Crescent in Pennsylvania

Traction Control points out an interview by Jamie Glazov on

Crescent of Betrayal author Alec Rawls:

This is a symbolic attack on America , every bit as ambitious in its own way as the 9/11 attacks. The Wahabbists build mosques to claim territory. By claiming the Flight 93 crash site, Paul Murdoch is trying to turn Flight 93 into an al Qaeda victory.

Original proposal, since slightly modified, overlaid with a familiar symbol:


Where do MO readers stand on the Flight 93 memorial controversy? Personally, I can’t quite figure out what I think about it.

My initial thought was that if they didn’t reject it after the backlash began, it couldn’t be a coincidence that the memorial appears to be an Islamic crescent aligned with Mecca. When the artist offered to make some changes, he didn’t really seem to understand what anyone was upset about, which didn’t do a lot to convince me that he is for real. Also, CAIR’s description of Flight 93 as “a plane that crashed” is pretty outrageous.

If I had to pick sides, I’d oppose this memorial design. Even if it isn’t intended as a

What do you guys think about this issue?


  1. Well,

    If the bassids go ahead with it, then I suppose that good folks might take some time to visit it, and bring along several bags of rock salt to sprinkle around the roots of the trees.

    Turning the red crescent into a blackened, rotting pile of dead plants seems fitting to me.

    Other’s mileage, of course, may vary.

  2. The architect admitted to putting the crescent along with analogies to minarets, and Muslim faith, in addition to sneaking in memorial spaces for the terrorist on purpose. He’s another morally equivalent bleeding heart that could care less about the families of flight 93. It’s all about satisfying his ego trip to essentially create a giant political cartoon on the landscape with our tax dollars. He is the kind of useful idiot who still wouldn’t get it if OBL was about to personally cut his head off.

    The memorial is a travesty and should have the design competition reopened.

  3. Wonder if they’ll have much difficulty getting workers from the Shanksville area to work on it. Worksite security might be an issue, too.

  4. I can ALMOST see the good in it. A crescent would always remind people who it was that pulled off the attacks, and what motivated them. And I think it would inspire anger and rage, which is probably a good thing.

    But I can also understand the folks who feel it would be disrespectful to those who died there. It’s not traditional, for sure. But then neither was The Wall, and I think it history shows that one turned out OK.

    But I would go a bit further and add an image like the cow jumping over the moon. But instead of a cow, it would be a big, burly rugby player, with an earring in his right ear, riding an airline food service cart, propelled by a fire extinguisher. And he would be backed up by some women, and businessmen, and such.

    And they would crack the crescent in two,

    But I’m not an artist….

  5. I’d scrap the who thing, whether intended or by accident. I, however believe it was designed that way to be a “political statement” by some pro-Islamic people.

    Incidently, I’ve heard the memorial design has a place where all the names of those who died in the hi-jacking are inscribed……………Including those of the hi-jackers

    Can anyone confirm this or is it an urban legend?

  6. Tried to be a Devil’s Advocate about it…but gah! I couldn’t really think of anything solid to support it, and Argument of Ignorance from Lack-of-Imagination on part of the artist isn’t one I would take for an artist.

Comments are closed