I think people are off the deep end on this one. Is it supposed to be a crescent? Or is it supposed to be an amphitheater (to amplify the sound of the chimes, perhaps), and as it so happens, amphitheaters are shaped like crescents?

Show me intent.

Dude, if a Holocaust museum was built in the shape of a Swastika for reasons apart from symbology (they just thought the design was cool, etc.)...

It doesn't matter what they intended. The symbology is quite clear, intended or not.

But I'm pretty damn sure they did intend it. I don't think they "forgot" the crescent is the symbol of Islam. They even use that word in the name of the memorial -- "The Crescent of Embrace."

An ampitheter, by the way, is usually circular. Why not a full circle? Circles symbolize unbroken unity, too.

I just don't think this was an accident. And accident or not, it's inappropriate.

I see now from Malkin's post that the design is called "crescent of embrace." Guess that answers my first question.

And beyond that, we have the Vietnam Wall syndrome all over again. I don't mean to be a philistine -- it just comes naturally -- but seriously, what's with all this pussy shit about trees and windchimes?

I like trees, and I've already said I like the windchime idea. But somewhere in this memorial... couldn't there be a concrete and obvious symbol of valor and resolve?

We used to memorialize heroes with statues. Too martial, the left thinks, and too passe. But I think a statue of some of the ringleaders of the revolt, huddled together, angry resolve in their eyes, would be a nice, if blatant, notification as to precisely what we're praising here.

But no... the left is uncomfortable with anger, resolve, and heroism generally, so we get trees and windchimes and the Islamic crescent. It's all about the peace, the forgiveness, the love.

I don't think the fallen loved their killers.

I don't think there is any way the people of Somerset County and Shanksville will stand for that sort of memorial.

If it gets put up I predict a lot of unofficial nightime alterations...

Dude, someone should have seen it and said something, like, "Hey guys, do you think having this memorial in the shape of something that represents the murderous bastards that perpetrated the crime may be seen as insensative?". Something.
Had to be intentional, there's no way something like that just sneaks by unoticed.
Any background info on who designed it?

ace -

regarding Bitburg, we can let Ronnie speak for himself:

... There are over 2,000 buried in Bitburg cemetery. Among them are 48 members of the SS -- the crimes of the SS must rank among the most heinous in human history -- but others buried there were simply soldiers in the German Army.

How many were fanatical followers of a dictator and willfully carried out his cruel orders? And how many were conscripts, forced into service during the death throes of the Nazi war machine? We do not know.

Many, however, we know from the dates on their tombstones, were only teenagers at the time. There is one boy buried there who died a week before his 16th birthday.

There were thousands of such soldiers to whom nazism meant no more than a brutal end to a short life. We do not believe in collective guilt. Only God can look into the human heart, and all these men have now met their supreme judge, and they have been judged by Him as we shall all be judged.

Our duty today is to mourn the human wreckage of totalitarianism, and today in Bitburg cemetery we commemorated the potential good in humanity that was consumed back then, 40 years ago.

Perhaps if that 15-year-old soldier had lived, he would have joined his fellow countrymen in building this new democratic Federal Republic of Germany, devoted to human dignity and the defense of freedom that we celebrate today.

Or perhaps his children or his grandchildren might be among you here today at the Bitburg Air Base, where new generations of Germans and Americans join together in friendship and common cause, dedicating their lives to preserving peace and guarding the security of the free world.

Too often in the past each war only planted the seeds of the next. We celebrate today the reconciliation between our two nations that has liberated us from that cycle of destruction. Look at what together we've accomplished. We who were enemies are now friends; we who were bitter adversaries are now the strongest of allies.

In the place of fear we've sown trust, and out of the ruins of war has blossomed an enduring peace. Tens of thousands of Americans have served in this town over the years.

As the mayor of Bitburg has said, in that time there have been some 6,000 marriages between Germans and Americans, and many thousands of children have come from these unions. This is the real symbol of our future together, a future to be filled with hope, friendship, and freedom.

Ron then went on to joke that he'd ordered a massive preemptive air assault on Soviet tank positions and would ride into Moscow by that Saturday.

He was funny that way.

The swastika comparison isn't quite fair. No one uses that symbol innocently anymore. Whereas I do think it's possible that designer chose the crescent for innocent, i.e., aesthetic, reasons.

I'd like to know what his thinking was. It won't make the design any more or less appropriate, but it will affect the level of outrage that's warranted.

Murdoch's apparently a USC professor...
and an obvious "Why do they hate us??" kind of guy.
Oh yeah, what am I saying. They quit asking that question when they found the answer to all problems...BUSH!!
Silly me.

Res ipsa loquitor.

ANd I think the swastika example is quite fair.

No one uses that symbol innocently anymore? Well the crescent is just as famous now as the swastika was then.

Suppose the grounds had been organized in a giant peace symbol-- for, uhh, "aesthetic reasons."

Appropriate political messaging? I think not.

The designer speaks:

Murdoch, however, said his crescent has no religious significance, but was created to add formality to the bowl-shaped valley surrounding the crash site.

"This is not about any religion per se," Murdoch said in a telephone interview with the Tribune-Democrat in Johnstown. "It's a spiritual space, and a sacred place, but it's open to anyone."

The word "crescent," he said, was used as a generic architectural term for a curved line.

