Don’t Take Flight 93 to Mecca 10-15-08
Oct 15, 2008 Political
One of the dozen epic-scale mosque features in architect Paul Murdoch’s Crescent of Embrace design is a year-round accurate Islamic prayer-time sundial. The shadow calculations take a bit of work to verify, but the overt similarity is immediate:
Traditional Islamic sundial, left. The gnomon’s shadow is just reaching the outer curved vertical, indicating time for Islamic afternoon prayers. On the right is a plan view of the Tower of Voices part of the Flight 93 memorial. Shadow calculations confirm that, when the tower’s shadow reaches the inner arc of trees, it will also be time for Islamic afternoon prayers.
An Islamic sundial is a very exacting structure that would be nearly impossible to construct by accident. Islamic prayer times are determined by shadow length, so the prayer-time indicator line must be placed a particular distance from the gnomon, and must follow a particular arc.
It turns out that architect Paul Murdoch’s also put an Islamic sundial in his preliminary crescent design (from before he was chosen as a design competition finalist). This first Islamic sundial was to have been situated a few hundred yards away from the sundial in his final design, and instead of being surrounded by a vast array of crescents of trees, Murdoch’s first sundial just used a single arc of trees, laid out along the tower’s afternoon prayer line. Here is the first incarnation of the Tower of Voices:
The view here is facing south, along the entry road. The Tower opens to the northeast.
The plan view shows a tree-line to the east of the tower that appears to be at least roughly the shape of the prayer line on an Islamic sundial:
Left hand image: the tower sits at the bottom of the north-south rectangle of black rock. Right hand image shows the shape of the afternoon prayer line for an Islamic sundial, generated by Fer de Vries’ ZW2000 sundial computer. It is calibrated to the crash site latitude of 40.03 north. Fer’s red X marks the center of the gnomon. The prayer-line image gets scaled up or down depending on the gnomon height.
Scaling the image to give the best fit to the tree line to the east of the tower, the fit is just about perfect when the gnomon height is set to 86 feet:
If an 86 foot tower is placed at the flashing red cross, then when the tower’s shadow reaches the base of the line of surrounding trees, it will be time for Islamic afternoon prayers. (Details below on how to determine this scaling.)
Does the Stage I Tower of Voices have a gnomon height of 86 feet?
Very likely. The Stage I design does not specify the height of the tower, but in the elevation view above it looks to be 90 or 100 feet tall, and in Murdoch’s final design, the tower height is 93 feet, which seems the likely height here.
That’s a bit off from 86, and a gnomon height of 93 feet would push the afternoon prayer line several feet out beyond the center of the line of trees, but notice that if the full tower height is 93 feet, the gnomon height is actually several feet shorter.
Take a look back at the elevation view of the tower and you’ll see that the it has a crescent shaped top, with two arms reaching up maybe 6 or 8 feet above the low point of the crescent. The consistent gnomon point would be the low center point, which would be pretty close to 86 feet, if the full tower is 93.
Thus this LOOKS to be another year-round accurate Islamic prayer-time sundial. What we can say for certain is that Murdoch is within a minor height adjustment of having a second year-round accurate Islamic sundial. Given the specificity of these sundial shapes, that can’t possibly be coincidence, demonstrating that Murdoch had a terrorist memorial mosque in mind from the beginning.
Of course that had to be the case, given that a terrorist memorial mosque is what he ended up designing, but this is the first clear indication of Islamic intent going back to the preliminary design itself. Murdoch’s repeated Mecca orientations and the other elaborate proofs of terrorist memorializing intent don’t appear until the Stage II design.
In the final design, Murdoch took care to hide his precise Islamic symbol shapes
In his final Crescent of Embrace design (now called a broken circle), Murdoch is systematic about hiding geometrically precise Islamic structures behind seemingly imprecise Islamic symbol shapes. For instance, the giant central crescent does not point exactly at Mecca. It points 1.8° north of Mecca, ± 0.1°, making it a not quite precise Islamic mihrab.
