I Visited the Flight 93 Crash Site Memorial Today

[Dr Adequate]

Whenever the topic of Mrs M comes up, you can guarantee that the topic of sex acts won't be far behind.

Of her race I am unaware; to her sex I am indifferent; I do however confess to a deep-seated prejudice against idiots, which my post expressed.

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.

It is a religious symbol only in the minds of conspiracy theorists spreading rumors which the families of flight 93 decry as "hurtful ... misleading and not based in fact".

 

[Tweeter]

Caustics explanationI 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.We forgive them.
Maybe you should just go with that, Pardalis.

 

[gumboot]

A central tenet of Christianity, is it not, is to love thine enemy even? Or something? I thinks it's misunderstood genius

Personally I think the design is either A) not intended to reference Islam in any way whatsoever, or B) precisely what you've suggested above.

If it's what is above, it seems doubly inappropriate. What possible grounds are there for making the UA93 memorial Christian in nature? Were all on board Christian? At least one of the passengers was gay, so God hates him, right?

Religion should have no place in an official government memorial, particularly when the incident in question is religiously motivated. Indeed, it is things like September 11 that are precisely why the USA chose to separate government and religion.

 

[Pardalis]

Caustics explanationI 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.We forgive them.
Maybe you should just go with that, Pardalis.

What part of "in your own words" don't you understand?

 

[Brainster]

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

Certainly. And reading this article, it sounds like the other designs were pretty miserable.

Clearly, the jury knew what it wanted because the finalists shared remarkably similar sensibilities. The design "Disturbed Harmony" was little more than a knee-high, granite "Bravery Wall," running through the field leading to the crash site. "(F)Light" proposed a covered walkway tracing the final few seconds of Flight 93's trajectory. "Memory Trail" was another planned walkway, this time culminating in a visitor's center. The design of finalist "Fields, Forests, Fences" rivaled the film Snakes on a Plane in the literalism of its title.

But they absolutely had to know that calling it a "Crescent" was going to stir up controversy. There are other issues, some minor, some not. It has been pointed out that the Crescent roughly faces towards Mecca; I don't think that's a significant issue. There are plans for 44 glass blocks; by a coincidence, no doubt, there were 44 people on the plane counting the terrorists.

 

[Pardalis]

Certainly. And reading this article, it sounds like the other designs were pretty miserable.



But they absolutely had to know that calling it a "Crescent" was going to stir up controversy. There are other issues, some minor, some not. It has been pointed out that the Crescent roughly faces towards Mecca; I don't think that's a significant issue. There are plans for 44 glass blocks; by a coincidence, no doubt, there were 44 people on the plane counting the terrorists.

So it's not the shape that bothers you, just the word "crescent"?

 

[Dr Adequate]

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

I don't think you mean "Caroline Glick".

Some more reponses from family members, including Todd Beamer's father.

Others spoke out against personal attacks on Joanne Handley, the NPS superintendent who oversees the project and supports its design.

Calvin Wilson of Herndon, Va., said attacks questioning Handley's patriotism are a form of terrorism. Wilson's brother, LeRoy Homer, was the co-pilot who died aboard Flight 93.

[...]

David Beamer, father of Todd Beamer whose command of "Let's roll" signaled the passenger revolt, said he has researched the design and found no fault in it. He addressed Burnett personally at the meeting.

"Our sons Beamer and Burnett and 38 others on that fateful morning were united," Beamer said. "So I'm sad today to find us on opposite sides."

The planning groups are in the midst of raising about $22 million for the first phase of the memorial. They hope to open it by the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks.

Christine Fraser, of Elizabeth, N.J., whose sister Colleen died that day, said she wants the Park Service to press on with the design.

"We can see the conspiracy in anything if we look hard enough," she said. "How dare anybody think I would want to build a memorial to crazy people who hate us."​

As to whether Burnett has any support from other family members, I note from the article that his sidekick in his little crusade is one Alec Rawls, who is not a family member.