"Sure, there is an Islamic crescent," Murdoch said. "Theirs is a lunar crescent. Ours isn't based on that."

Damn it -- busted link in my last comment. Here's the correct one.

The left would have a shit-fit if it were shaped in anything even resembling a cross.

Frankly, this is absolutely appalling.

And yet the crescent was chosen, despite other obvious (and perfectly viable) possibilities, like a full circle.

The crescent is the "text" of the memorial, and authors usually don't pick their words helter-skelter and randomly, unless you're a blogger like myself.

Yeah, it's still outrageous, just degrees thereof. Meanwhile I can agree with ace that the pussy shit is just lame.

In the Ballpark at Arlington, renamed for some corporate sponsor whose name escapes me, there is a statue just inside the entrance of Nolan Ryan. It's nice, he's lookin up with his hat off, like he did so many times after a great performance, or one of his no-hitters...his records and accomplishments are carved into the granite around him.. all very nice.

but if I could have chosen my favorite pose, it would have been Nolan with his left arm wrapped around that pussy Robin Ventura's neck, punching the shit out of him with his right.

that would have been cool.

And I've got to say that I don't put as much stock in the designer's claims as to his intent as Allah does.

He says it was all just an accident. Well, if it was an accident, chosen for no very good reason, certainly he'd be willing to change it in order to avoid the supposedly-unintentional messaging his accidental design is sending.

I see no statement by him that he's willing to contemplate any overarching shape to replace the crescent.

He seems big on the crescent. Why? Well, maybe he just loves crescents. Or maybe he thinks the crescent, with all its symbolic charge, is the key to his design.

This is not about any religion per se

that is an interesting statement

One last point:

No one uses that symbol innocently anymore? Well the crescent is just as famous now as the swastika was then.

Come on. That's patently absurd. Half of America can't find Canada on a fucking map, yet you think there's an indelible link in their minds between Islam and crescents? Never mind the fact that the two Arab flags most often featured on TV here -- the Iraqi and Palestinian -- don't have crescents in them. (Neither do the flags of Hamas or Hezbollah, for that matter.)

Ask the average American what symbol he thinks of when he thinks of Islam and he's likely to tell you "a towel."

"Sure, there is an Islamic crescent," Murdoch said. "Theirs is a lunar crescent. Ours isn't based on that."

And sure, the Islamic crescent is normally indicated as red but our red is not based on the Islamic red. Ours is a tint lighter.

At this point the designer's original intent is moot. If he wants to say that the choice of a crescent shape was purely aesthetic and had no religious connotations whatever, fine. I don't think I believe him, but let him stick to that story.

The point is that a huge number of people will instantly make the connection to Islam, and feel that it's wildly inappropriate in a 9-11 memorial. It's a bad idea, and it should be scrapped.

YOU FAR RIGHT NEOCONS WILL NEVER GET IT:

Those fascists on the plane (the passengers) were the AGGRESSORS...the "terrorists" are the victims. In fact, it is suggested that one of the so-called "passengers" was an ex-Isreali commando.

We on the Left support the victims, the freedom fighters you neocons call "facists."

"I realize that the left isn't comfortable with the idea of fighting back"

...indeed, since Leftism = Slave Morality.

Come on. That's patently absurd. Half of America can't find Canada on a fucking map, yet you think there's an indelible link in their minds between Islam and crescents?

Tell that to B.C. comic strip who caught grief when the crescent was shown on a outhouse.

the Iraqi and Palestinian -- don't have crescents in them. (Neither do the flags of Hamas or Hezbollah, for that matter.)

Yeah they just load up there weapons in their non designated military vehicles. You know the ones. The red crescent ambulances.

I'm with Allah on this one, especially since it appears that family members of those who died really like it. With the much lower number of casualties, it must have been easier to determine the will of the families than it is with the WTC memorial.

As to people who point out how hysterics on the left go batshit about supposed subtextual symbolism: Exactly. Do you really want to be like those nutjobs?

This kind of cleverness goes on in public art. Outside the NYS Supreme Court building at 60 Centre Street in Manhattan is a big sculpture which is supposed to be inspired by a slave ship and an African antelope horn, but looks like a big "F* you" bird. It was also an ill designed fountain causing problems, but that's a different issue.

Normally I'd agree with Allah, but notice also there's some trees in a different color from their surroundings placed where the star would be in the Islamic star and crescent. It's entirely possible the designer came up with that by accident, but I really sort of doubt it.

I am 100% with Allah and Hubris on this one. The rush to angry outrage is a little silly, IMO, based on:

1. The common use of a crescent in design. The National Police Officer's Memorial, for example, is basically two symmetric crescents opposite each other.

2. the fact that the "redness" of the red crescent (as depicted in the sample pic) seems to merely reflect the color the leaves will be in autumn. (my interpretation could be wrong on this, but if correct, it will only be "Muslim" for a month)

3. The fact that while an Islamic symbol would be an unfortunate allusion, it is NOT the analagous equivalent of a swastika on a Jewish memorial.

4. The family members chose the designs.

5. To be clear - it's not not ok to raise an eyebrow and examine the intent - and perhaps exert pressure to make tweaks on the final design of the memorial to avoid uncomfortable associations - but rushing to judgment on both the intent and the nature of the design as a de facto symbol of Dhimmitude seems, as Hubris puts it, "batshit about supposed subtextual symbolism."

