I Visited the Flight 93 Crash Site Memorial Today

[SezMe]

It is a little reminiscent of an outdoor chapel, especially with the big cross in the right front corner of the arrangement.

There's a cross as an official part of the site? What, no Jews or atheists were on the plane - to say nothing of the many, many other possibilities. I'm disappointed in the design committee.

 

[OldTigerCub]

There's a cross as an official part of the site? What, no Jews or atheists were on the plane - to say nothing of the many, many other possibilities. I'm disappointed in the design committee.

The cross is located in one corner of the temporary memorial. It is not official by any means. I really don't know who placed it. All of the monuments, crosses, benches, caps, pins, statuettes, engravings, homemade carvings...all have been brought and placed by individuals and organizations. The ground has yet to be broken on the permanent memorial. Everything that is there right now is the accumulation of the sentiments of visitors and locals.

 

[SezMe]

Thanks, Tiger. I sure hope religion is kept out of the permanent memorial.

 

[Tweeter]

Cool site!
I really dont think this subject could be funny, but i kinda like what this guy had to say.
"You were deeply involved with the process? Are you saying that you are one of the designers, or that you are one of the jurors, or administrators?

If you were one of the designers, you have a lot of questions to answer. Are you saying that you were both a) someone who made some of the critical decisions that create define what I am calling the terrorist memorial wall (the exact location of the upper memorial wall, it's being bisected by the center line of the red maple crescent, the four extra translucent blocks in the flight path, etcetera) and b) that you had no awareness that the upper wall was centered on the red crescent bisector, the orientation of the crescent on Mecca, etcetera, then that is an interesting data point, and you should do you best to explain to people. But if you are claiming that there is nothing to explain, then you are not just an *******, you are at some level knowingly complicit. Any person who had honestly not intended to place forty-four memorial blocks in the flight path, or not intended to have the upper wall integral with the crescent, or not intended to orient the crescent precisely on Mecca, would be aghast to discover that he had done these thing. You are not aghast. You either did it on purpose yourself, or you had at least some awareness that someone else was doing it. The fact that you are not aghast to find out what your group actually did, whether by mistake or on purpose, but instead are calling other people ******** for discovering it, tells me that there is something VERY damned wrong with you. If you want to explain different, we're all ears.

If, on the other hand, you were a juror, or an administrator, who had nothing to do with creating any of the Islamist structures, you too should be aghast at finding out that the crescent contains. That you are not tells me that you are not a person of good faith. You are saying that you would be content to plant an Islamic flag on the graves of our murdered heroes (perhaps you murdered kin), so long as you did it by mistake? You don't want to know about such a thing, and stop it? That's sick. That's like Cindy Sheehan calling the fascists who murdered her son "freedom fighters." It's a self-centered obliviousness beyond fathoming. But again, if you can explain yourself, lots of people would like to hear it

Im bumping my own thread.
Family members of the crash victims think the symbolism in the new memorial is a slap in the face. This is the smoking gun.

 

[mrbaracuda]

Im bumping my own thread.

A post is not a thread. This is not your thread.

Family members of the crash victims think the symbolism in the new memorial is a slap in the face. This is the smoking gun.

Smoking gun of what exactly? 9/11 was an inside job fantasies? No it isn't.

 

[Foolmewunz]

The crescent issue is legitimate; a lot of people are angry about that, and to be honest, I'm one of them. In the original design it was specifically referred to as "the Crescent of Embrace", which not only sounds grammatically incorrect, but renders any talk about how it's just a coincidence involving semicircles irrelevant.

Brainster,

This is getting a little tedious. You're taking things to new heights (or depths) all the time.

So a bunch of right wing bloggers have now co-opted another word - crescent. I thought I was being facetious, but are you now going to rename the "crescent wrench"?

Why are you angry that someone uses a legitimate word to describe something? A word which conicidentally means a symbol of something that's representative to the Arab and Islamic world?

Peter Paul and Mary:
If I had a hammer... I'd .....

Right Wing Blognut:
Have you noticed they're using a commie symbol? Huh? Didja see that?

Sensible Person:
Uh, I think hammers have been around for millenia. I can't think that the folks at Stanley are communists.

Right Wing Blognut:
But that doesn't matter! What matters is that I discovered this nonsense and wrote a fiery column about it and now we have to make my rantings better known.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Im bumping my own thread.
Family members of the crash victims think the symbolism in the new memorial is a slap in the face. This is the smoking gun.