What is he? He's ... a conservative blogger.

 

[articulett]

Of her race I am unaware; to her sex I am indifferent; I do however confess to a deep-seated prejudice against idiots, which my post expressed.

It was your disrespect of goats that I find fault with.

 

[Dr Adequate]

But they absolutely had to know that calling it a "Crescent" was going to stir up controversy. There are other issues, some minor, some not. It has been pointed out that the Crescent roughly faces towards Mecca; I don't think that's a significant issue. There are plans for 44 glass blocks; by a coincidence, no doubt, there were 44 people on the plane counting the terrorists.

Ah, let the numerology begin!

But wait! What about the facts?

Regarding the claim that there are 44 glass blocks in the memorial, Mr. Murdoch vehemently disagreed, saying that, first of all, there is no glass block used in the design.

Instead, there are 40 inscribed marble panels listing the names of the passengers and crew at the gateway to the Sacred Ground, where their remains still rest.

There is then an opening in the wall, Mr. Murdoch said, and three additional panels, which would include the date, Sept. 11, 2001.

"Where the other one is being fabricated, I don't know," he said.

A separate glass plate will be located near the visitor's center and include the memorial project's preamble.​

40 apples + 3 oranges + 1 banana + 0 glass blocks = 44 glass blocks. And that, you must agree, is sinister.

 

[Brainster]

I don't think you mean "Caroline Glick".

My bad. Liz.

Some more reponses from family members, including Todd Beamer's father.

Others spoke out against personal attacks on Joanne Handley, the NPS superintendent who oversees the project and supports its design.

Calvin Wilson of Herndon, Va., said attacks questioning Handley's patriotism are a form of terrorism. Wilson's brother, LeRoy Homer, was the co-pilot who died aboard Flight 93.

[...]

David Beamer, father of Todd Beamer whose command of "Let's roll" signaled the passenger revolt, said he has researched the design and found no fault in it. He addressed Burnett personally at the meeting.

"Our sons Beamer and Burnett and 38 others on that fateful morning were united," Beamer said. "So I'm sad today to find us on opposite sides."

The planning groups are in the midst of raising about $22 million for the first phase of the memorial. They hope to open it by the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks.

Christine Fraser, of Elizabeth, N.J., whose sister Colleen died that day, said she wants the Park Service to press on with the design.

"We can see the conspiracy in anything if we look hard enough," she said. "How dare anybody think I would want to build a memorial to crazy people who hate us."​

As to whether Burnett has any support from other family members, I note from the article that his sidekick in his little crusade is one Alec Rawls, who is not a family member.

What is he? He's ... a conservative blogger.

Oh, well, we can safely ignore him, eh? However, I do note this part in that article that you highlighted:

Burnett was one of more than a dozen people, mostly family members of the victims, who sometimes wept as they spoke for and against the design.

Beamer's dad's comment is reassuring however. If he's on board with the revised design (and the elimination of the Crescent of Embrace name), then I'm getting more comfortable with the idea.

 

[Pardalis]

If he's on board with the revised design (and the elimination of the Crescent of Embrace name), then I'm getting more comfortable with the idea.

You prefer "Bowl of Embrace", seriously? You think it makes more sense, and is more poetic?

 

[BenBurch]

OTC, thanks for posting that. When I travel through that area I shall have to stop there.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Oh, well, we can safely ignore him, eh?

Or mock him, either way's good.

However, I do note this part in that article that you highlighted:

It says "more than a dozen people, mostly family members of the victims, who sometimes wept as they spoke for and against the design". Now, that does not imply that there was more than one family member speaking against it.

The president of Families of Flight 93 specifically says:

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.​

So it does look as though he's a lone voice. To be more accurate, I think his wife supports him, although her name does appear at the bottom of this letter.

 

[Brainster]

You prefer "Bowl of Embrace", seriously? You think it makes more sense, and is more poetic?

