August 8, 2011 | Filed Under 9/11, al Qaeda, Anti-Americanism, Anti-Semitism, Democrats/Leftists, Flight 93, Government, History, Islamofascism, Liberals, Osama bin Ladden, Terrorism, Warner Todd Huston | Comments Off
That makes the broken-circle memorial to Flight 93 a memorial to the terrorists, who are depicted not only as smashing our circle of peace, but as leaving a giant Islamic crescent-and-star flag in its place:
They call it a broken circle now, but the unbroken part of the circle, what symbolically remains standing in the wake of 9/11, is just the original Crescent of Embrace: a giant Islamic-shaped crescent, pointing to Mecca.
The damned thing is actually an al Qaeda victory mosque, with the Mecca-oriented crescent as its mihrab: the Mecca-direction indicator around which every mosque is built.
July 3, 2011 | Filed Under 9/11, al Qaeda, Anti-Americanism, Democrats/Leftists, Ethics, Flight 93, Government, History, Islamofascism, Liberals, News, Patriotism, Public Employees Unions, Society/Culture, Terrorism, Unions, Warner Todd Huston, Western Civilization, Wisconsin | 1 Comment
-By Warner Todd Huston
If you needed yet another example of why government employees should never be allowed to join unions, this is it. In Racine, Wisconsin the local fireman’s union got into an imbroglio over a July 4th parade float honoring the fallen first responders of the Sept. 11 attacks, a parade entry that the union supported previously. This time, though, union bosses decided not to support the 9/11 memorial float because one of the firemen on the float opted out of the fireman’s union this year.
That’s right, the fireman’s union decided that their union agenda was more important than supporting a memorial to their brethren that died on Sept. 11, 2001. Their union agenda was even more important than patriotism and an Independence Day parade.
Imagine that. These union thugs despoiled the memory of the Sept. 11 fallen and used them in order to make points for their union ideals and political policies.
What could be more disgusting?
Conservative hero Alan Keyes is asking whether there is a pattern of submission surrounding the nation’s 9/11 sites. Apparently he has seen our video expose of Islamic and terrorist memorializing features in the crescent memorial to Flight 93 (now called a broken circle). Like any straight-thinker, he doesn’t like what he sees. The Flight 93 crash site is no place for a giant Islamic-shaped crescent, no matter what it is called.
On this point, Keyes cites Colorado Representative Tom Tancredo’s 2005 objection to the newly unveiled Crescent of Embrace design:
Anyone live within driving distance of Somerset Pennsylvania? It’s a beautiful place to visit and a group of motorcyclists from Indianapolis is already going.
Tom Burnett Senior and Alec Rawls are buying full page color ads in the Somerset Daily American for both Friday the 10th and Saturday the 11th, so anyone who makes the trip will have a ready made protest sign waiting for them. Just buy a newspaper, tape the ad to a piece of cardboard, and let the massed national media know what side you are on.
That’s right. With Barbara Bush and Michelle Obama both attending, it’s going to be a media circus, and a rare opportunity to force coverage of our issue. Just self-organize. Ad-holders will show a core of united opposition (and the media might even be forced to read our brief expose).
-By Frank Salvato
In light of the decision by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission to allow for the construction of a mosque and Islamic center just 500 feet from Ground Zero, it can be successfully argued that political correctness has replaced history as a basis for knowledge in the United States of America. If it holds true that history does repeat itself – and I have no reason to believe it won’t – then the culture of ignorant arrogance, so prevalent in the nation today, will prove to be a contributing factor to the subjugation of the great American experiment.
To summarize, radical American Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, founder, CEO and Executive Director of Cordoba Initiative, has won approval – and support from the self-deprecating Progressives elected and appointed to office in New York City – to construct a $100 million, 13-story Islamic center, including a mosque that would accommodate up to 2,000, just 500 feet from Ground Zero. Abdul Rauf – who after the slaughter of innocents on September 11, 2001, said, “”I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened,” and who has refused to recognize Hamas or Hezbollah as terrorist organizations – is refusing to divulge the revenue sources for the project. Abdul Rauf’s wife, “Daisy” Kahn, is quoted as saying of the construction of a mosque in the shadow of 2,976 souls, “No big deal.”