But Murdoch also includes a thematically defined crescent in his design. It starts where the flight path thematically breaks the circle at the upper crescent tip, which more than a hundred feet from the end of the full Crescent of Embrace structure. That hundred foot plus change in the end-point of the crescent alters the orientation of the crescent by exactly 1.8°, so that the “true” thematic crescent points exactly to Mecca, as closely as can be determined given the pixel resolution of the graphics. Murdoch then provides redundant proof of intent by repeating this whole multi-Mecca oriented geometry in the crescents of trees that surround the Tower of Voices. (Demonstration in the 2nd half of this post.)
Murdoch does the same thing with the Tower sundial. On first look, the inner arc of trees in Murdoch’s final Tower of Voices design is only an accurate marker for afternoon prayer times for 8 months of the year (from March to October). But upon further inspection, one sees that Murdoch used a tricky two-height gnomon, where light passes through a slot in the top of the tower from November to February, lowering the gnomon point at the center of the crescent topped tower for those months.
This tricky two height gnomon puts a kink in the afternoon prayer line that conforms exactly to Murdoch’s tree line, creating a year-round accurate Islamic sundial. True evil genius.
In the preliminary design, Murdoch was not so careful. His tree line follows the full traditional Islamic afternoon prayer line shape, which any informed person could immediately recognize.
The chances of Murdoch coming up with TWO different year-round accurate Islamic sundials by coincidence? 0/(∞2).
Sundial calculations
Islamic afternoon prayers commence when an object’s shadow is the length of its noon shadow, plus its height. As summer turns to winter, noon shadows get longer, so the shadow length at prayer time gets longer too. Also, shadows lengthen more quickly, so the time it takes the noon shadow to grow by the gnomon height gets shorter, making prayer times occur earlier. Thus the angle of the prayer-time shadows gets more northerly (earlier) as the days get shorter, creating the characteristic prayer-line arc.
The labor intensive way to calculate prayer times is to use J Geisen’s awesome sun-shadow applet to find the length of shortest shadow for a particular gnomon on an particular day at a particular latitude and longitude, then look for the time and shadow angle at which the gnomon’s shadow is the length of its noon shadow plus its height.
The easy way is to let Fer de Vries’ ZW2000 computer program do the work for you. Just download the zip files, right click the folder and extract all the files, then open the program, set the latitude to 40.03 degrees (shanskville PA), check “Islamic prayer lines,” click calculate, and set the scale so you can see the result. (The bigger the gnomon height you pick, the more you will have to scale the resulting graphic down to bring the prayer lines into the picture). Really easy.
In addition to generating prayer lines, De Vrie’s program also generates a bar that is equal in length to the gnomon height. It is visible in the bottom right corner of the graphic above that shows the prayer line superimposed over the tree line. That gnomon-height reference line makes it possible to scale the image of the gnomon point and its associated prayer line to the site-plan image.
The base image used is a 32x enlargement of a tiny piece of the large JPEG image of Murdoch’s Stage I design. That original image includes a distance scale, where 3.5 screen inches at 72dpi = 4000 ft. After enlarging 32x, that becomes 112 s.i. = 4000′, or 1 s.i. = 4000’/112=35.714′.
Once the graphic is resized so that it fits over the estimated gnomon point and the tree line, the gnomon height bar scales out to 2.41 inches. (It looks a bit bigger, but that is just because it was bolded, which makes the length grow along with the width.) 2.41 x 35.714 = 86′.
The Memorial Project claims that it investigated the sundial warnings and found them to be a false alarm, but their comments prove that they never even looked at the warnings
Memorial Project Chairman John Reynolds said last year that any tower with a wall around it can serve as an Islamic sundial. When prayer time comes around, just mark the wall with the angle of the tower’s shadow, and voilà.
FAIL. Islamic prayer times are determined by shadow length, not shadow angle, and the shadow angle at prayer time changes every day of the year. It CANNOT be marked on any old wall around a tower. An Islamic prayer-time marker must be set the right distance from its associated shadow-caster, and it must follow the right arc.
Imagine telling the public you have investigated a warning of terrorist attack and found it to be a false alarm, when in fact you never investigated it at all? That is what Reynolds is doing when he claims to have investigated the warnings of an Islamic sundial, when he doesn’t even know that Islamic prayer times are determined by shadow length. The irresponsibility of these people is breathtaking.