As Allah makes the distinction (and unlike me, he can probably get away with it on this comment board without being flamed to holy Hell), there are certainly more reasonable degrees of disagreement or objection to this besides full-bore righteous outrage.

PS - Alluha Akbar!

Well, let's not you, Allah, and Hubris start sucking each other's cocks over your ostensible level-headedness.

I'm not precisely calling for "anger" or "outrage." I think the post was pretty even-keeled, and I spoke of "weariness." Not frothing anger.

PSS - Normally I'd agree with Allah, but notice also there's some trees in a different color from their surroundings placed where the star would be in the Islamic star and crescent.

I believe that's a lake, fountain or patch of grass.

It's possible that the artist is trying to pull a fast one, but I'm still unsure about assuming intent and going to Defcon 1.

Touchy, touchy. Easy, tiger. Go to one of those massage parlors in Chinatown or something.

While one might call "Flight 93 "Memorial:" The Crescent of Dhimmitude" a bit strongly worded, I wasn't intending to directly criticize this blog, as much as I was questioning the overwhelming sentiment in Malkin's 30 or so trackbacks.

Besides - Allah has turned down all of my previous advances to initiate "sucking each other's cocks."

Well, let's not you, Allah, and Hubris start sucking each other's cocks over your ostensible level-headedness.

You insult me, sir. I am not level-headed.

The day I see the pro-abortion left building memorials at bombed clinics that celebrate Christianity as a religion of peace and understanding, I'll buy the theory that Islam in general and the anti-america left in particular aren't simply celebrating the murder of our civilians by the Muslim equivalent of the militant brownshirts of 1930's Germany.

Too clever by a half, and I don't buy it at all.

Speaking of "buy", just how much is this "spritual space" cost, and who foots the bill?

What's wrong with a nice marble slab with their names, a description of their deeds, and a thank you from the Nation?

Why does this have to turn into some asthetic boondogle - an expensive, sly joke aimed at those who take memorials seriously.

I think "dhimmitude" is perfectly justified, when a "memorial" to those butched by Islamist lunatics just can't seem to avoid making the Islamic crescent the main architectual feature of the "memorial."

As others have said-- the cross is a lovely aesthetic design, too, even absent any religious connotations.

Think a cross-shaped memorial had any chance whatsoever to be chosen? I don't. I think they would have recoiled from the inavoidable connotations of the cross.

And yet-- no recoiling at the crescent. Hey, it's just a nice little shape. Means nothing.

Bill from INDC is saying that it isn't worth mentioning that there is a chance that some pro-terrorists might be trying to hijack another 9-11 memorial (cause they neeevvver tried to that before!)

I commend his bravery in keeping his mouth shut! A true non-partisan centrist hero!!!!

Bill - Pull a fast one? It's right out there in the open.

The intent isn't a mystery, they meant to include symbolism of the faith.

and unlike me, he can probably get away with it on this comment board without being flamed to holy Hell

Boo Fucking Hoo. Want me to tell you the solution to this problem?

That red crescent is essentially is a memorial to the hijackers.
Lovely thought, but I'd rather remember the folks who fought evil.

Well, they were victims too, right?

It would be jingoistic to exclude them from our prayers.

There is an obvious counterargument to Allah's superficially reasonable reservations.

Namely, the crescent is croissant-shaped -- or, should I say, the croissant is crescent-shaped?

It is obvious that this is not merely a monument to Islam; it's a monument to Islam and French pastry.

As for the crescent only being red in autumn--

Well, terrific! That means that in spring and summer it will be green.

Not like a green crescent has any religious connotations. Just like a golden cross doesn't have any religious connotations, either.

So, as long as we're discounting all possible religious connotation, let's have that big golden cross as the central architectural feature of the memorial.

I assure you-- it would only be chosen for its aesthetic qualities. The Christian cross is based on the crucifix, whereas this cross would simply be an age-old symbol signifying nothing at all.

I haven't seen any calls on here for the right to boycott or anything. Nor have people been objecting on the grounds that the memorial is, I don't know, three-dimensional, just like a mosque.

The fact is that a crescent is a fairly specific shape, and an even more specific title, with clear associations to a specific religion. It raises an unnecesary point of controversy, and it ought to be junked.

On the issue of subliminal messages in public art: There's a plaza in downtown Salt Lake City with a sculpture at the center featuring all sorts of arcana--a sundial surrounded by the signs of the zodiac, and a polished monolith supporting a giant boulder. Like most public art, it means who-knows-what, but a couple of years after its unveiling the artist did a snarky little interview where he revealed that the boulder symbolized his wish that Salt Lake would be obliterated by a giant meteor. Cute (and paid for with my tax dollars!), but 9-11 is too serious to fart around with that kind of cutesiness.

Boo Fucking Hoo. Want me to tell you the solution to this problem?

Hey, I wasn't crying, just issuing a pre-emptive defense of the point due to Allah's endorsement. Like, because he's Allah, and he's got CRED, MAN.

Also, I was specifically going to write:

"and unlike me, he can probably get away with it on this comment board without being flamed to holy Hell by shitbags like BrewFan"

But I figured that it was best not to incite. Nevertheless, you predictably rise to the occassion.

You must be the dumbest right-wing troll on the net, BrewFan.

