god’s sake don’t fall into the same trap as Franklin Foer.
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 1:00 PM
Correction above – should have said 44 blocks.
Allah, why are you not convinced about the evidence very painstakingly laid out in the Error Theory site that you reference above? I too would have dismissed it as a conspiracy theory, except that after a certain number of co-incidenced, one has to concede that it is real. The one about the Mecca orientation is particularly glaring. So is the part about the disguised tributes to the 4 hijackers.
infidelpride on August 20, 2007 at 1:04 PM
Oh and we must respect what people believe without evidence at all times.
You really need to see this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPAC_cGVnUg
Although I doubt it will affect you much.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 1:04 PM
This has nothing to do to with religious faith or symbols. If you can show me that the designers intended this to be an Islamic symbol — and I’m not talking about some bizarre bisection model vis-a-vis Mecca, I’m talking about statements, prior writings, something concrete — then I’ll happily side with you in saying the memorial should be redone. I’m not saying “it doesn’t matter if it’s an Islamic symbol,” I’m saying “it’s not an Islamic symbol.” Stop dragging atheism into it.
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 1:05 PM
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 12:51 PM
If secular conservatives like you go democrat, it will be because thats what you chose to do, not because you were cast out. The single most profound difference between atheists like you and people of faith like me is, I can live with your delusions of intellectual superiority without being threatened by your presumption to know the unknowable, whereas you obviously cannot live with my acceptance that there are some thing beyond explanation.
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 1:06 PM
Thirded. Is that a word?
RobertCSampson on August 20, 2007 at 1:07 PM
Geez, guys, back off of AP. He’s the main reason I come here–his wit and humor combined with insightful analysis and interesting news bits make HA fun. He’s allowed to have an opinion that is different from commenters’, isn’t he? What is he supposed to do, take a poll of commenters next time before he posts so he can be sure to agree with the majority? Just cut him some slack. He’s a good blogger.
aero on August 20, 2007 at 1:08 PM
Allahpundit on August 20, 2007 at 1:05 PM
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 1:04 PM
I would love to stay and discuss this longer, but unfortunately it is Corona time and I’m the one suppose to pick them up for the other individuals in my beer swilling circle, er would that be crescent?
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 1:08 PM
Can we all agree that this “Crescent of Embrace” design is a bad idea?
Kinda of like using a “Swastika of Remembrance” to mark a Holocaust memorial.
Mike Honcho on August 20, 2007 at 1:08 PM
If what you say is so obvious, then why has only one family objected to this? If a significant portion of the familes objected, even if they were a minority, you would have more credibility.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 1:09 PM
And some people wonder why the traffic here is down….
Capitalist Infidel on August 20, 2007 at 1:10 PM
You are forgetting that you are dealing with people that do not require evidence to believe in something.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 1:10 PM
aero on August 20, 2007 at 1:08 PM
You are of course correct
Atheism is only in it because as an atheist religious symbols have so little meaning to you that perhaps you fail to understand how much they mean to individuals of faith.
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 1:13 PM
The world won’t end if this memorial has Islamic influences – Which I think is pretty obvious, especially if you’ve ever seen what tops the minaret of most mosques, and understand the habit of bowing to Mecca during prayer. However, it doesn’t belong in any form at this memorial. A cross would have been more appropriate, but just imagine the howls that THAT would have caused.
gmoonster on August 20, 2007 at 1:18 PM
doriangrey on August 20, 2007 at 1:06 PM
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 1:22 PM
Hehe Inverse the quoted parts of my comment and it makes more sense. Sorry.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 20, 2007 at 1:22 PM
I think I have the solution to all the trouble with the crescent shaped memorial.
Set up a large display with a cross on one side and a shield of David on the other so that during the daylight hours the memorial has a large shadow of a cross or shield of David cast across the crescent portion. If no Muslims complain, then it’s not a Islamic symbol to them, if they do, then it is. Case closed.
ScottG on August 20, 2007 at 1:24 PM
I’m an atheist who is apposed to any memorial at that site that is in any way reminiscent of an Islamic symbol, intentional or otherwise.
FloatingRock on August 20, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Allah
You actually seriously believe that the designers would be explicitly
brazenopen about this being an Islamic symbol, knowing the backlash it would invite if known? It’s like expecting Islamic leaders worldwide to explicitly state that they endorse the goals of Jihadists worldwide.Given the controversy that this design did cause in the first place, why didn’t they simply go back to the drawing board and come up with a different idea/theme? How difficult would that have been?