To join our blogbursts, just send your blog’s url.
Don’t Take Flight 93 To Mecca 10-1-08
Oct 1, 2008 Flight 93
What a mihrab means to the Wahhabists, the Khomeini-ists and the other Salafists
In 1981, Ayatollah Khomeini explained the meaning of a Mecca-direction indicator (called a mihrab), like the one now being planted on the Flight 93 crash site:
Mehrab means the place of war, the place of fighting. Out of the mehrabs, wars should proceed, just as all the wars of Islam used to proceeded out of the mehrabs. [Hat tip Yoel Natan, Moon-o-theism, p. 30]
The I-ah-told-you-so wasn’t just speaking allegorically either. The University of Chicago’s Francis Joseph Seinglass Comprehensive Persian-English dictionary lists amongst its definitions for mihrab: “warlike,” and “a field of battle.” (Hat tip Czechmade.)
Anyone who thinks it is okay to build the world’s largest mihrab on the Flight 93 crash site really should read Khomeini’s whole speech (his tribute to Muhammad). It’s only two pages, but psychopathic hellspawn like Khomeini can pack an awful lot of murder-lust into a short space, when every stinking sentence is a plea for wanton slaughter.
From beginning:
The real Day of God is the day that Amir al mo’menin drew his sword and slaughtered all the khavarej and killed them from the first to the last.
To end:
We believe that the accused essentially does not have to be tried. He or she must just be killed. Only their identity is to be established and then they should be killed.
“The accused,” of course, is YOU, and all the other “discontented people” who do not readily submit to the murder-cult’s endless demands.
To rid the world of who they accuse of violating God’s law, they grant themselves exemption from the Sixth Commandment. Evil stupidity. Maggots for brains. Matched only by the see-no-evil stupidity of a western world that is so defrauded by its dishonest left wing media that it is losing the capacity to fight back.
Will we really build a Salafist memorial mosque on the Flight 93 crash site? Will we really elect a president who is in bed with Islamofascists and domestic terrorists alike? Will we really let Iran get the nuclear weapons with which to wipe city after American city off the map, as they so desperately crave? Will we really turn off the energy spigot–the key to past and continuing progress–based on utterly fraudulent claims of human-caused global warming, even as the world descends into a substantial cooling phase?
None of these issues should even be in question, yet the minority of us who are trying to stem the collapse of the nation can barely battle even these gimmies to a draw, and could lose all four. If the nation survives this “moment” in history–this long war with Islamic fascism and with our own liberty hating left–it will be thanks to the relative handful of people who recognize honest reason and evidence as impenetrable armor and unbreakable sword against those who seek advantage in manipulative dishonesty.
The demagogues and their dupes are powerful in numbers, but blind. Their hostility to contrary reason and evidence divorces them from reality, leaving them ignorant of surrounding truth. That is our advantage. We know the lay of the land, and can use it to defeat them, but we still have to get up and do it.
To join our blogbursts, just send your blog’s url.
Don’t Take Flight 93 To Mecca 9-24-08
Sep 24, 2008 Flight 93
Paul Murdoch channels Allahpundit
Two years ago Allahpundit (who works for Michelle Malkin) made a very strange judgment. He accepted that the original Crescent of Embrace design for the Flight 93 memorial pointed roughly to Mecca (to be exact, it points within 2 degrees of Mecca), but said that worrying about the orientation of the crescent reeked of “truther-iness.”
“A good rule of thumb,” said Allah:
if you need a protractor to properly express your outrage, you’ve probably gone too far.
Orientation on Mecca may sound esoteric, but it is certainly not esoteric to Muslims, who are supposed to face Mecca five times a day for prayer, and often carry special compasses for that purpose.
In particular, a crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca is called a mihrab, and is the central feature around which every mosque is built. (Some mihrabs are pointed arch shaped, but the archetypical mihrab is crescent shaped.) This isn’t merely suspicious, like learning to fly airliners without learning how to land. It is the discovered enemy objective: to stab a terrorist memorial mosque into the heartland of America.
How can anyone be surprised? As our blogburst logo shows, the original crescent design was a bare naked crescent and star flag. For Allah to dismiss ADDITIONAL Islamic symbol shapes as coincidence is like seeing the second airplane fly into the Trade Center and saying: “Well now it HAS to be an accident.”