Hamilton Peterson, president of the Families of Flight 93 (he lost his father and stepmother) on the design:

"The selection of the final design moves us one step closer to memorializing this extraordinary group of heroes" said Hamilton Peterson, president of the Families of Flight 93. "We will forever honor their efforts and revere this hallowed ground as the final resting place for the passengers and crew members of Flight 93."

Here he is at a recent hearing regarding putting a marker in the capitol building:

"In this age when evildoers get most of the news coverage, how important it is to have a tribute to those who faced evil with courage and conviction, and refused to give up.

"Every day across the world as passengers and crew board flights, there is an implicit understanding that people are ready to take action to prevent terrorists from stealing our freedom and our lives. Flight 93’s eternal gift is the knowledge that good people can and must prevail," Peterson said.

Yep, sounds like a real terrorist-lover.

Sorry: Link.

Aside from the whole "crescent" issue, it is just a stupid design. I even think a big slab of granite or marble with names on it would be preferable. Windchimes? Imagine windchimes at, say, the Lincoln Memorial. Go ahead, try.

I wish I was a level 18 necromancer so I could raise the corpse of somebody who has a clue how a national monument ought to be done.

"You must be the dumbest right-wing troll on the net, BrewFan"

lol! If this was your blog, I think you'd delete this statement after thinking it over for a minute!

Not like a green crescent has any religious connotations. Just like a golden cross doesn't have any religious connotations, either.

So, as long as we're discounting all possible religious connotation, let's have that big golden cross as the central architectural feature of the memorial.

Dude pretty much all trees are green. And I'm not saying that you don't have reason to raise an eybrow.

BUT my overarching point is, do you really want to cede all suspicious crescent shaped memorials because the symbol of islam happens to be a crescent? In a similar fashion, I think it's ridiculous that a memorial that consists of two lines that intersect in the middle would be discounted because it's a sneaky endorsement of Christianity.

I gather that a lot of people on this board might also think that PC leftist nitpicking that invalidates such a potential geometric design (that resembles a cross) would be pretty stupid.

So in essence, in reacting to the crescent by noting the fact that leftists would paradoxically decree potential Christian religious allusions unacceptable (in their attempts to monomaniacally eliminate domestic religious references), are we not committing some of the same hyper-analytical ideological sins?

I mean, let's face it: crescents are fucking cool.

If the intent is not some PC reconciliation and the design could be tweaked a bit to avoid uncomfortable allusions, (establish intent, butch it up, widen the crescent, get rid of any colored space in the middle that can be looked at as a direct attempt to mimic Islam's symbol), I kind of dig it.

lol! If this was your blog, I think you'd delete this statement after thinking it over for a minute!

Ok, you got me, I can't merely referring to your efforts here by using the word "troll," Brewfan. Here you're just one of the dumbest and most wretch-inducingly sycophantic commenters on the net.

Yep, sounds like a real terrorist-lover.

We went from basically a strong disagreement to this fucked up shot at those that disagree. Fuck you.

I'm no arbologist (?), but from the description of the memorial, it looks to me like the trees will be red throughout the summer.

From the article linked on Malkin's site:

"Crescent of Embrace" will feature a Tower of Voices, containing 40 wind chimes -- one for each passenger and crew member who died -- and two stands of red maple trees that will line a walkway caressing the natural bowl shape of the land. Forty separate groves of red and sugar maples will be planted behind the crescent, and a black slate wall will mark the edge of the crash site, where the remains of those who died now rest.

I'm kinda' on the fence about the whole thing, but there is more to the memorial than just the red crescent.

Cmon people!

We are discussing the Sacred Symbol of the Religion of Peace!

Can't we all just get along.

It's a giant symbol of the religion that the attacks were done to promote.

It's like a message beaming upward to allah: Here is the spot where infidels were murdered in your name.

The memorial seems to be celebrating the victimhood, not the heroism, of the Flight 93 passengers. It also gives me the creepy feeling that the passengers and crew are being embraced by Allah (ahem, not that there's anything wrong with that).

Despite his protestations, I think the architect envisioned this as a healing monument that would bring Islam and western society closer together. Maybe he's right - but at this time I think most of us are more concerned with the preservation of western society in the face of radical Islam.

If 30 years ago he was designing a monument to our efforts in the cold war, it would have included "The Sickle of Brotherhood."

The memorial seems to be celebrating the victimhood, not the heroism, of the Flight 93 passengers.

This is the second problem with the memorial, which, combined with the first, leads me to be very suspicious about the agenda being promoted here.

I don't think the families' wishes should be dispositive. If they like the design, great, but it ain't their memorial.

My question for those who oppose the design is this: what message are you afraid is being sent by having a crescent there? That the jihadis' cause was just and Islam should prevail?

This isn't the WTC site or the Pentagon, whose inhabitants, according to the left, kinda sorta had it coming for being part of Amerikkka's military-industrial complex. This is Flight 93. Does anyone, including the left, think the passengers deserved it? In other words, whose going to receive the message you think is being given by having a crescent there?

If the memorial included a re-enactment of Todd Beamer kicking a terrorist's ass for fifteen minutes straight (an homage to the 15 minute alleyfight in They Live), I might be willing to give the big red Islamic crescent a pass.

But the whole thing is about peace and love and healing and trees and windchimes and, more than likely, Tom Fucking Queerbait Bombadil prancing around in his big yellow boots, and when that gets added in with the symbol of our enemy (not that Islam per se is our enemy, but the crescent is the symbol of our enemies, along with being the symbol of peaceable Muslims), then I've got to say this memorial does not celebrate what it claims to celebrate.