As to JayHaw’s comment about why other relatives haven’t objected, it could be anything – from them being uninformed about this theme – all the way to them being too scared to appear to be Islamophobes. Their lack of anger about this site doesn’t automatically make the non-Islamic claims of the designers authentic, or count as evidence in the other direction (in a manner of speaking).
This memorial could have been religious or secular – no problems either way. But it even looking islamic is an outrage – given the fact that the only Muslims on that flight were the 4 hijackers.
infidelpride on August 20, 2007 at 1:26 PM
AP, I tend to agree with you on the absence of conspiracy here, but calling your readers a bunch of truthers isn’t cool. Nobody here deserves that.
thebriand on August 20, 2007 at 1:28 PM
If it had nothing to do with islam then why even include the direction of Mecca in the first place? Since when does the direction to anywhere come into account when designing a memorial to fallen heroes?
1. Direction in degrees toward mecca.
2. Obvious crescent shape.
3. 4 markers that possibly are for the hijackers.
Too many coincidences for me.
Swinehound on August 20, 2007 at 1:38 PM
I am making a mental note and committment to remember this name:
Tom Burnett.
I don’t need a state funded memorial to remember him and his deed. Nor those who acted with him and since him.
The provinces burn while Rome deliberates.
Montana on August 20, 2007 at 1:46 PM
Re-posted for emphasis.
And get off AP’s back. He was providing his personal opinion on the matter, not purposefully being insensitive, naive or “atheistic” in any way.
Some of the responses here on this thread by the incensed to AP’s comments are curiously Islamic in nature, a la Muhammad cartoon depictions.
awake on August 20, 2007 at 1:49 PM
Wait a minute!
Isn’t Islam the Religion of Peace?
William
William2006 on August 20, 2007 at 1:51 PM
I agree completely. A memorial design that incorporates a red crescent facing mecca named Crescent of Embrace? Intentional or merely coincidental, those three factors disqualify it as an appropriate memorial to the victims.
I’m going to have to side with Tom Burett’s father on this. I’m not persuaded on the conspiracy theory, but as a memorial it is insensitive and therefore offensive.
Dork B. on August 20, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Allahpundit. I respect the work, effort, and price of visibility you pay for being here. That visibility makes you an easy target, not a fun thing I can only imagine. And I link in here constantly during the day to read what you and other post. So I get a lot of value from Hot Air.com at no expense to me. My thanks to you and the others for that.
On the Truther accusation you are floating about…
But if you ever start calling us Truthers, you’ll have one less reader in me. I can enjoy good sarcasm and over the top mud slinging from time to time, but what I’ve been seeing lately is giving me cause to pause and reconsider my frequent trips here.
I don’t know enough about this memorial to decide either way. But what I do know smacks of moral relativism and insensitivity to the very people the memorial is for.
But if I look it in more detail and end up aligned with those who don’t like the islamic overtones of the memorial, I remember that you called me a Truther because I didn’t align with you.
You’ve shown high contempt for many of your readers of late.
A few names for your to consider:
Linda Chavez
Michael Chertoff
Lindsay Graham
Montana on August 20, 2007 at 2:00 PM
Next, people will be seeing crescents and stars in their lucky charms….OK, maybe that was a bad example.
Where is the “star” in this memorial anyway?
awake on August 20, 2007 at 2:19 PM
whoa whoa whoa…what’s with all the hostility? It gets my heart racing just reading it.
Let’s turn this around and discuss the issues that unite us, like how Catholics aren’t Christians, before it is too late!
tlynch001 on August 20, 2007 at 2:30 PM
No. no. Look, you may be right about if you have to get a protracter out to be outraged, but the thing was called ““Crescent of Embrace,” by Paul Murdoch
I did not know that. That right there is enough to be outraged out imo. Good grief. Did no one say “That might be a tad insensitive???”
It was ridiculous beyond comprehension to invoke ANY sort of connection to Islam at all.
Forget the conspiracy theories on the actual design. Here is my thought.
The families all approved this?? I just don’t believe that. I just don’t. The voting was secret, was it not? Isn’t there some way to find out how people voted? Has anyone asked them? I think that would be the course to take.
If they really did approve it, then so be it. But I am just not buying that. Plus, I think Mr. Burnett has every right to not want his son’s name there if he is offended by the memorial. Hasn’t this man been through enough?? Haven’t we all?
Rightwingsparkle on August 20, 2007 at 2:31 PM
Again, I cannot profess any real knowledge about the memorial design. However, to your point above Indifelpride, please remember this:
Donations to the Red Cross poured in to the tune of millions of dollars after 9/11. People wanted to help. They wanted to do something. So they gave. Then they discovered that Red Cross wasn’t going to pass all that money onto the affected families. One of the uses the Red Cross determined for that money was for “Islam is nice and misunderstood” fund.