Allahpundit seems to have forgotten the defining quality of the 9-11 truth morons. It isn’t that their claims seem esoteric or even outlandish. It is that their claims are FALSE, and in most cases are revealed by the simplest fact-checking to be blatantly dishonest as well. The truthers are self-conscious purveyors of malicious disinformation, a la Michael Moore.
In contrast, everything we are saying about the flight 93 memorial is TRUE, and is easily verified to be true just by examining the official design drawings.
● The 93 foot Tower of Voices will be topped with yet another Islamic shaped crescent. Just look:
The symbolic lives of the 40 heroes literally dangle down below the symbolic Islamic heavens, projected against the sky above. Not a lot of different possible meanings here.
● The 9/11 date is to be inscribed on a separate section of Memorial Wall that is centered on the bisector of the giant crescent, which is the exact position of the star on an Islamic flag. The date goes to the terrorists.
● Etcetera ad nauseum, and architect Paul Murdoch proves that all of it is intentional by repeating every Islamic and terrorist memorializing feature in the Tower of Voices part of the memorial. (2 minute animation showing the repeated Mecca orientations here.)
How many airplanes have to hit the Flight 93 memorial before a few of our heavy hitters can admit that MAYBE it is not just an accident? Can we at least agree that the Park Service should be exposed for lying through their teeth about these facts?
If we could get word out to the public just about the Mecca orientation of the crescent, Murdoch’s plot would probably be kaput, especially given the numerous denials the Memorial Project has issued in the last year and a half. But getting even the most basic facts out is terribly difficult when it isn’t just the mainstream media that won’t report the facts, but even people like Michelle Malkin are remaining silent, after taking a leading role in raising the initial alarm.
The loss of her powerful voice is hard enough, but there is also the seeming implication. Even the most internet savvy conservatives–the people we most need to reach to have any hope of stopping this–presume that if Michelle is not still objecting to the Flight 93 memorial, it must be okay now.
It is NOT okay. It is a thorough-going memorial to the terrorists. As Tom Burnett Sr. (father of Flight 93 hero Tom Burnett Jr.) keeps urging, we have to “do something,” as his son got up and did something. We have to stop this re-hijacked Flight 93 before it reaches its destination.
If Michelle is going to hand such an important portfolio to Allah, doesn’t he have an obligation to check a few facts before smearing fellow conservatives as truther-like? Allah and Michelle are good friends and much beloved for their excellent judgment and hard work. There is no anger here. Just an appeal for both to take another look. Paul Murdoch has even provided a fitting pretext, if any is needed.
In an interview two weeks ago, Murdoch re-labeled the tips of his crescent structure the same way that Allah proposed two years ago, yielding a more extended crescent that no longer points to Mecca. Murdoch is channeling you Allah, but where you were merely ignorant, he is being deceptive.
Where are the breaks in the circle?
In 2006, Allah posted a graphic from Alec Rawls that used orientation lines to show how the defining points of the Mecca-oriented crescent are unchanged in the Circle of Embrace redesign:
Original Crescent of Embrace design, left, points to Mecca. The flight path can be seen coming down from the upper left corner of the image, breaking the circle at the upper crescent tip.
Every particle of that original Crescent of Embrace design remains completely intact in the Circle of Embrace redesign. The original crescent tips are still there, yielding the same Mecca oriented crescent. Allah, however, suggested that the orientation of the crescent HAD been changed:
In blue: Allahpundit’s proposed orientation lines for the Circle of Embrace redesign.
If you don’t know that the theme of the whole design is the flight path breaking the circle at the original upper crescent tip, and you don’t notice that there is still a gap in the circle at the original upper crescent tip, you can get Allah’s altered orientation for the Circle redesign, no longer pointing to Mecca.
Murdoch, of course, knows the theme of his own design (being the first one to articulate it publicly). Still, pretending that the breaks in the circle have been changed is a useful dodge, and Murdoch employed it the other week.