It's Neil Young singing "Imagine" at the 9/11 telethon all over again.

Thanks Dman, fuck you back. I didn't attack anyone in particular, I was responding to the idea that the memorial has been hijacked by people with pro-terrorist sympathies. Since the families were involved in the choice of the memorial, I thought something backing up their motivations was relevant. Not sure how that affected you personally.

see ace? I actually had a point with the Nolan Ryan thing.

bottom line for me, at best, the crescent is just inappropriate.

Hubris--

Once again, the design was selected by 15 people, only a fraction of which were affected family members, the others being "community leaders" and "design professionals."

There is simply not enough evidence at this point to say "the families" -- all of the affected family members -- approved of this design.

There's a rule. I forget who said it. But it says that any nonprofit organization which is not expressly right-wing will become left-wing over time, because it's the left-wingers who tend to get involved with this shit, until they have a board consisting of nothing but left-wingers.

Sometimes this can happen quickly. Did it happen here? I don't know. But neither do you know that "the families" signed off on memorializing their dead with an Islamic crescent.

I don't think the families' wishes should be dispositive. If they like the design, great, but it ain't their memorial.

I don't think it's dispositive (and acknowledge the points made by Ace in his update), but the question of motivation came into this topic pretty quickly. A lot of the criticism isn't just "they picked a memorial that's a bad idea" but rather "this is a deliberate attempt at Islamic symbolism/acknowledging the humanity of the terrorists/whatever." If motivation is a topic, I think it's fair to point out that people who not only lost loved ones, but say the terrorists were evil and those who died show that we will freakin' fight back, think the memorial's kosher (if I can use that word).

Johnny Coldcuts FTW

There is simply not enough evidence at this point to say "the families" -- all of the affected family members -- approved of this design.

We crossed in the mail. Acknowledged, and I agree.

"Here you're just one of the dumbest and most wretch-inducingly sycophantic commenters on the net"

Come on. Admit it Bill. You like the abuse! Otherwise you wouldn't keep coming back for more. You want Daddy BrewFan to spank you again?

My question for those who oppose the design is this: what message are you afraid is being sent by having a crescent there?

Well, for starts, it looks like the message is that the passengers have given themselves up to the embrace of Islam.

In other words, whose going to receive the message you think is being given by having a crescent there?

We may not be receptive, but we can certainly feel insulted, and we can feel that the actions and fates of the passengers are being called irrelevant, since they end up being embraced by Islam anyway.

Hubris , I disagree with the design and I have not indicated any family member who did agree with the design is pro terrorist. Any inference that I or anyone else might have is an over the top insult.

To me the design is just more appeasement that our Islamic enemies perceive as weakness.

BUT my overarching point is, do you really want to cede all suspicious crescent shaped memorials because the symbol of islam happens to be a crescent?

Hate to say it, but I agree with Bill et al. Crescents are cool, the appear all over the place in architecture and design, and I don't think the form has been preempted by Islam in the same way that the cross has been preempted by Christianity.

*slaps self silly*

Dman,

Peace, man [but I'm not an appeaser--ed.]. I wasn't insulting anyone. I was trying to point out that it appears people with the right motivations were involved here. That's it. Sometimes it might seem something's directed to you when it's not. I know this from firsthand experience, because I'm a narcissist.

do you really want to cede all suspicious crescent shaped memorials because the symbol of islam happens to be a crescent?

From now on, yup. Because after 9/11, we can't look at crescents the same way anymore. However innocent crescent designs might have been in the past, we're in a new era now, and we might as well behave like it. I'll meet the designers halfway, though: if they want to build the memorial according to its present design, but add a gigantic statue of a woman crowned with stars standing on top of it, maybe we can talk.

My question for those who oppose the design is this: what message are you afraid is being sent by having a crescent there?

I'm not afraid of anything. I am repulsed by most things islamic at the moment. I do not want to see it associated with a memorial to those murdered by those people.

I'm not precisely calling for "anger" or "outrage."

OK, I will call for it then. Why is it the left is only allowed "anger" and "outrage"?

I don't even know if this is the right issue, but frankly Scarlet I don't give a damn. If the left can express faux "anger" and "outrage" as a political tool so can I.

The left compromised and twisted the 9/11 memorial design into some self-flagellation excercise, there's no reason to believe this on might not have similar motivations behind it.

I will say this: once is a fluke, twice a coincidence, three times is ENEMY FUCKING ACTION.

If a Pentagon memorial gets similarly compromised, then you KNOW its a conspiracy.

Half of America can't find Canada on a fucking map, yet you think there's an indelible link in their minds between Islam and crescents?

And the other half that can, knows it is an islamic symbol.

He seems big on the crescent. Why? Well, maybe he just loves crescents. Or maybe he thinks the crescent, with all its symbolic charge, is the key to his design.

Maybe, he just wants to encourage the continual asking of that most obnoxious of questions: "Do you know why they hate us?"

"BUT my overarching point is, do you really want to cede all suspicious crescent shaped memorials because the symbol of islam happens to be a crescent?" -- Allah

Certainly not. Salt Lake City's new library opened in 2003 without a peep of any concern about celebrating Islam. Which would have been silly.
However, one should be able to describe THIS memorial without using the words red and crescent.
The more I think about it, the more I find it offensive.