Ugh. I will not dispute the fact that many islamic people are friendly and peaceful. But c’mon. The use of donations to victims of Islamic terrorists to fund a Kumbiya Hand Holding ceremony for Islam??
Umm. No. Solicit funds for that specifically instead of sneaking those funds meant for victims of islamic terror.
Montana on August 20, 2007 at 2:41 PM
mjk on August 20, 2007 at 12:03 PM: “It’s probably something akin to a swastika being used in a Holocaust memorial.”
I agree.
I’m not convinced that the design of the memorial is “faith-neutral” much less absent Islamic symbolism. If Mr. Burnett wishes his son’s name removed, then his wishes should be honored.
georgej on August 20, 2007 at 2:43 PM
I agree with you, Allah, that all this protractor stuff is nonsense.
But still, you’d have to be a friggin’ idea to design a 9/11 memorial called “the Crescent of Embrace”. I mean, seriously. I don’t think it’s a conspiracy of any sort, but it boggles my mind how incredibly profoundly stupid that was.
I’m frustrated that they couldn’t find an artist with a bit of common sense. It’s really not hard to design a good memorial. It doesn’t need to make a bold statement, it just needs to have a memorial plaque on it. That’s all.
sandberg on August 20, 2007 at 2:46 PM
Many thanks to Allah for posting about what I have found in the Flight 93 Memorial, even if he is skeptical. About his skepticism, Allah writes:
If I am right, architect Paul Murdoch is perpetrating a sneak attack against America on behalf of the 9/11 terrorists. He is not going to admit it because that would keep him from getting away with it. But Murdoch does provide other kinds of proof. He wants to be able to claim his victory, once it is a fait accompli, and to this end has included numerous proofs of intent in his design.
One is the Islamic prayer time sundial. This is a very precisely configured structure which can only result from calculation. Contrary to what defenders of the crescent design are saying, it could never happen by accident.
Another is his repetition of the almost exact Mecca orientation of the giant crescent in the vast array of crescent of trees that surround his crescent shaped Tower of Voices. (The Islamic sundial.) A line across the most obtruding tips of the Tower crescents points 1.8 degrees north of Mecca, the same as the orientation of the central crescent.
Note also that Murdoch’s statements have been revealing. He lies about not knowing where there is another glass block on the flight path. Being caught lying is no small thing.
Alec on August 20, 2007 at 2:48 PM
So, what you are really saying is that we need a full congressional hearing with supeona power, to determine the intent of the designer since we can’t depose them? Okay. You’ve convinced me.
The fact that most people find this memorial offensive, whether others agree or not, is proof it should be nixed. A simple park is still the better idea instead of another monument that the usps can not maintain.
Blake on August 20, 2007 at 2:49 PM
Montana
I agree with you on the Red Cross. Aside from the mismanagement of funds and the diversion of excess funds to non-9/11 pet projects of theirs, the Red Cross – which in the past was apolitical to the point that even the Nazis didn’t interfare with them, although the Communists did – has been too politicized. For instance, in most Islamic countries, their branches are known as the ‘Red Crescent’, but in Israel, they nixed the idea for a ‘Red Magen David’ and instead ended up with a Red diamond for non-Christian and non-Muslim countries.
Alec
You did an yeoman’s job in exposing one of the most well disguised attempts at shariah, and that too on such a sacred memorial. Any idea what the status of the memorial currently is, and whether any other families (other than Tom Barnett) have spoken out against it?
infidelpride on August 20, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Uh oh. Allah thinking about “banning” folks cause “someone mocked him” Sound familiar.
Allah admit it. You were being flip. Just as you could have thought about your comment (not that you are not entitled to it), you decided to make your comment motivated by a desire to be petty, not because of a strong feeling that you should defend the “crescent”.
Knowing that others would have strong feelings, you injected yourself into the issue by intentionally pricking the ballooning discussion with a “who cares”.
Agrippa2k on August 20, 2007 at 2:56 PM
If you’ll read some of the other links that Allah provided, you would see that the ACTUAL CRASH SITE is in the place of the ’star’ of the Islamic symbol at this memorial.
Allah, those other links you provided showed plenty of proof that these things were not just random incidents. The memorial could be ANYTHING. so. . . ANYTHING even close to Islamic religious symbolism should be considered offensive to the victims of this hate crime. It should be changed. The only thing more obvious would be Arabic text from the Koran.