Asked if the circle in the Circle of Embrace redesign depicts a broken circle, as critics claim, Murdoch said that the circle breaks when it reaches the sacred ground:
The edge of the sacred ground “breaks” the circular perimeter of the bowl to give it the prominence it deserves as the focal point of the entire park and the final resting place of the 40 heroes.
The Sacred Ground is the yellow-colored area in the graphics above. By acknowledging only the break at the sacred ground, Murdoch is suggesting that the tips of the crescent come up to yellow area on both sides, just as Allah drew.
The Park service website, however, goes on to identify another break as well, the original break at the upper tip of the original crescent design, where the flight path crosses the circle:
The trees surrounding this “circle of embrace” are missing in two places; first, where the flight path of the plane went overhead (which is the location of the planned memorial overlook and visitor center), and second, where the plane crashed at the Sacred Ground (depicted by a ceremonial gate and pathway into the Sacred Ground). In summary, the memorial is shaped in a circular fashion, and the circle is symbolically “broken” or missing trees in two places, depicting the flight path of the plane, and the crash site…
In his interview, Murdoch does not just fail to mention the symbolic breaking of the circle at the original upper crescent tip, but offers an alternative description of the Entry Portal structure:
The entrance moves through the circular edge along the flight path, so as visitors enter they will be aligned with United Flight 93 through their own experience.
Sorry Murdoch, and Allah, but this passage through the original upper crescent tip does not just show the path of Flight 93. It explicitly symbolizes the flight path smashing our harmonious circle and turning it into the giant (Islamic shaped) crescent.
Entry Portal walkway follows the flight path through the Entry Portal walls, symbolizing the breaking of the circle, according to the Park Service itself.
Allah’s blue orientation lines are WRONG. The crescent is the unbroken part of the circle, which was not altered in the so-called redesign. All they did was add an extra arc of trees that explicitly represents a broken off part of the circle. Can Allah please post a correction?
It points to Washington
What made Allah throw up his hands was our further claim that the asymmetric crescent of memorial groves at the back of the full Crescent of Embrace points to the White House. But this too is TRUE, and if you look at Murdoch’s plan, there is very clear reason for it.
Murdoch constantly provides proof that his possible Islamic and terrorist memorializing structure are intentional, often by repetition. The purpose of the White House orientation is to prove that his drawing of only 38 Memorial Groves, instead of the advertised 40, is not a mistake.
The giant crescent represents the symbolic Islamic heavens. Since the crescent of Memorial Groves is part of the full crescent, Murdoch cannot actually memorialize the 40 infidels there and still have a proper mosque. Thus Murdoch has to PROVE that the 38 groves are intended to memorialize someone else.
Notice that the 38 groves can be seen as a set of 19 nested crescents, ranging in length from 38 groves down to two. That is one for each 9/11 hijacker. How can this intent be proved? First, Murdoch proves intent by repetition. The Tower of Voices is also surrounded by a set of 19 nested crescents:
Paul Murdoch’s detail view of the Tower of Voices. Click for larger image.
The nested crescents of memorial groves establish the precedent that arcs of trees as short as two are to be counted as crescents. Using this rule, there are 19 nested crescents in the Tower array.
That is not enough proof for Murdoch, who provides redundant proof of intent for ALL of his Islamic and terrorist memorializing features. To provide additional proof that the 38 groves are to be seen as 19 nested crescents, Murdoch takes advantage of the fact that crescents have orientation, via either the bisector of the crescent, or by a line across the crescent tips. He positions his crescent of groves so that a line across the tips of any of the 19 nested crescents points to the White House:
19 nested crescents, all pointing to the target that the Flight 93 terrorists were trying to destroy.
The White House sits at about the “i” in Washington in this Yahoo map. The other possible target of Flight 93, the Capitol Building, is also nearby, but Higher resolution analysis suggests that the crescent tip line points closer to the White House.
Repeated symbolic damnation
Does anyone want to think that all this is coincidence too: the two missing groves, the White House orientation, the second set of 19 nested crescents in the Tower array? “Wow. A dozen airplanes flying into the Trade Towers. That’s really got to be an accident now. That many airplanes just couldn’t be on purpose!”