In fact, it is suggested that one of the so-called "passengers" was an ex-Isreali commando.

Shit, if only.

What really pisses me off is how those leftie moonbats show their traitorous instincts by putting an Islamofacist crescent in the night sky during every lunar cycle. Bastards!

However, one should be able to describe THIS memorial without using the words red and crescent.
Yeah, that tells me the guy's intent right there.

This whole crescent thing is a matter of context and intent. The croissant, for example, was invented in Vienna after they won a huge victory over the Turks--1689, I think. They liked the idea of devouring the symbol of Islam for breakfast every morning. They didn't put up a big "Crescent of Reconciliation" in the middle of town.

I've got no problem with a big crescent-shaped library in the middle of SLC, but if it had been some interfaith worship center, the design would have been legitimately criticized. The monument to people who died fighting Islamic terrorists shouldn't be shaped like a crescent. If they want to put crescents on the doors of the nearby public restrooms, that's fine with me. Not, of course, that there'd be any religious significance in that.

Maybe somebody could just e-mail the designer and ask him the question (I won't have access to e-mail until tonight or I'd do it).

info@paulmurdocharchitects.com

site

Hubris:

We already know what the designer has said to the public - check out Allah's post above. He said that it's not about any religion "per se." I suspect that that's all you're going to get from him.

So it's not a religious monument, but I think it's pretty clear that it's designed to make a statement about the relationship between Islam and the west.

What a great piece of public art, look at the conversation it has provoked. About Flight 93?

...but I think it's pretty clear that it's designed to make a statement about the relationship between Islam and the west.

I'd like to ask that question and see if there's a response. And also: During the design process, did the "crescent" symbolism issue come up? Just to see what they'd say (I suspect the answer would be "we were fitting the terrain" since that's their general design philosophy, but what the hell, e-mails are free).

If you take a look a the design in the link that Chad put up, which is the design layout that the judges had to review, you will notice that the crescent is not clearly outlined like it is in the design that was released later.

So, the judges most likely were not aware of the way the final design would look.

Other than the crescent (that unfortunately dominates the entire memorial) I really like the layout and idea for this design.

On another note, was anyone else aware that the entire competition, including the salary for the competition coordinator, was funded by the Heinz Foundation (see page 22 of the PDF)?

Dollars to Donuts says that crescent is facing Mecca.

A good work of architecture provokes reactions and conversation and discussion -- in this blog alone, the design of the Crescent of Embrace's spurred debate on the relationship of the West and Islam, of "correct" symbolism of appropriate memorials, and the shift of tone of memorials in recent years, among other things.

Not all buildings are pretty and soft and nice. Not every piece of art is kittens and balloons and happy flowers.

If this were a generic "tombstone and flowers" memorial, would it have the same impact?

Nick:

I agree that good art and architecture should make us think, but this design provokes thought by exploiting the fates of those on Flight 93. And it's too "kittens & balloons & happy flowers" for most of us, since it completly ignores what the passengers did and why they had to do it.

Compare the message of this design with, say, a group of bronze statues of the passengers standing between the airplane and the White House. Isn't that a little closer to explaining how and why they died? Perhaps too jingoistic for some, but not all memorials are "pretty and soft and nice."

If this were a generic "tombstone and flowers" memorial, would it have the same impact?

To any old enough to remember the event, the design of a memorial is irrelevant.

You want a memorial with "impact"? Take a ton of whatever wreckage was left, cast it in a lucite block, and put a "Let's roll" plaque on it. Don't clean anything - leave it bloody with bits of splattered brains and bone fragments.

THAT will have impact. THAT will show that at least someone had some stones. THAT will make people remember.

This is a touchy feely crock of shit that doesn't do anything to memorialize some real heros.

The notion that the purpose of art is to shock and provoke, and that an angry conversation proves the value of the piece, is purely modern and purely bullshit. It dates to a time when art ran out of gas, and to a generation of artists who realized they didn't have the talent to draw competently, but they could probably take a halfway decent photograph of a crucifix in a jar of pee. It is toddlers who have never been punished saying bad words for the pleasure of the look on grown-ups' faces.

That being said, I don't know that we have anyone left with the skill to do a proper, kick-ass war memorial. Something big and bronze and macho and pissed off.

Wind chimes.

Crescents.

Jesus.

One of the plaques to be installed on the sight will say:

"May all who visit this place remember the collective acts of courage and sacrifice of the passengers and crew, revere this hallowed ground as the final resting place of those heroes, and reflect on the power of individuals who choose to make a difference."

Doesn't seem like a "celebration of victimhood" to me.

See what a divisive and violent religion Islam is? We're fighting already and they haven't even built the damn thing. Taste my scimitar, infidels!

BTW, the monument should be a big bronze busted-up drinks cart.

As the issue has shifted somewhat from the crescent to it just being a pussy design, you should look at the photos. From ground level, it looks like some imposing architecture with the tower, gateway, etc. And the chimes aren't like a set from the Dollar Store, they're big fucking things like in a cathedral organ.

The Tomb of the Unknowns is pretty powerful, but it's not imposing architecture.

Not exactly trying to convince anyone of anything, just saying it's easy to find fault with just about any design because of our subjective tastes.

