I Visited the Flight 93 Crash Site Memorial Today

[OldTigerCub]

I used to spend a lot of summer weekends in the Indian Lake area, and I have driven past there on numerous occasions more recently, but today I decided that I had to visit the Flight 93 crash site and memorial and see it first hand.

It was very easy to find, with very noticeable signs directing the way, and the drive felt very familiar...that was until I turned onto Skyline Drive. There is a sense of history, and loss, and reverence that comes over one when approaching the scene of such a tragedy, even though it has been almost seven years.

The temporary memorial was quite busy with visitors, but the parking lot was adequate, though unpaved, with plenty of room to park. As I got out of my car, there was a noticeable silence that seemed only to be cut by the flapping of several flags and the rumble of a few Harleys as their riders pulled in and out of the lot.

I was impressed by the attentiveness of the park rangers and "ambassadors" who were very receptive to questions about the crash, and who are all very knowledgable about the events that transpired. One of these "ambassadors" started to give a presentation about the history of 9-11 and Flight 93 in detail just as I was about to leave, though two very large tour busses arrived and postponed her speach as what appeared to be approximately 100 senior citizens disembarked and crossed the road to the memorial.

As I drove away down Skyline Drive, I could see the cabins back in the woods that had been hit by debris, and I got a glimpse of the pond where part of an engine had come to rest. I also saw the red barn, from Val McClatchey's photograph (I believe) as I made my way back toward Route 30.

Having been there and having seen how seriously the locals are about taking care of the site, and the dedication they have to helping people learn the true history behind UAL 93, I suddenly realized that the place, the event and the people involved will be remembered by the vast majority for what really happenned in the skies over PA that September morning, regardless of how the CTers, twoofers and revisionists try to mis-represent it or deny it.

I took a few pictures while I was there:
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/19757489663434e281.jpg
A bronze on granite monument with the names
of the passengers and crew.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/19757489663437d83c.jpg
The benches face the hallowed ground area,
and are where visitors congregate to
listen to presentations or just meditate.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1975748966343a6866.jpg
The flag denotes the center area of the fence
in front of the impact point: hallowed ground.
Noone is allowed to go beyond
the fence except family members of
Flight 93 passengers and crew.

There are quite a few more shots that I took, all higher resolution, that can be found at my webpage: oldtigercub.com/flight93memorial (http://oldtigercub.com/flight93memorial/) for anyone who would like to see them.

[Reality Believer]

Still no sign of a Boeing. ... I keed, I keed! :D

Thanks Tiger Cub. That is an interesting view for someone on the opposite side of the country.

[OldTigerCub]

One note: I disrespectfully declined the "Twoofer Harrassment of Wally Miller and Val McClatchey" tour. I think I have seen that one done to death right here on teh interwebz.

Not that there really was one offered, mind you.

[~enigma~]

I used to spend a lot of summer weekends in the Indian Lake area, and I have driven past there on numerous occasions more recently, but today I decided that I had to visit the Flight 93 crash site and memorial and see it first hand.

It was very easy to find, with very noticeable signs directing the way, and the drive felt very familiar...that was until I turned onto Skyline Drive. There is a sense of history, and loss, and reverence that comes over one when approaching the scene of such a tragedy, even though it has been almost seven years.

The temporary memorial was quite busy with visitors, but the parking lot was adequate, though unpaved, with plenty of room to park. As I got out of my car, there was a noticeable silence that seemed only to be cut by the flapping of several flags and the rumble of a few Harleys as their riders pulled in and out of the lot.

I was impressed by the attentiveness of the park rangers and "ambassadors" who were very receptive to questions about the crash, and who are all very knowledgable about the events that transpired. One of these "ambassadors" started to give a presentation about the history of 9-11 and Flight 93 in detail just as I was about to leave, though two very large tour busses arrived and postponed her speach as what appeared to be approximately 100 senior citizens disembarked and crossed the road to the memorial.

As I drove away down Skyline Drive, I could see the cabins back in the woods that had been hit by debris, and I got a glimpse of the pond where part of an engine had come to rest. I also saw the red barn, from Val McClatchey's photograph (I believe) as I made my way back toward Route 30.

Having been there and having seen how seriously the locals are about taking care of the site, and the dedication they have to helping people learn the true history behind UAL 93, I suddenly realized that the place, the event and the people involved will be remembered by the vast majority for what really happenned in the skies over PA that September morning, regardless of how the CTers, twoofers and revisionists try to mis-represent it or deny it.

I took a few pictures while I was there:
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/19757489663434e281.jpg
A bronze on granite monument with the names
of the passengers and crew.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/19757489663437d83c.jpg
The benches face the hallowed ground area,
and are where visitors congregate to
listen to presentations or just meditate.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1975748966343a6866.jpg
The flag denotes the center area of the fence
in front of the impact point: hallowed ground.
Noone is allowed to go beyond
the fence except family members of
Flight 93 passengers and crew.

There are quite a few more shots that I took, all higher resolution, that can be found at my webpage: oldtigercub.com/flight93memorial (http://oldtigercub.com/flight93memorial/) for anyone who would like to see them.Where were the black "investigate 9/11" shirts? I would love to see the reaction to a truther at the memorial there. Shanksville isn't NYC...

[OldTigerCub]

Where were the black "investigate 9/11" shirts? I would love to see the reaction to a truther at the memorial there. Shanksville isn't NYC...

I'm guessing that the sound of Harley Davidson motorcycles causes an allergic reaction to anyone wearing such a shirt. There were none to be seen!:p
(black "investigate 9-11" t-shirts, that is.....)

[Minadin]

Thanks for planting that image of half-naked truthers in my head, OTC. :p

[OldTigerCub]

Thanks for planting that image of half-naked truthers in my head, OTC. :p

Not the image I intended, but I can picture the following scene:
Twoofer1: (shouts)9-11 was an inside job!!!
Twoofer2: What's that rumbling sound?
Twoofer1: I don't know, but it's comming this way.
Twoofer2: HARLEY RIDERS! Get the shirt off!!!!
Let's get out of here!!!! We're gonna die!!!!!

[mrbaracuda]

So uh, can you sit on those benches or does no one dare? Those are somewhat.. strange. Odd choice if you ask me.

[Caustic Logic]

Nothing really to add. Thanks for sharing. It's interesting to get a feel for the space, and the solemnity, and symbolism used.