No, what they can’t be is an accident. Paul Murdoch is dead serious about proving that he has designed a proper terrorist memorial mosque. THAT is why the Memorial Groves point to the White House. And it isn’t just the Memorial Groves. EVERY depiction of the 40 heroes has an opposite hidden meaning, proved by repetition.
Those 40 wind chimes, one for each of the heroes, all literally dangling down below the symbolic Islamic heavens projected in the sky above? That’s symbolic damnation.
So too with the 40 blocks inscribed with the 40 names. All four of the “extra” translucent blocks on the flight path are located within the symbolic Islamic heavens. The three inscribed with the 9/11 date are inscribed as placed the star on the Islamic crescent and star flag, while the 44th sits at the upper crescent tip (where the flight path breaks the circle).
In contrast, the 40 blocks inscribed with the names of the heroes are all further down the flight path, down below the Islamic star and hence symbolically cast out of the symbolic Islamic heavens, which again implies damnation.
All of this has a very clear purpose. If the memorial actually honored the 40 infidels it could not be a proper mosque. According to the Koran (9.18), mosques are not to be defiled by infidel presence. Depictions of victory over the infidel are of course allowed.
Allahpundit is not the only one who thinks that TOO MANY suspicious features somehow imply coincidence. The Memorial Project says the exact same thing. They know that the Mecca orientation claim is accurate. They know that ALL of our factual claims are accurate and admit it in private conversation, but have decided that the very outlandishness of all somehow implies that it has to be coincidence.
Flight 93 is supposed to be the symbol of our woken vigilance. We are supposed to be alert now to the nature of the Islamic terrorists who are waging war against us: that they hide amongst us, pretending to be trustworthy friends. Have the truthers actually succeeded in stripping the nation of that lesson, making us loathe to witness evidence of conspiracy?
9/11 was one of the most elaborate conspiracies in history (by al Qaeda, not by the Bush administration). We can’t just unlearn that lesson, and be blind to evidence of conspiracy in hopes of staying as far as possible from those who present phony evidence of conspiracy.
To make sense, one must follow the evidence wherever it leads. That is what the truthers DON’T do. The problem isn’t that they are pushing conspiracy theories, it is that they aren’t honest. Ignoring the facts in an anti-conspiracy direction does not make one opposite to the truthers, but makes one similar, as Allah darn well ought to know.
To join our blogbursts, just send your blog’s url.
Don’t Take Flight 93 to Mecca 8-14-2008
Aug 14, 2008 Flight 93
Memorial Project Superintendent lies about receiving threats
Joanne Hanley, superintendent of the Flight 93 Memorial Project, cannot answer the damning facts about the crescent design (now called a broken circle), so she has decided to slander the people who are pointing them out. In a speech at the Memorial Project’s August 2nd meeting, she cited a list of “threats” she had received from critics, saying for instance that her “career would be destroyed.”
In defense of Superintendent Hanley, Flight 93 family member Calvin Wilson expressed his disgust at the violent threats and charged that critics were acting like the terrorists themselves. Three Pennsylvania newspapers covered Hanley’s claims to have been threatened, one editorialized against the uncivilized critics, and a Memorial Project press release highlighted Wilson’s outraged response to the supposed threats.
It is all a lie. Here is the Letter to the Editor that Alec Rawls just sent to the duped Pennsylvania newspapers, exposing Superintendent Hanley’s deception:
A warning is not a threat. A warning is to protect against a threat.
As the lead organizer of the movement to stop the crescent design, I can tell you who made the statements that Superintendent Hanley was complaining about. I recognized every one of the phrases she cited as coming from myself. It is ME who Joanne Hanley is accusing of making threats, an accusation that is not just false, but grotesquely dishonest.
What Joanne Hanley is casting as threats were WARNINGS, trying to alert her to the threat posed by architect Paul Murdoch and his scheme to plant a giant Mecca-oriented crescent on the Flight 93 crash site. This is one of Superintendent Hanley’s excuses for refusing to heed warnings about the crescent design. She pretends that warnings are threats and hence SHOULD NOT be listened to.
When I couldn’t get Hanley to look to the facts for the country’s sake, I tried to appeal to her instinct for self-preservation, warning her of the personal consequences of Murdoch’s attempt to stab a terrorist memorial mosque into the heartland of America. (That is the meaning of a crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca: it is the central feature of a mosque.)
As I put it in a March 2006 email to both Superintendent Hanley and Project Manager Jeff Reinbold:
I have been trying to save your lives and your careers for six months. It is not too late for you. You can still do your jobs and investigate the basic facts I have warned you about, like the Mecca-orientation of Murdoch’s original Crescent of embrace, and the continued presence of Murdoch’s original crescent in the redesign.
Shortly after this email, Joanne Hanley told me why she was not concerned about the almost-exact Mecca orientation of the giant crescent. In a conference call with Jeff Reinbold, she told me that: “It isn’t exact. That’s one we talked about. It has to be exact.” (The giant crescent points 1.8° north of Mecca, ± .1°.)
If she had admitted to the public what she was admitting in private—that the giant crescent does indeed point almost exactly to Mecca—it would have been okay. The people of Pennsylvania would be able to decide for themselves whether a giant Mecca-oriented crescent makes an acceptable memorial to the victims of Islamic terrorism, so long as it does not point EXACTLY at Mecca. Instead, the Memorial Project decided to deceive the public, sending an academic fraud from the University of Texas to assure the press that there is no such thing as the direction to Mecca:
Daniel Griffith, a geospatial information sciences professor at the University of Texas at Dallas, said anything can point toward Mecca, because the earth is round. [Post Gazette, “Flight 93 memorial draws a new round of criticism,” August 18, 2007.]
Just as I warned Superintendent Hanley that her career was in jeopardy, I also warned Dr. Griffith that his career would be destroyed if he did not correct this blatant disinformation. Like Hanley, Griffith too interpreted my warning as a threat, as if it would be ME who was responsible for the harm to his reputation, when he was covering up evidence of an enemy plot by lying about basic geometry, pretending that there is no direction between two points on planet earth.
In spite of the Memorial Project’s active cover-up of Murdoch’s plot, I continued to treat Superintendent Hanley as what she is: a fellow countryman aboard a hijacked airplane who is in need of rescue. As I put it in another email to Superintendent Hanley last November:
I don’t want you to be hurt here. There is only one bad guy in this story: Paul Murdoch. I want to help everyone else get off of this hijacked airplane. … I am not your enemy. I am your friend. I am the one who has been trying to save you, for two damned years, and I still am, despite your persistent public slanders against me.
Is it even POSSIBLE to be clearer? A warning is not a threat. A warning is to protect someone from a threat, as my communications spelled out over and over. For Joanne Hanley to pretend that these warnings about the threat she is facing were threats in themselves is deliberate dishonesty. For her to tell Calvin Wilson that these attempts to protect her from Murdoch’s plot were violent threats against her, prompting Wilson to use his status as a family member to attack critics on this dishonest basis, is even worse.
Joanne Hanley is not the only person I am warning. Every Pennsylvanian is aboard this hijacked airplane. How can the newspapers of Pennsylvania let stand a fraudulent claim that there is no such thing as the direction to Mecca? How can the educated people of Pennsylvania, the math teachers, the college students, the politicians, let such a fraud stand, when every one of you knows that Muslims face Mecca for prayer?
If Pennsylvanians continue to be willfully blind to easily verifiable evidence of an enemy plot in your own back yard, history will not be kind to you.
Alec Rawls
Palo Alto CA
August 12, 2008
Morality requires trust in truth
Imagine if one of the passengers on Flight 93 was told that if they did not retake the airplane, they would be killed when the terrorists flew the airplane into a building. If the passenger was Joanne Hanley, she would say: “Stop threatening me!”
Any excuse to avoid the truth, no matter how nonsensical or even suicidal. A photo-negative of the fighting spirit of Flight 93.
Asked by Pilate to account for himself, Jesus answered: “To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth.” (Jn. 18:37.) Jesus wasn’t a witness for the truth only sometimes, or only about matters of salvation. He proceeded from the factual truth of every situation that crossed his path, and called upon the rest of us to similarly trust in truth.
Secular moral reason demands the same thing. Anyone who thinks that it can somehow be right or in their interest to avoid or suppress the truth will through that avoidance of the truth become divorced from reality, with the inevitable effect that their ideas about what is right or in their interest can only be wrong. This is the irrationality of the Memorial Project. They proceed on the assumption that the crescent design is innocent, while self-consciously covering up evidence that it is not.
This malfeasance puts the rest of our society to the test. All of the people who we pay to check and report the facts: government, academia and the media, are all desperately trying to suppress the truth. That leaves it up to the rest of us to witness and communicate the truth about Murdoch’s plot. (Some basic facts, and how to verify them for yourself, posted here.)
To join our blogbursts, just send your blog’s url.
Don’t Take Flight 93 to Mecca 7-31-2008
Jul 31, 2008 Flight 93
Rally this Saturday: Stop the crescent mosque!
Tom Burnett Sr. and Alec Rawls will be in Somerset PA this weekend to condemn the crescent/broken-circle memorial to Flight 93. Here is Alec’s notice about the press conference that he and Mr. Burnett will host after they speak at the public meeting of the Memorial Project Saturday morning:
…Also on the press conference panel will be Diane Gramley, President of the American Family Association of Pennsylvania, and the Reverend Ron McRae of Johnstown.
In addition to our own statements, Mr. Burnett will read a statement from Congressman John Kline (R-MN), and Alec Rawls will present statements from Rich Davis, founder of the Chester County Victory Movement, and from the president of Muslims Against Sharia Law.
After answering questions for the press, Mr. Burnett and his co-panelists will host a rally to stop the re-hijacking of Flight 93. Members of our informal Western Pennsylvania Compatriots group (who spoke out at the last public meeting) will be in attendance, and some out of town folks will be coming as well.
And check this out: a big color ad in the local paper:
To inform and invite the local populace, a half-page full-color ad will be running in tomorrow’s edition of the Somerset Daily American. It explains how the original Crescent of Embrace design remains completely intact in the Circle of Embrace redesign, which is explicitly described by the Park Service itself as a “broken” circle. That is exactly how architect Paul Murdoch described his original Crescent design.
All the redesign does is include an extra arc of trees that explicitly represents a broken off part of the circle. The unbroken part of the circle (the crescent), remains exactly as it was. It is still a giant Islamic shaped crescent, still pointing to Mecca , as your colleague Kirk Swauger verified a year ago:
Rawls maintains that the midpoint between the tips of the crescent points almost precisely toward “qibla,” the direction to Mecca, which Muslims are supposed to face for prayer.
His claims seem to be backed up by coordinates for the direction of qibla from Somerset that can be found on Islam.com. When superimposed over the crescent in the memorial design, the midpoint points over the Arctic Circle, through Europe toward Mecca.
Except for Kirk’s verification of the Mecca orientation of the crescent (which was not picked up by any other news organization), reporters have not been bothering to check the facts. When our claim that there are to be 44 inscribed translucent blocks emplaced along the flight path was reported a few months ago, Gordon Felt, President of Families of Flight 93 was quoted denying it, but despite this clear conflict of factual claims, no reporter bothered to simply open up the design drawings and count.
Can reporters actually be shamed into doing their jobs? Doubtful. They seem to regard actually checking the facts as giving some kind of unfair advantage to the side that is right (which they would be happy do do if the right side was THEIR side).
When the press is in this anti-fact-checking mode, their methodology is just to quote each side. We are trying to take advantage of this behavior by having some of our independent supporters use source documents to fact-check our basic claims, then attest in press releases and at the public meeting that they have personally counted the translucent memorial blocks etcetera.
Co-panelist Diane Gramley will be making such declarations for the cameras. Cao (the organizer of these blogbursts) did some checking from source documents this week and has already posted a powerful press release about her findings that Alec will present at the press conference.
Tom Burnett’s attendance should bring national news coverage. If Tom and Alec can direct some of that coverage to our independent fact checking, it might break the media embargo on fact checking, and once we get the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent out as verified national news, the crescent goose will be cooked.
If you want to participate in our fact-checking drive, Alec has a set of fact checking guides, with links to source documents, at CrescentOfBetrayal.com. Just send him a link to the post or comment in which you attest to your fact-checking results, and he will compile them.
To join our blogbursts, just send your blog’s url.