Both of them suck. Crescent of Embrace sucks more because of the Islam reference, but Cross of Embrace would suck too. The whole "of Embrace" formulation sucks.

 

[T.A.M.]

I understand how some people could find the use of a crescent in a memorial dedicated to victims of islamic extremists offensive. Similarly dedicating a memorial to the victims of the crusades with a cross would be so, as would dedicating a memorial to the victims of the holocaust would be if it had the Swatztica (spelling - sorry).

I know the latter is an extreme case, and the symbol more instantly recognized as a nazi symbol.

TAM

 

[Pardalis]

Both of them suck. Crescent of Embrace sucks more because of the Islam reference, but Cross of Embrace would suck too. The whole "of Embrace" formulation sucks.

So your beef is with "embrace" now?

Brainster, I know you're one of the good guys, so I'm not trying to "debunk" you or anything, I'm just trying to follow your reasoning: at first your beef was with the shape, then you agreed it may only be the result of the topography of the site (since other submissions had the same shape). Then, it was the word "crescent" that bothered you. Now it's "embrace".

If it's really "crescent" that bothers you, then how is one supposed to name something that is of a crescent shape? If it's "embrace", then it's just about esthetics.

You see where I'm going with this? Ultimately, when you think about it, your problem is really about nothing.

 

[Brainster]

So your beef is with "embrace" now?

Brainster, I know you're one of the good guys, so I'm not trying to "debunk" you or anything, I'm just trying to follow your reasoning: at first your beef was with the shape, then you agreed it may only be the result of the topography of the site (since other submissions had the same shape). Then, it was the word "crescent" that bothered you. Now it's "embrace".

If it's really "crescent" that bothers you, then how is one supposed to name something that is of a crescent shape? If it's "embrace", then it's just about esthetics.

You see where I'm going with this? Ultimately, when you think about it, your problem is really about nothing.

You're mistaking my trivial concern about the phrase "Crescent of Embrace" or "Bowl of Embrace" being a horrific name aesthetically, leaving aside for the moment the obvious symbolism of the "Crescent". As I said back in 2005 when this first came up, it's akin to "Circle of Hug". It makes no sense. You may find it poetic, I just find it strange.

I object to the word "Crescent" because of the obvious religious symbolism which is completely inappropriate specifically because fanatics of that religion are responsible for what happened that day. And I did not stipulate that the site requires a circular design of some kind; I just agreed that might be true. The other finalists did not feature a circular design.

Contrary to what people seem to believe, conservative bloggers weren't the only ones to raise issues with the design:

Fundamentalist Christians aren’t alone in their concerns about an Islamic symbol being used in the design of the Flight 93 National Memorial.

Muslims would take affront as well, a professor of Middle Eastern studies at New York University said.

And:

Fouad El Bayly of Somerset, leader of the Islamic Center of Johnstown, has said Muslims immediately would recognize the symbolism in the design.

The crescent is a symbol of Islamic faith, El Bayly said.

“You pick something to be identified with,” he said.

Like I said earlier, some of the stuff is silly; the guy with the Crescent of Betrayal website claims that the crescent is perfectly aligned with Mecca, give or take 1.8 degrees. He also claims that if you draw a line between the ends of the crescent it points directly at the White House. That's the sort of "research" I'm used to seeing from Killtown.

My whole focus on the 9-11 conspiracy theories arose because I got pissed off about the Flight 93 section of Loose Change. I've mentioned several times that one of the things that lifted my depression after 9-11 was when I spent several hours on the Sunday after the attacks reading about Beamer, Bingham, Glick, Nacke, Burnett and all the other people on that flight. So I tend to be just a tad defensive of those people and their memory.

The people who died on that plane were heroes, and they deserve a monument that reflects that heroism. Like I said, the fact that Todd Beamer's dad has approved the design means a lot to me; I know he's not gone PC on us.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Contrary to what people seem to believe, conservative bloggers weren't the only ones to raise issues with the design ...