Tweeter,
Do you have even a passing acquaintance with the ENGLISH LANGUAGE?

Smoking Gun?????

That makes no sense whatsoever. Did you read what I posted above? The people objecting to this are not 911 conspiraduds. They are quasi-xenophobic reactionaries who break out in a case of the hives at anything that isn't painted redwhiteandblue, have a picture of an eagle on it, or a quote from Ronald Reagan carved in four inch letters.

Hint: Do you recognize the name "Brainster" (take your time... you can scroll up or you can use the member search function)?
Do you know that Brainster is responsible for a serious amount of thrashing that is dealt to the TM?
And have you noticed that Brainster is one of the folks expressing his disagreement with the choice of designs?

I have owned you four times in this thread alone. Please just sign over the permanent deed to your ass so we won't have to go through this so often. (Better yet, MAKE SOME SENSE, OCCASIONALLY!)

 

[gumboot]

I have to say that I do think the use of the crescent symbol is somewhat inappropriate. Not so much the shape of the memorial itself, as I don't feel it really is a crescent, but the specific use of the word "crescent". For good or bad, the crescent is undeniably linked to the Islamic faith, and to use such a symbol as a memorial to a horrific act carried out by people acting on behalf of that faith is IMHO, incredibly bad taste.

Memorials are, by their very nature, incredibly symbolic, and designers of such monuments really should put much more thought into what the chosen symbols represent. Either the designer didn't even think about symbolism, in which case they really have no business designing a memorial, or they intentionally chose an Islamic symbol which is even worse.

I should reiterate here that the only thing I really take issue with the the name "crescent of embrace". The design itself seems fine to me. I don't know if the designer actually used the term "crescent" or not, so it might not be their fault.

For what it's worth, the crescent symbol has been intimately linked with the middle east for about 1500 years, well before the appearance of Islam. It was the symbol of the Sassanian Empire (Persian) and after they were conquered by the Arabs, the crescent symbol was adopted as a symbol of authority in the Caliphate and amongst Muslim rulers as it was a well recognised and established symbol of West Asian power.

However it was a long time before the Crescent was adopted as a symbol of Islam itself, and was traditionally reserved as a secular symbol as Islam prohibited the use of geometric symbols.

In this aspect I think in some ways the use of a crescent is even poorer taste - you could argue that the use of an Islamic symbol was a gesture of reconciliation, or a recognition that the hijackers were not representative of Islam, however traditionally the crescent is more a symbol of Arabian and Persian domination, not Islam, and in particular the Caliphate - the very thing Al Qaeda was/is fighting to reestablish. In this regard it is in incredibly poor taste - akin to using a Swastika on a memorial to victims of Neo-nazi actions.

 

[Brainster]

Brainster,

This is getting a little tedious. You're taking things to new heights (or depths) all the time.

So a bunch of right wing bloggers have now co-opted another word - crescent. I thought I was being facetious, but are you now going to rename the "crescent wrench"?

Why? Are crescent wrenches related in some form or fashion to 9-11?

Why are you angry that someone uses a legitimate word to describe something? A word which conicidentally means a symbol of something that's representative to the Arab and Islamic world?

Oh, it was just a coincidence?

 

[mrbaracuda]

Yea, I don't get foolmewunz on this one either really.

 

[Dr Adequate]

The crescent issue is legitimate ...

Your blog asks:

I'd be interested in hearing the Flight 93 families on this; I know that some of them were represented on the jury that selected the design.

The Families of Flight 93, May 2, 2008

Much has been said in the press recently about a controversy related to the design of the Flight 93 National Memorial. These stories have appeared on and off over the past few years and are being driven by a relatively small number of disgruntled citizens and representatives from one of our forty families [underlining in original]. Since the completion of the memorial design competition, we have heard claims suggesting that somehow family members of those that lost their lives on the morning of 9/11 are in some way willing or unknowing participants in the creation of a memorial secretly honoring those very terrorists that brought such death and destruction to our land. These allegations are hurtful to the overwhelming number of families fully in support of the memorial. Furthermore, they are misleading and not based in fact.​

Michelle Malkin blows goats.

 

[Pardalis]

This is the smoking gun.

Again, could you explain to me in your own words how this conspiracy works?

I'm not following.