Aside from the fact that the Abdul Rauf’s insistence in building a mosque 500 feet from hallowed ground, consecrated by the massacre of almost 3,000 innocents by 19 Muslim barbarians, is, simply put, insensitive to every other demographic but fundamentalist Islamists, self-deprecating Progressives and the evil, it is callous, rude and ignorant. But most importantly, it is antagonistic.
In order to understand just how deliberately abrasive the construction of Park51 – or, as originally intended, The Cordoba House – in the shadow of Ground Zero actually is, we must come to understand its inferred meaning and to do that we must understand a period of violent Muslim aggression, circa 711AD, that established the Emirate and Caliphate of Cordoba. Remember, the mosque project at Ground Zero was originally meant to be called “The Cordoba House .”
In 711AD, during the first attempt at global conquest by Muslim leaders, Tariq ibn-Ziyad, under the orders of the Umayyad Caliph Al-Walid I, brought most of the Iberian Peninsula (what is now Spain, Portugal and Gibraltar) under Muslim occupation in a campaign that lasted approximately seven years. The Iberian Peninsula, for the most part, became part of the expanding Umayyad Empire, under the name of al-Andalus.
The turning-point battle that brought the Muslims to power in Cordoba, the Battle of Guadalete, was not a singular Muslim attack, rather, it was the culminating event in a series of raids across the straits from North Africa. During the initial raids, several southern Iberian towns, predominantly Christian in nature, were pillaged by the Islamist forces, which had been harassing the peninsula by sea since approximately 705AD. But during the Battle of Guadalete, whole cities were razed and a grotesque number of people were slaughtered in a general destruction that sent non-Muslim civilians fleeing to the hill countries.
At first, al-Andalus was ruled by appointees of the Caliph, most holding power for periods of approximately three years. But after a series of civil wars between Muslim factions, exiled Umayyad prince Abd-ar-Rahman I established himself as the Emir of Córdoba. He refused to submit to the authority of the Abbasid Caliph, who now held power, as forces under his control had butchered many members of his family. Over a thirty year reign, he established a tenuous rule over much of al-Andalus.
For the next century and a half, his descendants continued as emirs of Córdoba, with nominal control over the rest of al-Andalus. Abd-al-Rahman III, who came to power in 912AD, not only tightened his authoritative grip on al-Andalus but extended it into western North Africa as well. In 929AD he proclaimed himself Caliph, elevating the emirate to a prestigious position competing with the Abbasid Caliph and the Shi’ite Caliph in Tunis—with whom he was competing for control of North Africa.
Under the Caliphate of Cordoba, non-Muslims were given the status of ahl al-dhimma (or dhimmi, a non-Muslim subject of a sharia law state) and adults paid a jizya (or tax). Then, as today, there were only three choices afforded to dhimmis under sharia law: accept dhimmitude, pay the jizya and exist as second-class citizens to all Muslims; convert to Islam; or die.
And while apologists throughout history have tried to diminish the cruelty of the Islamic culture toward non-Muslims in the many Caliphates, many scholars have argued that it would have been both a “theological as well as a logical absurdity” that Islam would have offered equality or even pretended that it did. [Lewis, Bernard W (1984). The Jews of Islam, p.4.]
Taking into consideration the history surrounding Cordoba where it relates to Islam, the significance of the initial intention to name the Park51 project “The Cordoba House” cannot be ignored. Cordoba infers conquest. In Abdul Rauf’s quest to erect an Islamic center and mosque in the shadow of Ground Zero we can only be led to the conclusion that its existence would signify conquest as well.
Rauf & Co.
In light of the history behind the name of Abdul Rauf’s organization – the Cordoba Initiative – it is legitimate, and, in fact, necessary, to scrutinize not only the intent behind his quest to build a monument to Islamic conquest in the shadow of Ground Zero, but a moral obligation for the non-Islamic world to inquire as to who and/or what organizations are funding the construction of said monument.