[Tweeter]

Yes, the symbolism. Funny of you to say that.
That is what is outraging family members of the crash victims.
The new memorial site will be a gigantic crescent with a star that points to Mecca.
http://www.wjactv.com/news/17074635/detail.html

[Pardalis]

Yes, the symbolism. Funny of you to say that.
That is what is outraging family members of the crash victims.
The new memorial site will be a gigantic crescent with a star that points to Mecca.
http://www.wjactv.com/news/17074635/detail.html

Since the earth is round, it doesn't point to Mecca, it points back to itself.

Only you could point out such an irrelevant controversy.

[Tweeter]

Well i`ll be damned.
I better tell the crash victims families that Pardalis says what they have to say is irrelevant.

[Pardalis]

Well i`ll be damned.
I better tell the crash victims families that Pardalis says what they have to say is irrelevant.

Why don't you go and do that, and make yourself useful for a change?

ETA: and btw, make sure to tell them you think their sons and daughters didn't die there, and that their calls were faked and that they aren't heroes for standing up against these non-existing terrorists.

[Foolmewunz]

Yes, the symbolism. Funny of you to say that.
That is what is outraging family members of the crash victims.
The new memorial site will be a gigantic crescent with a star that points to Mecca.
http://www.wjactv.com/news/17074635/detail.html

Tweeter,
Is there a committee on the other side of your internet connection? Surely one person could not be so dumb as to believe all the nonsense you foolishly post as fact. This is a dumbass lone crusade by one whacknut that's caught the attention of a few dedicated conspiradroids.

Just to summarize....
It isn't a "crescent" other than the fact that it's a semi-circle and you could call a semi-circle a crescent, but then again, you'd probably call a circle, "a couple of crescents linked together". It's a common geometric figure, the circle. Look it up. I was born in a place we called The Crescent City (New Orleans). There's a crescent on the city shield/emblem. Are they Islamists?

There are other things factually incorrect in the presumed source of this article - the lone dad who has been hawking this thing all along. A little searching and you could've discovered all this, yourself, and not waste people's time posting this drivel.

By the way... back to circles. Think about it. Is the earth a sphere (even if an irregular one)? This isn't multiple choice. There's only one answer... "Yes". Now find me a point on any sphere that does not point to any other point on said sphere. I won't be waiting for the response.

Seriously, son! Think about it. Other than the fact that it's some sort of diabolical conspiracy and conspirophiles love any old conspiracy! So now it's not the overwhelming Zionist conspiracy? It's some overwhelming Islamist conspiracy? Who, pray tell, is behind this one? Is there a new Islamist wing to the Illuminati? Did the Elders of Zion have a change of heart?

Thump! Thump! Thump!
(I'm too poor to afford graphics. That's the sound of me smacking my head against the desk.)

[mrbaracuda]

Are they Islamists?

YES! Yes yes yes!
Just like the people in South Carolina are!

* mrbaracuda shrieks

Ever seen the flag of SC?

:SOUTHCAROLINA:

:eek::boxedin:

[Tweeter]

I simply report the news.
Also this isnt a mudslinging article fresh off prison planet.
I repeat the"family members of the crash victims" are complaining.

[Foolmewunz]

YES! Yes yes yes!
Just like the people in South Carolina are!

* mrbaracuda;3916426 shrieks

Ever seen the flag of SC?

:SOUTHCAROLINA:

:eek::boxedin:



I knew there was something shifty about that Strom Thurmond guy!

ETA: And the French! How could we forget the croissant?

ETA AGAIN: And my mechanic. I heard him asking one of his helpers for a "crescent" wrench. I'm sure that was some sort of code. And the mechanic. Well, he claimed his name was Enrique and he was from Spain... but that skin looked a lot like the color of the average terrorist. He could've been from Saudi.

[mrbaracuda]

Well, he claimed his name was Enrique and he was from Spain...

More like al-Andalus, right? :eek:

[Pardalis]

I simply report the news.
Also this isnt a mudslinging article fresh off prison planet.
I repeat the"family members of the crash victims" are complaining.

The old "don't kill the messenger" shtick.

Why do you care? You don't even think these people died there.

[Caustic Logic]

This is a dumbass lone crusade by one whacknut that's caught the attention of a few dedicated conspiradroids.

Just to summarize....
It isn't a "crescent" other than the fact that it's a semi-circle and you could call a semi-circle a crescent,

Thanks for that. I needed to look that up, It's not even multiple people? Or a proper crescent? Maybe this Dad is on a mission to help the contractors' efforts to have to redesign by making it seem that way. (kidding ;) ) Is the "star" east of the "crescent" anything like in the traditional symbol?

I never thot it was an Islamist design, but perhaps symbolically using Islamic imagery, as a way of honoring the RELIGION of the attackers in opposition to their attempt to hijack said religion. A clever inverion and peace offering in an age of "clash of civilizations." I thot maybe this was the idea, and maybe is, if only implied, and it's not a bad design in that light, arguably at least, but some people wouldn't get it. Maybe too intelligent a design...

Need to get the schematics... in case it matters.

By the way... back to circles. Think about it. Is the earth a sphere (even if an irregular one)? This isn't multiple choice. There's only one answer... "Yes". Now find me a point on any sphere that does not point to any other point on said sphere. I won't be waiting for the response.

Somehow Muslims know which way to orient themselves but I've even heard of Muslims in the orient EAST of mecca bowing east when praying. Maybe this is their thinking, and it's all in the intention of focusing yourself spiritually in that direction. If so, can Tweeter's source prove the supposed star-representing structure has such intent and devotion? Or is it actually facing towards, say, Graceland?

[Tweeter]

More truth members emerging daily was the point i was actually trying to make. Family members are the best kind.

[Pardalis]

More truth members emerging daily was the point i was actually trying to make. Family members are the best kind.

I don't follow. Why don't you try and explain that a little more?

[mrbaracuda]

More truth members emerging daily was the point i was actually trying to make.

Well you failed.

Family members are the best kind.

So people who do not like a crescent or semi-circle shaped memorial are as tarded as you all of a sudden and support your fantasy movement because of this?

Keep failing.

[mrbaracuda]

zombietime (zombietime.com) has a page (http://www.zombietime.com/flight_93_memorial_project/) about it, albeit a very small one.

http://c.imagehost.org/0888/memorial_crescent.gif

Personally, I'm not too fond of it.

[mrbaracuda]

Just to summarize....
It isn't a "crescent" other than the fact that it's a semi-circle and you could call a semi-circle a crescent

I wasn't aware of it, but the design is actually called 'Crescent of Embrace'. :eek:

[Pardalis]

I think it looks more like this (http://www.sportslogos.net/images/logos/1/5/full/50.gif), and this (http://charliedean.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/chicago-cubs.jpg), even this (http://www.superc.ca/fr/index.html).

It's just stupid (the controversy, not the site).

[SezMe]

So OldTigerCub posts the OP which, to me, evokes the solomnity of the place. Too bad it was posted in the 9/11 Conspiracies Thread because the OP has nothing to do with such CTs. But by post #2 we were off to the CT races, never to come back to the real meaning of OTC's post, namely, that people died here in an attempt to save other American people and institutions.

It is a place where unimaginable courage ended. It is a truly a place of reflection and mourning.

That the usual characters (on both sides, damnit) play out their usual games demeans the thrust of the OP.

The pictures sadden me. The ensuing thread after the OP saddens me more.

[mrbaracuda]

So OldTigerCub posts the OP which, to me, evokes the solomnity of the place. Too bad it was posted in the 9/11 Conspiracies Thread because the OP has nothing to do with such CTs. But by post #2 we were off to the CT races, never to come back to the real meaning of OTC's post, namely, that people died here in an attempt to save other American people and institutions.

It is a place where unimaginable courage ended. It is a truly a place of reflection and mourning.

That the usual characters (on both sides, damnit) play out their usual games demeans the thrust of the OP.

The pictures sadden me. The ensuing thread after the OP saddens me more.

Hm. I agree but I have to say no one here has forgotten. Well, maybe tweeter, but he's tweeter.

MOOODS!

[Pardalis]

That the usual characters (on both sides, damnit) play out their usual games demeans the thrust of the OP.

As you said, it was posted in the CT section, it was to be expected.

[Caustic Logic]

Cool, thanks. Okay, that does have a suggested crescent shape, and the central memorial of the crash site is positioned relative to the crescent AS IF it were a star in a crescent-star flag. Uncanny.
image (http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z36/AlecRawls/Figure1CrescentFlagsHoriz.jpg)
But it's pointing the wrong way, south-soutwest. In the sense as Foolmewunz says any line points anywhere, this points to Mecca.
image (http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/2007/08/08/islam_93tiplinebisector2bqiblacolor.jpg)

Found this site: oddly called error theory (http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2007/08/tom-burnett-sr-denounces-flight-93.html)

Thought this line was funny: "the planned memorial is actually a terrorist memorial mosque, built around the half mile wide Mecca oriented crescent." No, see, it was a clever trap! When the TERRORISTS come to PRAY at the kick-ass mosque, daat's vhen vee cath them!

And how 'bout this line:

"Tom himself found two different Islamic elements in the crescent design. In addition to identifying the giant crescent as an Islamic symbol, he also noted that the Tower of Voices is akin to an Islamic minaret (long before seeing my proof that it is actually a year-round accurate Islamic prayer-time sundial)."

Wow! "Akin" to a minaret and a sundial - both mean it's ... dun-dun - a vertical structure, akin to a tower, as in "a tower of voices!" Cristendom owes Mr. Burnett and Mr. Rawls a debt of gratitude in this reverse crusade! Is this as dumb as it sounds or what?

[Tweeter]

Cool site!
I really dont think this subject could be funny, but i kinda like what this guy had to say.
"You were deeply involved with the process? Are you saying that you are one of the designers, or that you are one of the jurors, or administrators?

If you were one of the designers, you have a lot of questions to answer. Are you saying that you were both a) someone who made some of the critical decisions that create define what I am calling the terrorist memorial wall (the exact location of the upper memorial wall, it's being bisected by the center line of the red maple crescent, the four extra translucent blocks in the flight path, etcetera) and b) that you had no awareness that the upper wall was centered on the red crescent bisector, the orientation of the crescent on Mecca, etcetera, then that is an interesting data point, and you should do you best to explain to people. But if you are claiming that there is nothing to explain, then you are not just an *******, you are at some level knowingly complicit. Any person who had honestly not intended to place forty-four memorial blocks in the flight path, or not intended to have the upper wall integral with the crescent, or not intended to orient the crescent precisely on Mecca, would be aghast to discover that he had done these thing. You are not aghast. You either did it on purpose yourself, or you had at least some awareness that someone else was doing it. The fact that you are not aghast to find out what your group actually did, whether by mistake or on purpose, but instead are calling other people ******** for discovering it, tells me that there is something VERY damned wrong with you. If you want to explain different, we're all ears.

If, on the other hand, you were a juror, or an administrator, who had nothing to do with creating any of the Islamist structures, you too should be aghast at finding out that the crescent contains. That you are not tells me that you are not a person of good faith. You are saying that you would be content to plant an Islamic flag on the graves of our murdered heroes (perhaps you murdered kin), so long as you did it by mistake? You don't want to know about such a thing, and stop it? That's sick. That's like Cindy Sheehan calling the fascists who murdered her son "freedom fighters." It's a self-centered obliviousness beyond fathoming. But again, if you can explain yourself, lots of people would like to hear it

[Foolmewunz]

Sezme,
Sorry if you feel disappointment, but I, for one, was just reading through a nice string of messages (albeit in the wrong sub-forum, I admit... which is why it was a pleasant surprise),.... It's sort of like having a nice walk in the country when along comes this big fat flea infested crow and craps all over your head (this thread).
Many of us have said - many times - the only reason we still pay any attention to any of these characters is that if left unanswered they leave the impression that the crap they post and link to is correct. In this case, not only are the crapping all over the every amphiteatre ever built with this nonsense, but it's just a stupid red herring as no one has come up with a single clue as to just what this could mean for a truther.

Tweeter,
You guys don't believe the cave-dwellers did it, remember? So how to you equate this family member, who says nothing about inside jobs, as being a family member to come out for the truth. You're just clutching at straws.

Better mind than mine have refuted the math on his sill projections, and as has been pointed out, any arc will have a point on it that points to everywhere else on earth (in one direction or another). Every building that is not constructed under the earth will have a shadow, too! This is a non-issue. A rant like the Apple Mecca rant, just the opposite side of the spectrum for the most part.

[Brainster]

The crescent issue is legitimate (http://brainster.blogspot.com/2005_09_11_archive.html#112664853201506681); a lot of people are angry about that, and to be honest, I'm one of them. In the original design it was specifically referred to as "the Crescent of Embrace", which not only sounds grammatically incorrect, but renders any talk about how it's just a coincidence involving semicircles irrelevant.

[Hokulele]

There are quite a few more shots that I took, all higher resolution, that can be found at my webpage: oldtigercub.com/flight93memorial (http://oldtigercub.com/flight93memorial/) for anyone who would like to see them.


Thanks for this post and the pics. As it is highly unlikely I will get to that part of the country any time soon, your thoughts give me a better feeling and perspective of the site.

[mrbaracuda]

The crescent issue is legitimate (http://brainster.blogspot.com/2005_09_11_archive.html#112664853201506681); a lot of people are angry about that, and to be honest, I'm one of them. In the original design it was specifically referred to as "the Crescent of Embrace", which not only sounds grammatically incorrect, but renders any talk about how it's just a coincidence involving semicircles irrelevant.

Something like this would be nice, wouldn't it?

http://oldtigercub.com/flight93memorial/slides/IMG_0285.JPG

Taken from OldTigerCub's page. Thanks for that. :) As a German you don't often get the chance to get there. ;)

[Pardalis]

The crescent issue is legitimate (http://brainster.blogspot.com/2005_09_11_archive.html#112664853201506681); a lot of people are angry about that, and to be honest, I'm one of them. In the original design it was specifically referred to as "the Crescent of Embrace", which not only sounds grammatically incorrect, but renders any talk about how it's just a coincidence involving semicircles irrelevant.

Isn't it called "Bowl of Embrace" now?

[Dr Adequate]

The crescent issue is legitimate (http://brainster.blogspot.com/2005_09_11_archive.html#112664853201506681); a lot of people are angry about that, and to be honest, I'm one of them. Apparently the "lot of people" are all right-wing bloggers; that's pretty much the opposite of a legitimate issue.

Really, Michelle "Dunkin' Donuts" Malkin is outraged because she's seen another manifestation of Sinister Islamofascism? Well, there's an enormous surprise.

Better not tell her about the Wiccans ... their sacred symbols include the crescent ... and the circle, triangle, and spiral. It's amazing what a huge influence they must have on architecture. I think I shall form a blasphemous sex cult the symbol of which is the straight line, that'll really **** with the paranoid people.

[CptColumbo]

I saw it as a half-eaten doughnut or a cookie with a really big bite out of it, but I'm kinda hungry right now.

[Dr Adequate]

The flag denotes the center area of the fence
in front of the impact point: hallowed ground.
Noone is allowed to go beyond
the fence except family members of
Flight 93 passengers and crew. You don't say whether this is a permanent feature of the site or just a part of the temporary arrangements. I hope and guess it's the former, that seems so exactly right.

[OldTigerCub]

I didn't mean to start a thread, then abandon it, but work carried me far and wide today, so all of that windshield time pretty much killed my chances of posting....until now.

So uh, can you sit on those benches or does no one dare? Those are somewhat.. strange. Odd choice if you ask me.
Yes, you can, and they are well used. Almost immediately after I took the picture, people started sitting down for a presentation by one of the ambassadors at the memorial. I kind of liked the arrangement. There are two rows with an aisle in the middle, and they face toward the crash site. It is a little reminiscent of an outdoor chapel, especially with the big cross in the right front corner of the arrangement.


Nothing really to add. Thanks for sharing. It's interesting to get a feel for the space, and the solemnity, and symbolism used.
You're quite welcome, CL. I have seen so many pictures that I thought I knew the place well, but seeing it first hand is a whole different experience. I hoped the pictures I took would give a better feel of the surroundings than the carefully framed and staged ones that are usually seen in books or internet sites.


So OldTigerCub posts the OP which, to me, evokes the solomnity of the place. Too bad it was posted in the 9/11 Conspiracies Thread because the OP has nothing to do with such CTs. But by post #2 we were off to the CT races, never to come back to the real meaning of OTC's post, namely, that people died here in an attempt to save other American people and institutions.

It is a place where unimaginable courage ended. It is a truly a place of reflection and mourning.

That the usual characters (on both sides, damnit) play out their usual games demeans the thrust of the OP.

The pictures sadden me. The ensuing thread after the OP saddens me more.
You may have a good point, SezMe. I had originally thought about posting in the community or social issues/current events subforums. The amount of time that I have spent trying to counter CT claims made me feel that a personal visit to the Flight 93 site might reinforce my understanding of the events. It is hard to walk among the tributes and pictures and monuments, and look out across that field and have any doubt whatsoever that the passengers and crew of UAL 93 were true heroes, and that the first battle was won in the sky above Shanksville. I Decided to post it here mostly as an effort to bring a little piece of reality to a subforum so often riddled with absurd fantasies.


The crescent issue is legitimate (http://brainster.blogspot.com/2005_09_11_archive.html#112664853201506681); a lot of people are angry about that, and to be honest, I'm one of them. In the original design it was specifically referred to as "the Crescent of Embrace", which not only sounds grammatically incorrect, but renders any talk about how it's just a coincidence involving semicircles irrelevant.
I tend to have a similar opinion with you on those points, Pat. I was not too crazy about the design myself when it was first announced. My personal opinion: Anything design that could in any way shape or form be construed or interpreted as having any favorable symbolism to the enemy that attacked us that day should have been summarily dismissed. I would have favored something simpler, and more reminiscent of a battlefield monument....but that's just my opinion.
On a side note, I understand that the committee met in Summersville this weekend, and Tom Burnett was on the radio on KDKA this morning. He mentioned being at the memorial site, and it made me wonder if he may have been among those that disembarked from the tour busses as I was preparing to leave. I thought it was a senior citizen's tour, but now that I think about it, nearly everyone was wearing plastic name badges. I guess it's just one of those things that will keep me wondering for a while....:rolleyes:

Thanks for this post and the pics. As it is highly unlikely I will get to that part of the country any time soon, your thoughts give me a better feeling and perspective of the site.
You are quite welcome, Hokulele. It's a long swim from the islands, ;) but I hope you get to see it for yourself someday soon!

You don't say whether this is a permanent feature of the site or just a part of the temporary arrangements. I hope and guess it's the former, that seems so exactly right.

My understanding is that the large fence running around the entire perimeter of the crash site is temporary. I believe that the permanent memorial will be in that field, and will surround the hallowed ground area, but I also understand that the central impact area will still be off-limits to all but family members.

[SezMe]

It is a little reminiscent of an outdoor chapel, especially with the big cross in the right front corner of the arrangement.
There's a cross as an official part of the site? What, no Jews or atheists were on the plane - to say nothing of the many, many other possibilities. I'm disappointed in the design committee.

[OldTigerCub]

There's a cross as an official part of the site? What, no Jews or atheists were on the plane - to say nothing of the many, many other possibilities. I'm disappointed in the design committee.

The cross is located in one corner of the temporary memorial. It is not official by any means. I really don't know who placed it. All of the monuments, crosses, benches, caps, pins, statuettes, engravings, homemade carvings...all have been brought and placed by individuals and organizations. The ground has yet to be broken on the permanent memorial. Everything that is there right now is the accumulation of the sentiments of visitors and locals.

[SezMe]

Thanks, Tiger. I sure hope religion is kept out of the permanent memorial.

[Tweeter]

Cool site!
I really dont think this subject could be funny, but i kinda like what this guy had to say.
"You were deeply involved with the process? Are you saying that you are one of the designers, or that you are one of the jurors, or administrators?

If you were one of the designers, you have a lot of questions to answer. Are you saying that you were both a) someone who made some of the critical decisions that create define what I am calling the terrorist memorial wall (the exact location of the upper memorial wall, it's being bisected by the center line of the red maple crescent, the four extra translucent blocks in the flight path, etcetera) and b) that you had no awareness that the upper wall was centered on the red crescent bisector, the orientation of the crescent on Mecca, etcetera, then that is an interesting data point, and you should do you best to explain to people. But if you are claiming that there is nothing to explain, then you are not just an *******, you are at some level knowingly complicit. Any person who had honestly not intended to place forty-four memorial blocks in the flight path, or not intended to have the upper wall integral with the crescent, or not intended to orient the crescent precisely on Mecca, would be aghast to discover that he had done these thing. You are not aghast. You either did it on purpose yourself, or you had at least some awareness that someone else was doing it. The fact that you are not aghast to find out what your group actually did, whether by mistake or on purpose, but instead are calling other people ******** for discovering it, tells me that there is something VERY damned wrong with you. If you want to explain different, we're all ears.

If, on the other hand, you were a juror, or an administrator, who had nothing to do with creating any of the Islamist structures, you too should be aghast at finding out that the crescent contains. That you are not tells me that you are not a person of good faith. You are saying that you would be content to plant an Islamic flag on the graves of our murdered heroes (perhaps you murdered kin), so long as you did it by mistake? You don't want to know about such a thing, and stop it? That's sick. That's like Cindy Sheehan calling the fascists who murdered her son "freedom fighters." It's a self-centered obliviousness beyond fathoming. But again, if you can explain yourself, lots of people would like to hear it

Im bumping my own thread.
Family members of the crash victims think the symbolism in the new memorial is a slap in the face. This is the smoking gun.

[mrbaracuda]

Im bumping my own thread.

A post is not a thread. This is not your thread.

Family members of the crash victims think the symbolism in the new memorial is a slap in the face. This is the smoking gun.

Smoking gun of what exactly? 9/11 was an inside job fantasies? No it isn't.

[Foolmewunz]

The crescent issue is legitimate (http://brainster.blogspot.com/2005_09_11_archive.html#112664853201506681); a lot of people are angry about that, and to be honest, I'm one of them. In the original design it was specifically referred to as "the Crescent of Embrace", which not only sounds grammatically incorrect, but renders any talk about how it's just a coincidence involving semicircles irrelevant.

Brainster,

This is getting a little tedious. You're taking things to new heights (or depths) all the time.

So a bunch of right wing bloggers have now co-opted another word - crescent. I thought I was being facetious, but are you now going to rename the "crescent wrench"?

Why are you angry that someone uses a legitimate word to describe something? A word which conicidentally means a symbol of something that's representative to the Arab and Islamic world?

Peter Paul and Mary:
If I had a hammer... I'd .....

Right Wing Blognut:
Have you noticed they're using a commie symbol? Huh? Didja see that?

Sensible Person:
Uh, I think hammers have been around for millenia. I can't think that the folks at Stanley are communists.

Right Wing Blognut:
But that doesn't matter! What matters is that I discovered this nonsense and wrote a fiery column about it and now we have to make my rantings better known.

[Foolmewunz]

Im bumping my own thread.
Family members of the crash victims think the symbolism in the new memorial is a slap in the face. This is the smoking gun.

Tweeter,
Do you have even a passing acquaintance with the ENGLISH LANGUAGE?

Smoking Gun?????

That makes no sense whatsoever. Did you read what I posted above? The people objecting to this are not 911 conspiraduds. They are quasi-xenophobic reactionaries who break out in a case of the hives at anything that isn't painted redwhiteandblue, have a picture of an eagle on it, or a quote from Ronald Reagan carved in four inch letters.

Hint: Do you recognize the name "Brainster" (take your time... you can scroll up or you can use the member search function)?
Do you know that Brainster is responsible for a serious amount of thrashing that is dealt to the TM?
And have you noticed that Brainster is one of the folks expressing his disagreement with the choice of designs?

I have owned you four times in this thread alone. Please just sign over the permanent deed to your ass so we won't have to go through this so often. (Better yet, MAKE SOME SENSE, OCCASIONALLY!)

[gumboot]

I have to say that I do think the use of the crescent symbol is somewhat inappropriate. Not so much the shape of the memorial itself, as I don't feel it really is a crescent, but the specific use of the word "crescent". For good or bad, the crescent is undeniably linked to the Islamic faith, and to use such a symbol as a memorial to a horrific act carried out by people acting on behalf of that faith is IMHO, incredibly bad taste.

Memorials are, by their very nature, incredibly symbolic, and designers of such monuments really should put much more thought into what the chosen symbols represent. Either the designer didn't even think about symbolism, in which case they really have no business designing a memorial, or they intentionally chose an Islamic symbol which is even worse.

I should reiterate here that the only thing I really take issue with the the name "crescent of embrace". The design itself seems fine to me. I don't know if the designer actually used the term "crescent" or not, so it might not be their fault.

For what it's worth, the crescent symbol has been intimately linked with the middle east for about 1500 years, well before the appearance of Islam. It was the symbol of the Sassanian Empire (Persian) and after they were conquered by the Arabs, the crescent symbol was adopted as a symbol of authority in the Caliphate and amongst Muslim rulers as it was a well recognised and established symbol of West Asian power.

However it was a long time before the Crescent was adopted as a symbol of Islam itself, and was traditionally reserved as a secular symbol as Islam prohibited the use of geometric symbols.

In this aspect I think in some ways the use of a crescent is even poorer taste - you could argue that the use of an Islamic symbol was a gesture of reconciliation, or a recognition that the hijackers were not representative of Islam, however traditionally the crescent is more a symbol of Arabian and Persian domination, not Islam, and in particular the Caliphate - the very thing Al Qaeda was/is fighting to reestablish. In this regard it is in incredibly poor taste - akin to using a Swastika on a memorial to victims of Neo-nazi actions.

[Brainster]

Brainster,

This is getting a little tedious. You're taking things to new heights (or depths) all the time.

So a bunch of right wing bloggers have now co-opted another word - crescent. I thought I was being facetious, but are you now going to rename the "crescent wrench"?

Why? Are crescent wrenches related in some form or fashion to 9-11?

Why are you angry that someone uses a legitimate word to describe something? A word which conicidentally means a symbol of something that's representative to the Arab and Islamic world?

Oh, it was just a coincidence?

:dl:

[mrbaracuda]

Yea, I don't get foolmewunz on this one either really. ;)

[Dr Adequate]

The crescent issue is legitimate (http://brainster.blogspot.com/2005_09_11_archive.html#112664853201506681) ... Your blog asks:

I'd be interested in hearing the Flight 93 families on this; I know that some of them were represented on the jury that selected the design.

The Families of Flight 93, May 2, 2008 (http://www.nps.gov/flni/parkmgmt/upload/STATEMENTBYGORDONFELT.pdf)

Much has been said in the press recently about a controversy related to the design of the Flight 93 National Memorial. These stories have appeared on and off over the past few years and are being driven by a relatively small number of disgruntled citizens and representatives from one of our forty families [underlining in original]. Since the completion of the memorial design competition, we have heard claims suggesting that somehow family members of those that lost their lives on the morning of 9/11 are in some way willing or unknowing participants in the creation of a memorial secretly honoring those very terrorists that brought such death and destruction to our land. These allegations are hurtful to the overwhelming number of families fully in support of the memorial. Furthermore, they are misleading and not based in fact.

Michelle Malkin blows goats.

[Pardalis]

This is the smoking gun.

Again, could you explain to me in your own words how this conspiracy works?

I'm not following.

[Brainster]

Your blog asks:



The Families of Flight 93, May 2, 2008 (http://www.nps.gov/flni/parkmgmt/upload/STATEMENTBYGORDONFELT.pdf)

Much has been said in the press recently about a controversy related to the design of the Flight 93 National Memorial. These stories have appeared on and off over the past few years and are being driven by a relatively small number of disgruntled citizens and representatives from one of our forty families [underlining in original]. Since the completion of the memorial design competition, we have heard claims suggesting that somehow family members of those that lost their lives on the morning of 9/11 are in some way willing or unknowing participants in the creation of a memorial secretly honoring those very terrorists that brought such death and destruction to our land. These allegations are hurtful to the overwhelming number of families fully in support of the memorial. Furthermore, they are misleading and not based in fact.

Michelle Malkin blows goats.

Whenever the topic of Mrs M comes up, you can guarantee that the topic of sex acts won't be far behind (http://michellemalkin.com/2005/02/08/comments-trolls-and-the-lefts-continued-whore-fixation/). It's racist and sexist and beneath you, or so I once thought.

The design was changed; as somebody noted, it's now the Bowl of Embrace, which is equally bad grammatically but at least does not evoke the main symbol of Islam. I am amused that all the atheists here seem to be fine with a religious symbol on public land.

[Caustic Logic]

Again, could you explain to me in your own words how this conspiracy works?

I'm not following.

Apparently Tweeter feels the Islamists who designed this memorial proves that
9/11 was not an Islamist operation? I dunno.

There's a cross as an official part of the site? What, no Jews or atheists were on the plane - to say nothing of the many, many other possibilities. I'm disappointed in the design committee.

Don't worry, when the new "terrorist mosque" is complete, the cross will be gone for sure!

I'm with no one here. I say it may well be an Islam-inspired design and I'm not mad. It is not a memorial to terrorists, but to peace and embrace. A central tenet of Christianity, is it not, is to love thine enemy even? Or something? I thinks it's misunderstood genius.



Much has been said in the press recently about a controversy related to the design of the Flight 93 National Memorial. These stories have appeared on and off over the past few years and are being driven by a relatively small number of disgruntled citizens and representatives from one of our forty families [underlining in original]. Since the completion of the memorial design competition, we have heard claims suggesting that somehow family members of those that lost their lives on the morning of 9/11 are in some way willing or unknowing participants in the creation of a memorial secretly honoring those very terrorists that brought such death and destruction to our land. These allegations are hurtful to the overwhelming number of families fully in support of the memorial. Furthermore, they are misleading and not based in fact.

Michelle Malkin blows goats.

Thanks for that. I'm not sure of MM's take but I've seen some paranoid dolts imply the designers are part of an Islamist conspiracy here... either these majority of family members thought the similarity was coincidence, or they decided the Islamic symbolism does not necc. = terrorism worship. I'm going with them.

[Tweeter]

Out of all the coincidences related to 9/11 this is one that cant be debunked. Hence the smoking gun.

[Pardalis]

Out of all the coincidences related to 9/11 this is one that cant be debunked. Hence the smoking gun.

Coincidence of what?

How does this fit in the conspiracy?

I know it's hard for you but try to make this brain of yours work for once.

[Tweeter]

You sound like a little kid. Why ? Why? Why?
You answer me, is it just a coincidence that the memorial will have these Islamic symbols or was it done intentionally?

[Brainster]

Out of all the coincidences related to 9/11 this is one that cant be debunked. Hence the smoking gun.

Oh, please, spare me your conspiracy theories. I suspect the designer knew quite well what he was doing with the crescent bit; he was being politically correct. I doubt many of the families caught it, although Tom Burnett certainly did (http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=520821&catid=14).

If Felt is right that the vast majority of the Flight 93 families are fine with the design, then that's one thing. But we've certainly seen "leaders" of 9-11 family groups like Bill Doyle (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/080706governmentcomplicit.htm) claim to have a mandate of the families behind them:

The representative of the largest group of 9/11 families says that the official version of events is a fallacy and that the NORAD stand down and evidence of incendiary devices used to bring down the towers amount to government complicity in the attacks - a conclusion shared by half of the 9/11 families he represents.

I would like to hear from more of the family members on this--Lisa Beamer, Caroline Glick, etc.

[Pardalis]

You sound like a little kid. Why ? Why? Why?
You answer me, is it just a coincidence that the memorial will have these Islamic symbols or was it done intentionally?

Answer my question first.

[Pardalis]

Oh, please, spare me your conspiracy theories. I suspect the designer knew quite well what he was doing with the crescent bit; he was being politically correct. I doubt many of the families caught it, although Tom Burnett certainly did (http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=520821&catid=14).

If Felt is right that the vast majority of the Flight 93 families are fine with the design, then that's one thing. But we've certainly seen "leaders" of 9-11 family groups like Bill Doyle (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/080706governmentcomplicit.htm) claim to have a mandate of the families behind them:



I would like to hear from more of the family members on this--Lisa Beamer, Caroline Glick, etc.


Brainster, could the design of the memorial be a result of the topography of the terrain?

[Dr Adequate]

Whenever the topic of Mrs M comes up, you can guarantee that the topic of sex acts won't be far behind (http://michellemalkin.com/2005/02/08/comments-trolls-and-the-lefts-continued-whore-fixation/). Of her race I am unaware; to her sex I am indifferent; I do however confess to a deep-seated prejudice against idiots, which my post expressed.

The design was changed; as somebody noted, it's now the Bowl of Embrace, which is equally bad grammatically but at least does not evoke the main symbol of Islam. I am amused that all the atheists here seem to be fine with a religious symbol on public land. It is a religious symbol only in the minds of conspiracy theorists spreading rumors which the families of flight 93 decry as "hurtful ... misleading and not based in fact".

[Tweeter]

Caustics explanationI say it may well be an Islam-inspired design and I'm not mad. It is not a memorial to terrorists, but to peace and embrace. A central tenet of Christianity, is it not, is to love thine enemy even? Or something? I thinks it's misunderstood genius.We forgive them.
Maybe you should just go with that, Pardalis.

[gumboot]

A central tenet of Christianity, is it not, is to love thine enemy even? Or something? I thinks it's misunderstood genius


Personally I think the design is either A) not intended to reference Islam in any way whatsoever, or B) precisely what you've suggested above.

If it's what is above, it seems doubly inappropriate. What possible grounds are there for making the UA93 memorial Christian in nature? Were all on board Christian? At least one of the passengers was gay, so God hates him, right?

Religion should have no place in an official government memorial, particularly when the incident in question is religiously motivated. Indeed, it is things like September 11 that are precisely why the USA chose to separate government and religion.

[Pardalis]

Caustics explanationI say it may well be an Islam-inspired design and I'm not mad. It is not a memorial to terrorists, but to peace and embrace. A central tenet of Christianity, is it not, is to love thine enemy even? Or something? I thinks it's misunderstood genius.We forgive them.
Maybe you should just go with that, Pardalis.

What part of "in your own words" don't you understand?

[Brainster]

Brainster, could the design of the memorial be a result of the topography of the terrain?

Certainly. And reading this article (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/680yigrm.asp), it sounds like the other designs were pretty miserable.

Clearly, the jury knew what it wanted because the finalists shared remarkably similar sensibilities. The design "Disturbed Harmony" was little more than a knee-high, granite "Bravery Wall," running through the field leading to the crash site. "(F)Light" proposed a covered walkway tracing the final few seconds of Flight 93's trajectory. "Memory Trail" was another planned walkway, this time culminating in a visitor's center. The design of finalist "Fields, Forests, Fences" rivaled the film Snakes on a Plane in the literalism of its title.

But they absolutely had to know that calling it a "Crescent" was going to stir up controversy. There are other issues, some minor, some not. It has been pointed out that the Crescent roughly faces towards Mecca; I don't think that's a significant issue. There are plans for 44 glass blocks; by a coincidence, no doubt, there were 44 people on the plane counting the terrorists.

[Pardalis]

Certainly. And reading this article (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/680yigrm.asp), it sounds like the other designs were pretty miserable.



But they absolutely had to know that calling it a "Crescent" was going to stir up controversy. There are other issues, some minor, some not. It has been pointed out that the Crescent roughly faces towards Mecca; I don't think that's a significant issue. There are plans for 44 glass blocks; by a coincidence, no doubt, there were 44 people on the plane counting the terrorists.


So it's not the shape that bothers you, just the word "crescent"?

[Dr Adequate]

I would like to hear from more of the family members on this--Lisa Beamer, Caroline Glick, etc. I don't think you mean "Caroline Glick".

Some more reponses from family members (http://www.zimbio.com/pilot?ID=3BLX37VtzyH&ZURL=/Lisa+Beamer/news&URL=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.google.com%2Fnews%2Furl%3Fsa %3DT%26ct%3Dus%2F0-0%26fd%3DR%26url%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fydr.inyork.com%2Fc i_10078554%26cid%3D1232808192%26ei%3DSuWUSP3tL4LM8 ATa2ozZBA%26usg%3DAFQjCNERIo8I8IDL5JZQbJf4N_NTD7jx _g), including Todd Beamer's father.

Others spoke out against personal attacks on Joanne Handley, the NPS superintendent who oversees the project and supports its design.

Calvin Wilson of Herndon, Va., said attacks questioning Handley's patriotism are a form of terrorism. Wilson's brother, LeRoy Homer, was the co-pilot who died aboard Flight 93.

[...]

David Beamer, father of Todd Beamer whose command of "Let's roll" signaled the passenger revolt, said he has researched the design and found no fault in it. He addressed Burnett personally at the meeting.

"Our sons Beamer and Burnett and 38 others on that fateful morning were united," Beamer said. "So I'm sad today to find us on opposite sides."

The planning groups are in the midst of raising about $22 million for the first phase of the memorial. They hope to open it by the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks.