Quite so. And when conservative bloggers, Christian fundamentalists, and conspiracy theorists all agree ... are they ever right? Has this happened even once?

 

[Pardalis]

You're mistaking my trivial concern about the phrase "Crescent of Embrace" or "Bowl of Embrace" being a horrific name aesthetically, leaving aside for the moment the obvious symbolism of the "Crescent". As I said back in 2005 when this first came up, it's akin to "Circle of Hug". It makes no sense. You may find it poetic, I just find it strange.

I object to the word "Crescent" because of the obvious religious symbolism which is completely inappropriate specifically because fanatics of that religion are responsible for what happened that day. And I did not stipulate that the site requires a circular design of some kind; I just agreed that might be true. The other finalists did not feature a circular design.

You have a right to not like the design, or to not like the similitude with Islam's crescent, but to think that it was intentional is rather far-fetched.

As an atheist, I don't see it as a religious symbol, it's just a coincidence, unless proven otherwise.

 

[OldTigerCub]

]Like I said earlier, some of the stuff is silly; the guy with the Crescent of Betrayal website claims that the crescent is perfectly aligned with Mecca, give or take 1.8 degrees. He also claims that if you draw a line between the ends of the crescent it points directly at the White House. That's the sort of "research" I'm used to seeing from Killtown.

My whole focus on the 9-11 conspiracy theories arose because I got pissed off about the Flight 93 section of Loose Change. I've mentioned several times that one of the things that lifted my depression after 9-11 was when I spent several hours on the Sunday after the attacks reading about Beamer, Bingham, Glick, Nacke, Burnett and all the other people on that flight. So I tend to be just a tad defensive of those people and their memory.

The people who died on that plane were heroes, and they deserve a monument that reflects that heroism. Like I said, the fact that Todd Beamer's dad has approved the design means a lot to me; I know he's not gone PC on us.

Brainster,
Your sentiments about the design and name of the memorial sound very close to mine, in the sense that the name and the design (be it circle, or crescent or bowl...) of "embrace" seem to be aimed toward making the site a place of mourning and reflection. Granted, a great many visitors have gone there already to mourn and reflect, but a memorial to the crash of an airliner on which the passengers and crew fought back against the enemy, in the first victory against the terrorists who had declared war on our country, should evoke more of a sense of pride in the courage of those aboard Flight 93, and should honor their memory accordingly. In as much I would think that a simpler and more inspiring "battle monument" type of design would have been more fitting.
With Tom Burnett being the only ouspoken critic among the family members at this point, however, and with the vast majority of the design committee endorsing the revised design, I would be inclined to advocate getting started on the construction and just getting it built.
Just my opinion, anyway....

Incidently, it appears that the temporary memorial may be moved across the road from where it sits right now. The the agreement between the landowner and the park service expires in a few weeks, and the park service will not stay on the land without a signed agreement.

Earlier this month, the park service said it is moving the temporary memorial after failing to reach a deal with the landowner.

By mid-August, all of the artifacts on or around the memorial’s chain-link fence, benches, flags, cross, angels, large stones and shelter will be moved across the road.

The landowner, Svonavec Inc. has indicated that they do not wish to kick anyone off the site, however, and that the public and park service may stay, though without some of the restrictions apparently imposed by the park service.

From the July 12, 2008 issue of the Tribune Democrat

SOMERSET — The owner of land occupied by the Flight 93 temporary memorial vehemently denies that his company is forcing the tribute to be moved.

Although Svonavec Inc. invoked a clause to end a license agreement with the National Park Service on Sept. 5, a company official said it never ordered the memorial off its property.

“You know that we have at no time requested or required that the temporary memorial be removed, nor have we excluded the public, the families or your department from our lands,” Mike Svonavec, the company’s secretary treasurer, wrote in a letter to the chief of the park service’s northeast region realty division.