 

[Brainster]

Your blog asks:



The Families of Flight 93, May 2, 2008

Much has been said in the press recently about a controversy related to the design of the Flight 93 National Memorial. These stories have appeared on and off over the past few years and are being driven by a relatively small number of disgruntled citizens and representatives from one of our forty families [underlining in original]. Since the completion of the memorial design competition, we have heard claims suggesting that somehow family members of those that lost their lives on the morning of 9/11 are in some way willing or unknowing participants in the creation of a memorial secretly honoring those very terrorists that brought such death and destruction to our land. These allegations are hurtful to the overwhelming number of families fully in support of the memorial. Furthermore, they are misleading and not based in fact.​

Michelle Malkin blows goats.

Whenever the topic of Mrs M comes up, you can guarantee that the topic of sex acts won't be far behind. It's racist and sexist and beneath you, or so I once thought.

The design was changed; as somebody noted, it's now the Bowl of Embrace, which is equally bad grammatically but at least does not evoke the main symbol of Islam. I am amused that all the atheists here seem to be fine with a religious symbol on public land.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Again, could you explain to me in your own words how this conspiracy works?

I'm not following.

Apparently Tweeter feels the Islamists who designed this memorial proves that
9/11 was not an Islamist operation? I dunno.

There's a cross as an official part of the site? What, no Jews or atheists were on the plane - to say nothing of the many, many other possibilities. I'm disappointed in the design committee.

Don't worry, when the new "terrorist mosque" is complete, the cross will be gone for sure!

I'm with no one here. I say it may well be an Islam-inspired design and I'm not mad. It is not a memorial to terrorists, but to peace and embrace. A central tenet of Christianity, is it not, is to love thine enemy even? Or something? I thinks it's misunderstood genius.

Much has been said in the press recently about a controversy related to the design of the Flight 93 National Memorial. These stories have appeared on and off over the past few years and are being driven by a relatively small number of disgruntled citizens and representatives from one of our forty families [underlining in original]. Since the completion of the memorial design competition, we have heard claims suggesting that somehow family members of those that lost their lives on the morning of 9/11 are in some way willing or unknowing participants in the creation of a memorial secretly honoring those very terrorists that brought such death and destruction to our land. These allegations are hurtful to the overwhelming number of families fully in support of the memorial. Furthermore, they are misleading and not based in fact.​

Michelle Malkin blows goats.

Thanks for that. I'm not sure of MM's take but I've seen some paranoid dolts imply the designers are part of an Islamist conspiracy here... either these majority of family members thought the similarity was coincidence, or they decided the Islamic symbolism does not necc. = terrorism worship. I'm going with them.

 

[Tweeter]

Out of all the coincidences related to 9/11 this is one that cant be debunked. Hence the smoking gun.

 

[Pardalis]

Out of all the coincidences related to 9/11 this is one that cant be debunked. Hence the smoking gun.

Coincidence of what?

How does this fit in the conspiracy?

I know it's hard for you but try to make this brain of yours work for once.

 

[Tweeter]

You sound like a little kid. Why ? Why? Why?
You answer me, is it just a coincidence that the memorial will have these Islamic symbols or was it done intentionally?

 

[Brainster]

Out of all the coincidences related to 9/11 this is one that cant be debunked. Hence the smoking gun.

Oh, please, spare me your conspiracy theories. I suspect the designer knew quite well what he was doing with the crescent bit; he was being politically correct. I doubt many of the families caught it, although Tom Burnett certainly did.

If Felt is right that the vast majority of the Flight 93 families are fine with the design, then that's one thing. But we've certainly seen "leaders" of 9-11 family groups like Bill Doyle claim to have a mandate of the families behind them:

The representative of the largest group of 9/11 families says that the official version of events is a fallacy and that the NORAD stand down and evidence of incendiary devices used to bring down the towers amount to government complicity in the attacks - a conclusion shared by half of the 9/11 families he represents.

I would like to hear from more of the family members on this--Lisa Beamer, Caroline Glick, etc.

 

[Pardalis]

You sound like a little kid. Why ? Why? Why?
You answer me, is it just a coincidence that the memorial will have these Islamic symbols or was it done intentionally?

Answer my question first.

 

[Pardalis]

Oh, please, spare me your conspiracy theories. I suspect the designer knew quite well what he was doing with the crescent bit; he was being politically correct. I doubt many of the families caught it, although Tom Burnett certainly did.

If Felt is right that the vast majority of the Flight 93 families are fine with the design, then that's one thing. But we've certainly seen "leaders" of 9-11 family groups like Bill Doyle claim to have a mandate of the families behind them:



I would like to hear from more of the family members on this--Lisa Beamer, Caroline Glick, etc.

Brainster, could the design of the memorial be a result of the topography of the terrain?