I'm just a simple country boy, but it seems to me that if this is supposed to be a memorial to those who fought back, MAKE IT A MEMORIAL TO THOSE WHO FOUGHT BACK, not a kissy-kissy, hug-hug all-creatures-great-and-small Kumbaya piece of crap that would make the real heroes puke.

When my kids were growing up and did something wrong, their immediate claim was "It was an accident." I really don't care if this piece of crap was by design or accident. It is still a piece of crap considering what the stated intent is, and should be tossed exactly for that reason.

And while tossing it, toss Te-RAY-sa's money along with it. If she wants that crap, she can put it on her own property, preferably in France.

Its a PUSSY DESIGN.

I want a bronze mailed fist rising out of wreckage like a fucking Phoenix ready to ass rape anyone who has similar ideas in the future.

It should be a WARNING as much as a memorial.

Nick:

The wording on the plaque was defined before the competition - it has nothing to do with the message of the architecture.

Hubris:

To me it all comes down to the Crescent of Embrace.

Embracing what? The Sacred Ground, of course, where the passengers impacted.

What's embracing them? The red crescent, the symbol of Islam.

I'm not much for metaphorical interpretation, but this one seems like it's pretty obvious.

God you people are stupid.

The Muslim crescent isn't red. It's green.

You're all thinking of the "Red Crescent" - the Muslim arm of the Red Cross.

Philistines.

The Muslim crescent isn't red. It's green.

You're right: loose shit on my part. I was thinking along the lines of the Islamic symbols on the flags of Turkey, Tunisia, Algeria, and Azerbaijan, all of which have red on white or white on red crescents.

I do love it when anonymous people insult others.

So brave.

You must be the dumbest right-wing troll on the net, BrewFan and Here you're just one of the dumbest and most wretch-inducingly sycophantic commenters on the net
Bill from indc: I can't tell you how offended I am at your comments. Brewfan is a mere piker when it comes to dumb and he's barely right of center.I, on the other hand, am incredibly dumb and waaaaay to the right of brewfan. As to wretch-inducingly sycophantic commenters, I'm not sure what those big words mean, but I don't think brewfan could out do me there either. As to the design question--don't you think the heroism of those who stopped the highjacking, thereby saving the lives of other innocent victims should be the main reason for having a memorial? And that the second most important reason for having a memorial for these heroes is to inspire the rest of us to be heroic and self sacrificing?Just asking, cause of course I'm not near as smart as you are, being the dumbest right wing troll on the net and the most wretch- inducing sycophantic commenter on the net.Back to you Billiant Bill.

I checked the design on Malkin's post. It looks like an amphiteater to me. Of course, only an unhinged shrew like Malkin would make such a noxious connection.

Don't you people have anyhing better to do ? Like trying to help Katrina's victims? Or is it that your need to hate is so great that you are totally dysfunctional ?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/blog_9_8_05_1045.html

Algeria and Tunisia-red crescents

Don't you people have anyhing better to do ? Like trying to help Katrina's victims? Or is it that your need to hate is so great that you are totally dysfunctional ?

Lookie here...

Money raised by mostly conservative blogs: - $1,339,529

Money raised by liberal blogs - $178,135 (Link not permitted by content editor. Take out *) http://www.dropc*sh.com/campaign/hurricanerelief/liberal_blogs_for_hurricane_relief

Go write a check, moron.

Brewfan is a mere piker when it comes to dumb and he's barely right of center.I, on the other hand, am incredibly dumb and waaaaay to the right of brewfan.

Sorry, John, you're just not in Brewfan's league, and you don't eat me like Brewfan does.

Hey Slublog, are we still using "progressive" as our code word for moron?

slublog: He's not a moron, he's just intellectually crippled by his hatred of and contempt for conservatives, republicans, christians and anyone else who disagrees with his world view. Facts mean nothing to him.

Dangit, brownshirt!

Did you lose your Codebook again!?!

Michael : Looky here buddy, I've worked long and hard for this honor and I'm not giving it up easily. I hereby challenge brewfan to dumb-off.

No, but I left it in my car. I think on odd days it's "progressive" and on even days "dismissed". I'll have to double check though.

Don't tell Karl.

Michael : Looky here buddy, I've worked long and hard for this honor and I'm not giving it up easily. I hereby challenge brewfan to dumb-off.

Thunderdome.

slublog: He's not a moron...

I beg to differ. He is indeed a moron - by definition.

Tony: don't get me started. I'm stoking up for my dumb-off competition with brewfan. P.S. no he isn't (note how dumb that reply is!!!!!!!!!)

Michael : Looky here buddy, I've worked long and hard for this honor and I'm not giving it up easily. I hereby challenge brewfan to dumb-off.

I can't believe you guys are actually fighting about this.
You saw how two of my last three posts crumbled under cursory inspection.

Clearly, I am the Queen Dunderhead.
And I'll chimp-smack, then drool all over anybody who dares challenge me.

Make. My. Day.

lauraw: Hey get in line here, lady. You have to win a battle of the witless first. My first shot: Al Gore' s "I invented the internet."

Open thread?
It's Friday night after all.

Meet you up top?
Heh, heh *droooolll*

I hate to do this to you, but yeh we're headed to the top.

There’s three problems here; the crescent’s resemblance to Islamic imagery, the touchy-feely, PC memorial, and the alternatives the federal government’s Parks Service would be willing to put forward.