The sad part about it is these jihadis know now that 9/11 did more to advance the cause of Islam than anything anyone else has ever done in the west. Things like this encourage them to do even more, bigger, more outrageous terrorist attacks.
Just put a monument up in a forest of trees with no orientation whatsoever. What’s wrong with that? I will never visit this memorial in the configuration that it is now.
ThackerAgency on August 20, 2007 at 2:59 PM
A few questions I have:
“Crescent of Embrace”
Why embrace? What is being embraced? It is a memorial to remember fallen family/heroes, what exactly needs to be embraced?
Why a crescent? Why place the location of the crash site almost completely outside of the memorial grounds? One would think that the the site would be center to the memorial and center AT the memorial.
But something that raises a flag with me is this from the Mission Statement:
“Educate visitors about the contexts of the events of September 11, 2001
Just what “contexts” need to be covered here? It is an historical event, there were set actions taken by set individuals that ended with the crash of the plane. I always get uneasy when someone wants to teach the “contexts” of historical events.
But the main concern I had, and still have even though they have now changed the name to “The Bowl”, is the idea of “Embrace”. Looking at the picture of the site, having the crash site almost completely outside of the crescent does not make one think of embrace. I seldom embrace something by holding it at arms length away from me.
The site is going to be built. People are going to stand on the “Sacred Ground” (no religious overtones there) turn to look at the “crescent” and be looking towards Mecca. These are facts. Whether they have any impact on the people that visit it will be another story, but I doubt a Muslim that stands on on the “Sacred Ground” looking towards Mecca at the site will be affected the same way as non-Muslims that are unaware of its meaning.
It will be interesting to see what the site will teach visitors about the “contexts” of Sept. 11, 2001.
Voidseeker on August 20, 2007 at 3:07 PM
If it came as close to implying a cross as it does to implying a crescent, and had the word “cross” in its name, wether intentional or not, wouldn’t the ACLU cry foul? Or am I assuming incorrectly?
Dork B. on August 20, 2007 at 3:12 PM
Truther!!!
Racist!!!!
Bigot!!!!!
Anti-Multiculturalist!!!!!!
Heh. Sorry, just had to.
Look, I am ALL for being skeptical when it comes to conspiracy theories. I prefer a rational approach and given that Truthers disgust me, I am loathe to read too much into this memorial debate.
What is all boils down to me is yet another act of moral relativism.
It is simply not ok to make this memorial in any way suggestive of respect for the religion of the killers.
ThackerAgency got it right above.
Go get money to build such a memorial yourself, but don’t build it off the tragic and heroic actions of our fellow Americans.
And one last note on Allah, if I was in his shoes, I would have ticked off the entire readership months ago. Not proud of that fact, but the truth hurts and I sometimes suck (like my post grammar and spelling…yeouch)
Montana on August 20, 2007 at 3:14 PM
ThackerAgency,
I did read them. My initial post was that the crescent was always a bad idea for a lack of taste from the begining. Originally naming it the “crescent embrace”, an even worse idea.
Constructing permanent memorials of any sort, in my opinion, only emboldens the Islamists. They will become more like testimonials than memorials. Eliminate the need for memorials altogether.
AP had an opinion on the matter and he is entitled to it. He was not throwing caution to the wind and professing things in direct confrontation to factual evidence.
awake on August 20, 2007 at 3:19 PM
Alec on August 20, 2007 at 2:48 PM,
Thanks for the info and for the links. I’m convinced this was intentional. Anyone who has not been living in a box for the last few decades recognizes that the crescent is a symbol of Islam. The original name left no doubt as to the shape. It should have been scrapped from the start and the designer fired.
The mathematical calculations and the extra blocks for the hijackers leave little doubt as to the intention of the mind of the designer whether he says anything publicly at this time or not.
A more fitting memorial would have been the empty field with a simple stone marker with the names of the passengers (excluding the hijackers) and crew listed, with a brief statement of gratitude for their bravery which inspired our nation on that dreadful day.
ScottG has an excellent idea of having a cross and a star of David cast a long shadow over the crescent. I’d love to see the reaction to that.
As for Deena Burnett she may be perfectly willing to let her father-in-law handle this. If I had three small children to raise (I believe she has three girls) I wouldn’t have a lot of extra emotional energy to spend fighting something like this and I might not want to become a target of controversy.
INC on August 20, 2007 at 3:35 PM
Thanks for calling me a ‘Truther’ of sorts, AP. I’ll try not to let the door hit my ass on the way out.
andycanuck on August 20, 2007 at 3:39 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »