Sep 12 2005
Red Crescent Symbol Of Jihad
Updates at the end, scroll down please.
Michelle Malkin asks in this update post whether people watched the excellent Discovery Channel’s special Flight 93: The Flight That Fought Back and how they felt about the Flight 93 Memorial. The short answer is yes we did and it was excellent. And yes we discusssed the memorial.
In answer to the second part, regarding the memorial, I submit this post which pulls out a comment I had on the Flight 93 Memorial earlier to emphasize the obvious:
I know what Al Qaeda will do with this. They will say it is a sign that fanatical Islam will win. They will say Allah placed his sign over those of the dead Americans who fought back as a symbol of victory. They will use it to rally the forces of Jihad. They will use this as a rallying point against us.
They will take a memorial that was supposed to honor our dead heroes and use it in such a manner that it will mean we probably will have many more memorials to build in the future.
Our navel gazing on this subject is a disasterous distraction. Al Qaeda would use the crescent symbol, on our hallowed ground, as a sign to all Islam to rise up against us. It would be like putting a swastika memorial over graves in Britain in WWII during the battle of Britain. Instead of holding back, as they did, Germany would seen the sign as a weakening of resolve in the British populace and would have made a second push – possibly defeating Britain.
Too many do not grasp how religous zealots fantasize about being blessed with the unstoppable power of God. How those fighting now an uphill battle wish for a sign from God that they will pervail. What better sign to the Jihadists than their religious symbol over the memorial site where we, America, first fought back and beat the Jihadists back?
Folks, forget the name changes and stop handing propaganda opportunities to our enemies. The jihadists are not rationale or logical. They are obssessed and delusional.
If one tries to rationalize how they will react then you have to face the fact you started off down the wrong path from the git-go. You cannot rationalize the irrational.
For example, even if the Crescent doesn’t face Mecca as some blog sites have speculated, Al Qaeda will use this speculation to claim the crescent does face Mecca to further substantiate their claim Allah has emblazoned the symbol of America’s demise in our heartland. Al Qaeda could claim the memorial site now is a holy site of Islam, since Islam’s enemies were driven by God to place the symbol of Islam on this memorial to send a signal – a bullseye if you will. They will say, since it is a holy site of Islam, it must be taken from the infidels and America must be destroyed.
To the Islamic fanatics this would be an enormous rallying cry.
And during all of this the Islamic fanatics will lie to our faces in English, as they learned from Arafat, to claim they only wish to be left alone in peace. They will chide us for being cold and callous for being against a symbol on a memorial. They will say those concerned are evil and bad. And we will navel gaze and wish for peace and pretend the threat is not as bad as it is…
And we will get another 9-11.
When will we realize what we are up against?
UPDATE:
Mark Coffey points to a post by Wretchard which does show the Flight 93 memorial would open towards Mecca. I doubt that is coincidence. Praise Allah!
UPDATE II:
Ed Morrissey takes this issue head on here and makes excellent points. His comments dovetail nicely with my response to a commenter on this post (see comments). It is worth repeating here in the main post:
The memorial is wrong for many reasons. Proof positive is it sent the wrong or mixed signal to a lot of Americans. It failed the first test of a good memorial, it did not connect with a broad segment of the population with a common theme. The WWII memorial in DC cannot be confused with promoting our enemies. The Lincoln memorial is never mis-interpreted as being pro-slavery or pro-confederacy.
So the memorial, not matter how much you like it, failed at its primary reason to exist.
This is something those defending the memorial need to come to grips with. It failed and the response is the proof it failed. It is not healing and it is not unifying. It failed. Go back to the drawing board.
Michelle, who has been spear heading the drive against this insult, has a major post out today with a link to an article on this very subject – start here.
And don’t miss Mark Steyn’s comments here.
AJStrata,
I responded to your post (about the Flight 93 memorial design) on RedState, but due, apparently, to a lack of a sense of humor, the powers that be felt my comments were worthy only of deletion.
So, I’ll try here. If you read carefully, you should be able to discern that I am not engaging in personal attack. I simply don’t agree with your post.
In my post, which I’ll assume you didn’t see, I took exception to your comments about what al Qaeda will do with the Flight 93 memorial design. Since you had used “Here’s a small minded, bigotted [sic] comment…” as your post heading, I used “Is AJStrata a small-minded bigot” as mine. A personal attack? Hardly, since I never discussed either the quality of your mind or your bigotry.
I went on to agree with ChrisD, who had seems to believe, as I do, that Americans have a lot more to worry about than what al Qaeda will do with the Flight 93 memorial design. Like anyone engaged in propaganda, al Qaeda will focus on whatever it feels works in the service of its cause. Regardless of one’s politics, it is pretty obvious that al Qaeda is not suffering from a lack of source material. It is a given that propagandists will distort anything they use, in any way they choose, if they perceive an advantage.
Since the crescent is present, visible, or discernible everywhere in nature and human-made works, al Qaeda can find that form anytime it wants to. In this case, it might be difficult for al Qaeda to explain why the “Great Satan” would intentionally pick a form* that is also an accepted symbol of Islam for use in a memorial honoring victims whose deaths were the direct result of Muslim terrorists. Perhaps, such a choice demonstrates that the people of the United States are not “afraid” of Islam or Muslims. Maybe, it is (and will be), a constant reminder of who was responsible for the deaths of the victims being honored. Or maybe, as I view it, it is simply a beautiful design that will create an appropriate atmoshere for reflection, remembrance, and prayer. Personally, I prefer that memorials don’t try too hard to “force” me to feel a certain way. I think people who visit the Crescent of Embrace will be able to feel whatever they bring to the site, and may leave with a wider, deeper emotional response, but that will depend on the individual.
The statement “if x, then the terrorists have won” hasn’t become a cliché through underuse. People of all political persuasions use it. However, given all that we, as a nation (and individuals), have to deal with, worrying about how al Qaeda will view our design of our memorial seems to me to allow them the power to insinuate themselves into places where they don’t belong.
From the newspaper reports I read, it was clear that at least some, probably most, and possibly all of the surviving friends and family members who were present at the design choice ceremony were deeply moved by the design and expressed their approval. (See http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05251/567702.stm
Looking at the competing designs
(http://www.flight93memorialproject.org/sitelite_home.asp) the Crescent of Embrace seems to me to be easily the most beautiful and profound. It would attract me to see it regardless of what it honored.
You wrote:
“Too many do not grasp how religous zealots fantasize about being blessed with the unstoppable power of God. How those fighting now an uphill battle wish for a sign from God that they will pervail. What better sign to the Jihadists than their religious symbol over the memorial site where we, America, first fought back and beat the Jihadists back?”
Let’s look at that. I’m well aware of “how religious zealots fantasize about being blessed with the unstoppable power of God.” I see it not only in Islamic terrorists, but also in my own country on a regular basis. Sadly, a common thread for both Islamic and Christian fundamentalists is their belief in their own infallibility and the necessity of imposing their beliefs on others without regard to issues of freedom or democracy. If there is a difference, it is in Islamic fundamentalism’s greater honesty regarding its means and goals. (This seems to be changing as more and more Christians call for an explicitly religious government in this country.) In the end, a fundamentalist religious state—Christian or Islamic–will be undemocratic…period.
You ask, “What better sign to the Jihadists than their religious symbol over the memorial site where we, America, first fought back and beat the Jihadists back?” I can think of many better signs. The increasingly strident divisions in this country have to give aid and comfort to America’s enemies and offer endless opportunities for exploitation. Do I think we should “come together†because of al Qaeda? Not if it means people have to sacrifice core beliefs in order to do so. If we and our elected representatives can’t find common ground, then we will ultimately fail as a country. What is the purpose of a free society if every external threat dictates fundamental societal and constitutional changes? Al Qaeda (and other terrorists) can certainly inflict great damage on the United States. But they have no ability to destroy us; only we can do that. Insisting that anyone who disagrees with you–I’m not accusing you of this, but it is courses through RedState’s circulatory system—is somehow wanting as an American citizen or somehow wants to appease or aid al Qaeda has the potential, in the end, to do more damage to this country than terrorists will ever be able to do.
Another better sign? The post-Katrina debacle must be inspiring to our enemies. We clearly, after four years of vast expenditures or institutional “upgrades,†are poorly prepared for major disasters, whether natural or terrorist inflicted. This is a failure of leadership at all levels of government and by both political parties. But Osama bin Laden is probably far more encouraged by the president’s obvious failings than he is by anything any mayor or governor did or didn’t do.
I could go on about “better signs†for al Qaeda, but the discussion topics are too many. I would respectfully submit that your response to the “Crescent of Embrace†is too emotional and not firmly grounded in reality.
None of these designs appear to be the kind of memorial that many of the RedState posters seem to be calling for. I think, from what I’ve seen, that the selection panel did a fine job. Al Qaeda will do what it will do and the Crescent of Embrace is, in my opinion, unlikely to measurably alter al Qaeda’s actions.
Since, I began my post with a question (posed with tongue-in-cheek), I felt it appropriate (in my RedState post) to end it with a tongue-in-cheek answer.
“Is AJStrata a small-minded bigot? Not necessarily. Delusional? Maybe. Paranoid? Perhaps. But a small-minded bigot? Based on the available evidence, I can’t make a final determination.†(Faithful in spirit, if not exact wording to my RedState posting.)
If that is a “personal attack,” then I think the RedState standards are both tone-deaf and unfairly applied, since there are endless cases of direct name-calling (not least of all by some of RedState’s “biggies”) aimed at those few who disagree with the RedState “mainstream.â€
You should have my email address. I welcome any response you might have to this comment.
* Zombie’s overlay seems silly to me. The forms are not really “nearly identical” either literally or because the Islamic crescent is a self-contained symbol, while the design of the Flight 93 memorial incorporates the crescent in an integrated way in an overall design. Imagine how many “crosses” there are–that is perpendicular lines–in Islamic cities, buildings, and even mosques. It would be as big a waste of their time to try to rid their lives of “crosses,” as it would be for us to try to rid our lives of perceived crescents, whether real or imagined; intentional or coincidental.
bansciencenow,
interesting post, I am surprised they deleted it. I found your response to my ‘bigot’ statement quite humorous.
Big surprise: I disagree. While it may appear I am being emotional, trust me when I say I am being cold, calculated and looking at ways for AQ to regain momentum if I were in their shoes. Arches are not crescents. Crescents are very specific shapes and represent something to a majority of the world, just like a cross does and a five pointed star. So you cand pretend otherwise: but symbols mean something and are powerful.
The memorial is wrong for many reasons. Proof positive is it sent the wrong or mixed signal to a lot of Americans. It failed the first test of a good memorial, it did not connect with a broad segment of the population with a common theme. The WWII memorial in DC cannot be confused with promoting our enemies. The Lincoln memorial is never mis-interpreted as being pro-slavery or pro-confederacy.
So the memorial, not matter how much you like it, failed at its primary reason to exist.
But the propanda is nothing to ignore. I could care less what you see American;s do with religion, whateverit is it pales to to the mass killings, the brutal beheadings, the treatment of women as property, the mind controlling indoctrination that is fanatical Islam.
I am not religious – stopped belonging to any mainstream religion decades ago. I see things from a different perch which combines spirituality with science and hope for the future, with an eye on all our weaknesses and failures. And one failure is underestimating people who feel destroying humans is OK. Once that barrier is broached they are no longer modern humans, who believe in civility, respect and tolerance.
Feel free to ignore these realities. I do not expect everyone to agree with me. In fact, I expect very few to see what is coming correctly. I doubt I am among them, but I do know from history those who see accurately what is coming are always in the minority.
AJStrata,
No, no surprise you don’t agree. My response to what you’ve written is so long I don’t know that I will post it.
I am glad you took the “small-minded bigot” content in the spirit in which it was offered.
CAIR
“Those aboard a plain that crashed” I guess the plane crashed on its own? This front group that calls itself CAIR can’t even acknowledge that the plane was brought down by extreme elements in their own faith. They can’t even condemn the terrorists th…
Flight 93 memorial design will be altered
Well, it looks like there’s good news. The memorial design for the passengers on Flight 93 around Pittsburgh will be changed.