All the finalists for the Shanksville memorial competition – just like all the finalists for the WTC competition (including the winner) - are deliberately devoid of patriotic meaning or any hint of American ideals. All were picked by judges using different criteria than those provided in writing to designers before the competitions.

What this means is the Shanksville memorial can’t be improved by junking this design and picking another finalist. Each one is terrible.

With regard to the NY memorial, nearly all observers (including in the blogosphere) have blown it badly by limiting their criticism to the planned museum/cultural installations. The winning memorial design (“Reflecting Absence” … a.k.a. “Memory Hole”) is every bit the modernist, deconstructionist propaganda vehicle the cultural and “historical” displays would have been. If you didn’t know it was a memorial, you’d never know it was a memorial. That’s because it isn’t. Worst of all, it will be there forever.

Well it's clear that at looking at just that part of the memorial and cropping the rest of it out makes it look much worse than it actually is. Look at the total design . Those wind chimes are HUGE. I think the whole debate over this is silly. Look at the total design - that's only a small part of it. Cropping the design and saying the whole thing is a red crescent of Islam is over the top. That's one small part of the memorial.

Do you really want to cede all suspicious crescent shaped memorials because the symbol of islam happens to be a crescent?

My daughter's high school has a building that's a semicircle. It's just a semicircle. But if they renamed the place "Mohammad Atta Memorial HS" and gave everybody the day off on Osama's birthday, it might not seem like a semicircle anymore, would it? Save your cool-ass crescent for some structure where it doesn't mean anything, or at least where it's for an Islam that doesn't stand for killing Americans - if there is such a place. I have my doubts lately.

And the chimes aren't like a set from the Dollar Store, they're big fucking things like in a cathedral organ.
If they play "Onward Christian Soldiers" every morning at 10am, that part can stay.

The Tomb of the Unknowns is pretty powerful, but it's not imposing architecture.
The Tomb is made of marble. Marble is cool. Bronze - like Lady Liberty and Iwo Jima - is great too. They say, "These are man-made. And they honor men's deeds." Red maple and gardens are for frickin' elves. Go sell the design to Legolas and Elron, they can prance all over it.

And why is it that when some of you talk about 'meaningful architecture' and 'not judging the intent of the artist' and all that crap, I feel like a mugger is whispering in my ear from behind saying, "No, no... don't cry. Just drop your pants, don't move and everything will be all right." I've been taking it up the ass by liberal bullshit practically from the day I stepped into kindergarten, and all I get from moderate shits like you is, "Stockholm Syndrome is FUN! Bend over a little more and you'll start to LIKE IT!"

At first, I wondered how in the world those surviving family members could not have seen the obvious symbolism...but when you go to the Flight 93 Memorial Project's website...the layout appears pretty innocuous.

It really makes one think as to exactly what sort of layout was shown them.

Though I must say that for me personally...the words “crescent” and "red maple trees" would’ve immediately caused my ears to perk up.

I've been taking it up the ass by liberal bullshit practically from the day I stepped into kindergarten, and all I get from moderate shits like you is, "Stockholm Syndrome is FUN! Bend over a little more and you'll start to LIKE IT!"

WOW!!!!

There's some healthy anger. Feel free to vent here anytime, BR.

Feel better?

Loved the reference to Stockholm Syndrome. But, most of the publicized victims (Patty Hearst and so on) have been white. If you're actually black, I'm strangely comforted by the fact that you identify.

Have to say I loved geoff's idea @ 03:44 PM:

"a group of bronze statues of the passengers standing between the airplane and the White House"

Perfect. Have the airplane, painted with every symbol of Islam you can think of, draped with giant suicide-bomber belts, using machetes for its wings and maybe the head of a splodeydope in a kaffiyeh for the nose, plummetting down towards a miniature White House. Have the faces of the Flight 93 passengers on a large group of spirits rising up and placing themselves between the first and the second.

Maybe THAT will hammer into the people's heads exactly what we're fighting for here.

Um, who made you folks the arbiters of taste? Let's remember, this is not YOUR memorial. Families of 9/11 victims approved the design and they actually LIKE the way it turned out. So shut yer yaps for once. I hate to tell you this, but the world doesn't revolve around what you think.

Besides, according to the architects, the shape of the walkway is to conform with the natural grade of the land. So unless you consider the earth itself to be supporting the hijackers, your criticisms just sound foolish.

Zen_less:

Some families (very few actually) approved of the memorial (see above). And the world revolves around what we all think. We're just expressing our opinions here, and I think that it's perfectly legitimate to say that the message it sends to us is not the message that the architects intended. Or perhaps that it is the same message, but that we feel that it is inappropriate.

There are many ways to exploit the "natural grade of the land." We just don't think that choosing an Islamic symbol is the best choice, or even a moral choice.

Oh, yes, it damn well is my memorial, zen_less! Maybe the families own a bigger piece than I do, but I own my proper citizen's share of it. I wouldn't have liked this design in any case, but I don't think I'd've noticed or particularly cared about the whole crescent business except that the architect helpfully pointed it out in the title.

The Crescent of Embrace. Jesus. If I had to pick two words that least memorialized Flight 93, they would be "crescent" and "embrace." I'm not sure which one offends me more.

Rename it as ARC of Heroism and plant evergreens.

How about a crescent up your ass, faggot...