For his part, Abdul Rauf says he wants to build the Islamic center and mosque to promote interfaith understanding and tolerance, yet he has shown little tolerance, understanding or sympathy for those who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001; for Americans who watched their fellow citizens jump and fall from the soon to collapse Twin Towers only to smash into the concrete below; for the families of first responders who raced to their deaths if only to save one life from the evils that radical Islamists perpetrated on our country.
Truth be told, I suspect that Abdul Rauf, deep down inside, sees his Cordoba House as a mark of conquest over America; a monument to the Islamist quest for a global Caliphate. I suspect that Abdul Rauf, and all those who are helping to fund his “initiative,” would dance with glee at the prospect of the United States Constitution falling prey to sharia law. Of course, this is my opinion, but I am familiar with the Abdul Rauf’s of the world and there is nothing understanding, tolerant or inclusive about them. They are arrogant elitists hell-bent on domination, and in this particular case, the domination of a hallowed site by a monument to radical Islamist aggression surrendered by the ignorant, the uninformed and those possessing a less than noble agenda.
In 2008, at an event in Dallas, Texas, which, in-part, constituted the original symposium series on the root causes of radical Islamist aggression, co-produced by our organization, BasicsProject.org, a young Islamist confronted one of our speakers, Robert Spencer of JihadWatch. I listened as he questioned Mr. Spencer and then again as Mr. Spencer picked-apart his logic with facts, completely dismantling the young Islamist’s argument. In the end, vanquished on the field of factual and ideological battle, the young Islamist declared, “You will all live under sharia before the end of your days.” This is exactly the mentality of Abdul Rauf…that we will all live under sharia before the end of our days. That is why it is obvious, at least to this observer, that his declaration of interfaith understanding rings hollow and that his core intention in constructing The Cordoba House within line-of-sight to Ground Zero is intended to mark the location of a modern day Islamist conquest of “the infidel.”
A Line in the Sand for So-Called Moderate Muslims
To his credit, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a tirelessly campaigner for the eradication of political Islam and the divorce of violence from the religion, founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and a gentleman who has always been cordial to me during our few encounters, strongly opposed the construction of The Cordoba House at Ground Zero, saying:
“For us, a mosque was always a place to pray, to be together on holidays—not a way to make an ostentatious architectural statement. Ground zero shouldn’t be about promoting Islam. It’s the place where war was declared on us as Americans.”
“After all, it was 19 Egyptian and Saudi Arabian thugs calling themselves Muslims who perpetrated this heinous crime on September 11th. They want to send a message of friendship, but building a mosque where there wasn’t one before, is not the most nuanced way of doing that.”
Sadly, these voices of reason are but muted whispers in a wind that howls with the disingenuous voices of the politically correct who ignorantly call for “tolerance” and “understanding” in the face of naked and violent Islamist aggression. Certainly it cannot be denied that the overwhelming majority – and, in fact, almost all – of violent aggression in the name of religion today comes at the hands of Islamists executing their crimes against humanity in the name of “Allah” and “Muhammad.”
And yet, so-called moderate Muslims across the United States and throughout the world respond to outrages such as the construction of a mosque in the shadow of Ground Zero with a deafening silence. So-called moderate Muslims from around the world react to the horrors of terrorism perpetrated in the name of their religion and through the hands of barbarians with grotesque indifference. And, instead of taking the lead in expunging radical elements from within their own religious community, instead of calling for a reformation of the Islamic religion to exclude all violent, anti-Semitic and dominant language in an effort to embrace the peaceful tenets of the Islamic dogma, so-called moderate Muslims do nothing but hide behind the disingenuous spin of organizations run by closeted fundamentalists like the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
It is well past time that the so-called “moderate Muslims” step up to do what they know deep down is correct. It’s time for them to choose sides and live with their choices. Moderate Muslims either condemn the violence and deceit, the subjugation of women and the crusade against all other religions or they side with the aggressor jihadists in their quest for the establishment of a global Caliphate; a quest to rule the world under sharia law. From this day forward their silence must be interpreted as siding with the aggressor Islamists.
There can be no turning back, no further delay. The grace period that began on September 12, 2001, for non-Muslims to exercise understanding and tolerance of the Islamic religion, to explore the meaning behind the aggression, is over. The non-Muslim population of the world has been intensely exposed to Islam for almost a decade now and that is long enough for us to understand that in its current form – especially its current fundamentalist form – Islam is not symbiotic with freedom or liberty, not compatible with the 21st Century, and antithetical to the United States Constitution.
We in the free world, who understand that liberty and freedom come to us as inalienable rights from the Creator, will not acquiesce to an ideology that oppresses its own women, that celebrates the conquest of other cultures, and which is so indignant of other philosophies and ideologies that it would allow for the use and rationalization of “violent jihad” in pursuit of global subjugation.
There is no retreat from this moment in time, this “line in the sand,” as it were. So-called moderate Muslims must choose: peaceful symbiotic co-existence or a confrontation of cultures.
For those truly moderate Muslims who choose to demonstrate a desire to co-exist in peace, standing against the “trophy mosque of conquest” – The Cordoba House – would be an excellent opening gesture.
Frank Salvato is the managing editor for The New Media Journal . He serves at the Executive Director of the Basics Project, a non-profit, non-partisan, 501(C)(3) research and education initiative. His pieces are regularly featured in over 100 publications both nationally and internationally. He has appeared on The O’Reilly Factor, and is a regular guest on The Right Balance with Greg Allen on the Accent Radio Network, as well as an occasional guest on numerous radio shows coast to coast. He recently partnered in producing the first-ever symposium on the threat of radical Islamist terrorism in Washington, DC. His pieces have been recognized by the House International Relations Committee and the Japan Center for Conflict. He can be contacted at email@example.com
August 4, 2010 | Filed Under 9/11, Alan Caruba, Christianity, Crime, Democrats/Leftists, Flight 93, Government, History, Islam, Islamofascism, Jews, Liberals, New York, Patriotism, Religion, Sharia, Terrorism | Comments Off
-By Alan Caruba
In the August 3rd edition of The Wall Street Journal, in the Greater New York section, the lead article was “9/11 Memorial Pledged as Part of Mosque Plan.”
There already is a 9/11 memorial. It is called Ground Zero and will be incorporated into whatever structure that eventually gets built on the site.
If one continued to read the story, however, you had to jump to page A21 where side-by-side with the mosque story was one titled, “Verdict in JFK Bomb Plot”, subtitled “Jury Finds Two Guilty in Conspiracy Charges for Plan to Ignite Fuel Tanks.”
The two men found guilty were Abdul Kadir and Russell Defreitas. A third defendant, Kareem Ibrahim, was ill and didn’t go to trial with them and a fourth, Abdel Nur, took a plea deal and faces up to 15 years in prison. At no time in the body of the article is there any mention that these men are Muslims though that fact was critical to their plot.
July 21, 2010 | Filed Under Anti-Americanism, Democrats/Leftists, Flight 93, Government, Islam, Islamofascism, Journalism, Media, Media Bias, Military, Patriotism, Religion, Terrorism, Western Civilization | Comments Off
Pamela Geller, who is leading the fight against the ground zero mosque in New York, has posted the following letter from Tom Burnett Senior.
To our fellow 9/11 families and to all who are concerned about the Ground Zero mega-mosque in New York:
We want everyone to know that the Park Service is right now building an even larger Islamic victory mosque atop the Flight 93 crash site. Many of you were outraged in 2005 when the Crescent of Embrace design was unveiled to be a half-mile wide Islamic shaped crescent:
From the Flight 93 Blogburst…
As Obama’s solicitor general, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan urged the Court to dismiss the suit that our 9/11 families have been pressing against the Saudi government and several Saudi princes for their extensive funding of al Qaeda. The families sued under the domestic tort exception to sovereign immunity, which according to Kagan’s Supreme Court brief (at p. 14):
…requires not merely that the foreign state’s extraterritorial conduct have some causal connection to tortious injury in the United States, but that “the tortious act or omission of that foreign state or of any official or employee” be committed within the United States. 28 U.S.C. 1605(a)(5).
The “tortious act or omission” is the wrongful act (the tort) that leads to the injury. Thus she is claiming that for Saudi funding of al Qaeda to be actionable, the funding itself has to have been transacted within the United States. Compare this with the actual wording of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a)(5):
World leader, known for reminding the Islamic world that his middle name is Hussein, hosts nuclear summit, presided over by large Islamic-shaped crescent:
It is hard to believe that the State Department could do this by accident:
Flight 93 father denounces civilian trial for 9/11 terrorists
A military trial will do the same thing–give them justice, give them a chance to talk–but not out, you know, in the public.
Nicely framed and edited by KSTP Minneapolis:
Ground broken for Terrorist memorial mosque
The desecration has begun. A ground-breaking ceremony was held at the Shanksville crash site on Saturday. Bulldozers will start reshaping the land this week. Never mind that the only rule for the Flight 93 memorial’s design competition was that the landscape had to be left as it was. In order to complete the full arc of the Crescent of Embrace (now called a broken circle, but still a giant Islamic-shaped crescent), an earthen causeway will have to be built across the wetlands that lie about 50 vertical feet below the crash site.
Construction drawings released: Flight 93 crescent now points less than 3° from Mecca
From Error Theory:
The original Crescent of Embrace memorial to Flight 93 faced less than 2° from Mecca. That made it a mihrab, the Mecca-direction indicator around which every mosque is built. (Some mihrabs are pointed-arch shaped, but the classic mihrab is crescent shaped.)
The Park Service dismissed concern about the Mecca-oriented crescent on grounds that the construction drawings had not yet been finalized. “Those trees could move fifty feet, or three hundred feet,” said Project Manager Jeff Reinbold in the Spring of 2006, as if this kind of “tweaking” would make any difference (Crescent of Betrayal Ch.8 p.145-6).
Burnett radio interview about 9/11 and the Flight 93 memorial
Tom Burnett Sr. and his wife Beverly did some 9/11 interviews this year, remembering their son Tom Jr., who was murdered by Islamic terrorists aboard Flight 93. Mr. Burnett has been trying for several years to stop the Park Service from planting a giant Islamic-shaped crescent on the Flight 93 crash site. In their interview with WSAU radio in Wisconsin, the Burnetts were joined half-way through the hour by Alec Rawls (the author of this blogburst post), who has written a book about the terrorist memorializing Crescent of Embrace design.
Mr. Burnett’s words are always heartfelt, yet marked by a constant scrupulousness. Emotion never carries him to utter a word beyond what he actually has grounds to assert. Highly recommended listening, perhaps especially for those who are better at judging people than facts. Let’s face it, show some people the Mecca-orientation of the giant crescent, and they just aren’t sure what they are looking at. Point out that the central feature of every mosque is a Mecca-direction indicator, and somehow the pieces don’t fall together in their brains:
September 12, 2009 | Filed Under Democrats/Leftists, Flight 93, Frank Salvato, Islam, Islamofascism, Military, Security/Safety, Society/Culture, Terrorism, Warner Todd Huston, Western Civilization | Comments Off
-By Frank Salvato
“The floor is completely engulfed. We’re on the floor, and we can’t breathe, and it’s very, very, very hot…I’m going to die, I know it. Please, God, no. It’s so hot, I’m burning up!” These were some of the last words of Melissa Doi, 32, one of the thousands of innocent victims that perished at the hands of radical Islamists on September 11, 2001. In all, 3,017 souls were lost and 6,291+ people were injured on that fateful day by al Qaeda terrorists in New York City, Arlington County, VA, and Shanksville, PA. Now, eight years later, one of the biggest fears held by counterterrorism experts and experts on radical Islam is coming to pass and we are less safe for it.
One of the biggest fears advanced by myself and people who I have had the honor of working with in the quest to educate Americans on the threats and dangers posed by radical Islamists, is that the American people would soon forget the horrors of September 11th; that they would start to forget the sense of helplessness they felt as they watched the World Trade Center collapse into the streets of New York City, the carnage at the Pentagon and the despondency of rescuers demonstrated in a field in Shanksville. We all understood that there would be a waning of the immediacy felt in the aftermath of the attacks – immediacy of response, education and prevention – but we feared the encroachment of apathy to the grotesque loss of life and butchery foisted upon the American people on that day. We feared it because we all understood – and still believe today – that to abdicate vigilance to the threat of Islamist aggression is to set the stage for another catastrophic event.
In the days after the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Liberal media (formerly referred to as the mainstream media) began to remove the images of the attacks from our television screens. Gone were the images of dust-covered people wandering the decimated streets of New York. We were no longer able to see the images of heroic firefighters and Pentagon workers frantically searched for people to rescue. And we were no longer provided the images of frustrated first responders – professionals trained to save lives – milling about the wreckage of an airliner in a field with no one to save. The media explained the removal of these images – these realities – by insisting it was done in the name of preventative tolerance; to quell any hatred, any catalyst for retribution toward the Muslim community.
This morning, as we begin to observe the terrible day of September 11, 2001, let us not fall into mere rote actions and unthinking memorial. We cannot forget that this is not some long past, historical situation that we can comfortably relegate to remembrance on a single day of the year, the rest of our days to go on as if it is but a distant memory. We must keep at the forefront of our minds that we are still in extent danger of another 9/11 at any time and it is only because of the hard and dangerous work that our men and women in uniform are doing every single day that keeps the next towering inferno from our TV screens. The inhuman enemy that caused those Towers to fall, those planes to tumble from the sky, are still out there planning anew. 9/11 is fresh still. Let us remember with a keen pang of loss and rage lest we complacently imagine we are back to a 9/10 world when we are not.
Let us now take a moment to remember those innocents who lost their lives so unexpectedly ad illegitimately that day. And let us thank the many thousands of our first responders who risked it all by jumping immediately to give aid to their fellows.
9/11 is in our hearts and minds and we say with a unified voice, never again.
Memorial Project still helping the hijacker fix his disguise
After denying for 4 years that the Crescent of Embrace memorial to Flight 93 will contain 44 inscribed memorial panels (equaling the number of passengers, crew, AND terrorists) the Memorial Project has announced a new design that appears to collapse three of the panels into one:
Everyone involved with the Flight 93 Memorial knows that the Crescent of Embrace points to Mecca
In 2007, Flight 93 Advisory Commission member Tim Baird told Alec Rawls (the author of these blogburst posts) that everyone at the meetings he attended is fully aware that the giant crescent, originally named the Crescent of Embrace, really does point almost exactly at Mecca. Professor Baird says they all just assume (himself included) that the Mecca orientation must be an innocent coincidence.
Pretty crazy, when they have also been told the meaning of a crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca. Every mosque is built around a Mecca-direction indicator called a mihrab, and the classic mihrab is crescent shaped. Geometrically, the Crescent of Embrace is the world’s largest mihrab.
EPA comment period closes Tues: tell ‘em no state-establishment of CO2-phobic religion
Only a couple more days to let the EPA know what you think of its proposed war against CO2. Just click on the little yellow “add comments” balloon. The following is a comment (ending at “sincerely”) that you can copy and paste. (If you choose to roll your own, feel free to leave it here too.)
There is overwhelming statistical evidence that the primary driver of natural temperature change is solar-magnetic activity, yet the solar flux is completely omitted as an influence on climate in all four IPCC assessments and in the Obama administration’s new “Climate Change Impacts in the United Sates” report. This omission is rationalized on grounds that the existing theories of how solar activity affects climate are still formative. The scientific method rejects this rationalization. Observational evidence is supposed to trump theory, not vice versa, but the IPCC is using theory (its distrust of existing theories of the mechanism by which solar-magnetic activity drives global temperature), as an excuse for ignoring the overwhelming evidence that solar-magnetic DOES drive global temperature. Not all religions are anti-scientific, but the demonstrably anti-scientific nature of CO2 alarmism proves that it IS religion, not science.
False AP report: Obama did NOT say that Iran must respect voters’ choice
Obama’s comments were mushy, yes, but at least he said the most important thing, according to AP:
He said it’s up to Iran to determine its own leaders but that the country must respect voters’ choice.
June 6, 2009 | Filed Under Anti-Americanism, Barack Obama, Democrats/Leftists, Flight 93, Islam, Islamofascism, Journalism, Liberals, Media Bias, Patriotism, President, Security/Safety, Society/Culture | Comments Off
Obama’s filing against 9/11 families: so bad it’s good
Bizarre amicus brief totally demolishes the Second Circuit’s dismissal of the families’ suit, then replaces it with the most mendacious stupidity imaginable. Now the Supreme Court will HAVE to hear the case, just to avoid the implication that it accepted this garbage.
9/11 families were stunned this week to learn that President Obama is asking the Supreme Court NOT to review their effort to recover damages from the government of Saudia Arabia and from several Saudi princes for funding al Qaeda’s 9/11 attack on America. That the defendants did funnel vast sums of money to al Qaeda was accepted as a given by the appellate court, as was the fact that al Qaeda was known to be dedicated to and engaged in violent attacks against America. So what was the Obama administration’s reason for siding with the Saudis?
Two Memorial Project commissioners quit over the Project’s bad behavior
Two Pennsylvanian’s quit the Flight 93 Memorial Commission last week, protesting Park Service plans to condemn five crash-site properties that it never negotiated for in good faith. Consider the case of the Lambert family, who have been on their land for three generations:
“It’s absolutely a surprise. I’m shocked by it. I’m disappointed by it,” said Tim Lambert, who owns nearly 164 acres that his grandfather bought in the 1930s. The park service plans to condemn two parcels totaling about five acres — land, he said, he had always intended to donate for the memorial.
“To the best of my knowledge and my lawyer, absolutely no negotiations have taken place with the park service where we’ve sat down and discussed this,” Lambert said.
Lambert said he had mainly dealt with the Families of Flight 93 and said he’s provided the group all the information it’s asked for, including an appraisal.
They are condemning land that he was trying to GIVE to them, just because he had the gall to expect the Park Service to actually do its part.
Moral Muslims don’t want a memorial to the terrorists on the Flight 93 crash site
Thanks to Khalim Massoud, president of Muslims against Sharia–Islamic Reform Movement, for his press release in support of Tom Burnett Sr.’s efforts to stop the Park Service from planting a giant Mecca-oriented crescent atop his son’s grave.
Islamic Reform Movement is clear eyed on the problem:
We all know who the enemy is. It’s Islamic radicals who are guided by the ideology of Islamic supremacy. Just as Nazis were guided by the ideology of Aryan supremacy. The only difference is that Gihadis consider it their religious duty to impose Islam all over the world and many of them yearn to die (and kill) for Allah. They use lines from the Koran such as “kill them [infidels] wherever you find them” or “slay the idolaters wherever you find them” as their guiding principles.
Islam needs to be reformed so that it rejects supremacism and violent conquest, but trying reform Islam is a difficult and dangerous business:
Press refuses again to check and report the facts, this time in BART shooting
The crescent memorial to Flight 93 would have been stopped long ago if the media was willing to check and report simple facts like the Mecca-orientation of the giant crescent. The same thing happens whenever the facts of a case are not congenial to our left-wing elites.
Another extreme example is now taking place in Oakland California, where inflammatory reports of police criminality in the New Year’s Day shooting of Oscar Grant are held up by the Oakland street mob as justication for last week’s murder of four police officers. Even after this massacre of Oakland police, the press still refuses to publish dramatic exculpatory evidence in the Oscar Grant case.
Senator Specter’s payoff for betraying his party: betrayal of his state
We now know one of the payoffs that Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter received for being one of three Republican Senators who allowed President Obama’s trillion-dollar Spendulus bill to become law. WPXI in Pittsburgh reports that Specter has a 5.5 million dollar earmark for the crescent-shaped Flight 93 memorial in the omnibus spending bill just passed by the Senate.
Columnist Ralph Couey emails a clarification
Alec Rawls sends this update to last week’s post on the Flight 93 memorial, where columnist Ralph Couey was said to have described Tom Burnett Sr.’s objections to the crescent design as “hopeless intransigence.”
UPDATE: Columnist Ralph Couey emails a clarification
Mr. Couey insists that his reference to “hopeless intransigence” was not directed at Mr. Burnett’s opposition to the crescent design but “dealt solely with the parties involved in the land purchase.”
I’ll take his word for that. The way he sandwiched his mention of Mr. Burnett’s protest in between his comments about the land deal certainly made it look like he was drawing a parallel, which is how I interpreted him, but there have been plenty of times when my own writings have been open to readings that I did not intend. These things happen. Here is the relevant part of Mr. Couey’s column:
Mother of Flight 93 hero calls for “a full and transparent review” of the crescent-shaped memorial
For two years, Tom Burnett Sr. has been speaking out against the crescent-shaped memorial to Flight 93. This week Beverly Burnett (mother of Flight 93 hero Tom Burnett Jr.) stepped into the public eye to support her husband, and to make her own appeal for a full investigation:
Today, I am adding my voice for a full and transparent review of the National Park Service and Flight 93 design selection process that produced Crescent of Embrace. Does it have Islamic symbols or doesn’t it? Let’s settle this once and for all.
Why do you think Tom Sr. opposed this design? It is pretty simple; Tom Sr. saw the Islamic symbols and knew those symbols did not belong at the crash site of Flight 93.
Tom Burnett Sr. traveled to Pennsylvania last August to attend the Task Force Meeting to voice his opposition to the memorial design. A Family Board member as well as a commissioner accused Tom Sr. being “just like the Islamic terrorists” that killed our son.
Why didn’t someone speak up and defend Tom Sr.’s right to voice his opinion?
Thanks to The Somerset Daily American for publishing Mrs. Burnett’s complete statement, which she also entered into the record of the most recent Memorial Project meeting. Read the whole thing.
Memorial Project officials insist that it was the passengers and crew, not the terrorists, who broke the peace on 9/11
The official explanation for the Crescent of Embrace design is that the path of Flight 93 breaks the circle, turning it into the giant crescent. They call it the Circle of Embrace now, but the Memorial Project’s own website acknowledges that the circle is still broken:
Caught on video: shameful cover-up of the crescent-topped Tower of Voices
For three years, the Flight 93 Memorial Project has been relentlessly dishonest, publicly denying damning facts like the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent while making excuses for these facts in private.
Set to another Ennio Morricone masterpiece.
Architect Paul Murdoch split his giant Crescent of Embrace memorial to Flight 93 into two separate arcs at the top, in effect creating two separate crescents:
Another stealth jihadist plants another evil hidden Islamic message
What could be as evil as sneaking a memorial to the 9/11 terrorists onto the Flight 93 crash site? How about sneaking a hidden message of Islamic indoctrination into the soundtrack if an adorable baby doll, repeated every 30 seconds to thousands of 2-5 year old girls without parental knowledge?
If you haven’t heard it before, check out this AP video from October:
Help the Soldiers!
American GeniusOur Founding Ideas
- The Declaration of Independence
- The Federalist Papers
- The U.S. Constitution
- Debates of 1787
- The Anti-Federalist Papers
- The Writing of John Locke
"Governments are instituted among men,deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776
What THEY Say:
Foreign News In English
Contact UsEmail Publius' Forum
Separation of School