Christine Fraser, of Elizabeth, N.J., whose sister Colleen died that day, said she wants the Park Service to press on with the design.

"We can see the conspiracy in anything if we look hard enough," she said. "How dare anybody think I would want to build a memorial to crazy people who hate us."

As to whether Burnett has any support from other family members, I note from the article that his sidekick in his little crusade is one Alec Rawls, who is not a family member.

What is he? He's ... a conservative blogger.

[articulett]

Of her race I am unaware; to her sex I am indifferent; I do however confess to a deep-seated prejudice against idiots, which my post expressed.


It was your disrespect of goats that I find fault with.

[Dr Adequate]

But they absolutely had to know that calling it a "Crescent" was going to stir up controversy. There are other issues, some minor, some not. It has been pointed out that the Crescent roughly faces towards Mecca; I don't think that's a significant issue. There are plans for 44 glass blocks; by a coincidence, no doubt, there were 44 people on the plane counting the terrorists. Ah, let the numerology begin!

But wait! What about the facts? (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07230/810465-85.stm)

Regarding the claim that there are 44 glass blocks in the memorial, Mr. Murdoch vehemently disagreed, saying that, first of all, there is no glass block used in the design.

Instead, there are 40 inscribed marble panels listing the names of the passengers and crew at the gateway to the Sacred Ground, where their remains still rest.

There is then an opening in the wall, Mr. Murdoch said, and three additional panels, which would include the date, Sept. 11, 2001.

"Where the other one is being fabricated, I don't know," he said.

A separate glass plate will be located near the visitor's center and include the memorial project's preamble.

40 apples + 3 oranges + 1 banana + 0 glass blocks = 44 glass blocks. And that, you must agree, is sinister.

[Brainster]

I don't think you mean "Caroline Glick".

My bad. Liz.

Some more reponses from family members (http://www.zimbio.com/pilot?ID=3BLX37VtzyH&ZURL=/Lisa+Beamer/news&URL=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.google.com%2Fnews%2Furl%3Fsa %3DT%26ct%3Dus%2F0-0%26fd%3DR%26url%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fydr.inyork.com%2Fc i_10078554%26cid%3D1232808192%26ei%3DSuWUSP3tL4LM8 ATa2ozZBA%26usg%3DAFQjCNERIo8I8IDL5JZQbJf4N_NTD7jx _g), including Todd Beamer's father.

Others spoke out against personal attacks on Joanne Handley, the NPS superintendent who oversees the project and supports its design.

Calvin Wilson of Herndon, Va., said attacks questioning Handley's patriotism are a form of terrorism. Wilson's brother, LeRoy Homer, was the co-pilot who died aboard Flight 93.

[...]

David Beamer, father of Todd Beamer whose command of "Let's roll" signaled the passenger revolt, said he has researched the design and found no fault in it. He addressed Burnett personally at the meeting.

"Our sons Beamer and Burnett and 38 others on that fateful morning were united," Beamer said. "So I'm sad today to find us on opposite sides."

The planning groups are in the midst of raising about $22 million for the first phase of the memorial. They hope to open it by the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks.

Christine Fraser, of Elizabeth, N.J., whose sister Colleen died that day, said she wants the Park Service to press on with the design.

"We can see the conspiracy in anything if we look hard enough," she said. "How dare anybody think I would want to build a memorial to crazy people who hate us."

As to whether Burnett has any support from other family members, I note from the article that his sidekick in his little crusade is one Alec Rawls, who is not a family member.

What is he? He's ... a conservative blogger.

Oh, well, we can safely ignore him, eh? However, I do note this part in that article that you highlighted:

Burnett was one of more than a dozen people, mostly family members of the victims, who sometimes wept as they spoke for and against the design.

Beamer's dad's comment is reassuring however. If he's on board with the revised design (and the elimination of the Crescent of Embrace name), then I'm getting more comfortable with the idea.

[Pardalis]

If he's on board with the revised design (and the elimination of the Crescent of Embrace name), then I'm getting more comfortable with the idea.

You prefer "Bowl of Embrace", seriously? You think it makes more sense, and is more poetic?

[BenBurch]

OTC, thanks for posting that. When I travel through that area I shall have to stop there.

[Dr Adequate]

Oh, well, we can safely ignore him, eh? Or mock him, either way's good.

However, I do note this part in that article that you highlighted: It says "more than a dozen people, mostly family members of the victims, who sometimes wept as they spoke for and against the design". Now, that does not imply that there was more than one family member speaking against it.

The president of Families of Flight 93 specifically says:

These stories have appeared on and off over the past few years and are being driven by a relatively small number of disgruntled citizens and representatives from one of our forty families.

So it does look as though he's a lone voice. To be more accurate, I think his wife supports him, although her name does appear at the bottom of this letter (http://www.nps.gov/flni/parkmgmt/upload/tomtancredo.pdf).

[Brainster]

You prefer "Bowl of Embrace", seriously? You think it makes more sense, and is more poetic?

Both of them suck. Crescent of Embrace sucks more because of the Islam reference, but Cross of Embrace would suck too. The whole "of Embrace" formulation sucks.

[T.A.M.]

I understand how some people could find the use of a crescent in a memorial dedicated to victims of islamic extremists offensive. Similarly dedicating a memorial to the victims of the crusades with a cross would be so, as would dedicating a memorial to the victims of the holocaust would be if it had the Swatztica (spelling - sorry).

I know the latter is an extreme case, and the symbol more instantly recognized as a nazi symbol.

TAM:)

[Pardalis]

Both of them suck. Crescent of Embrace sucks more because of the Islam reference, but Cross of Embrace would suck too. The whole "of Embrace" formulation sucks.

So your beef is with "embrace" now?

Brainster, I know you're one of the good guys, so I'm not trying to "debunk" you or anything, I'm just trying to follow your reasoning: at first your beef was with the shape, then you agreed it may only be the result of the topography of the site (since other submissions had the same shape). Then, it was the word "crescent" that bothered you. Now it's "embrace".

If it's really "crescent" that bothers you, then how is one supposed to name something that is of a crescent shape? If it's "embrace", then it's just about esthetics.

You see where I'm going with this? Ultimately, when you think about it, your problem is really about nothing. :)

[Brainster]

So your beef is with "embrace" now?

Brainster, I know you're one of the good guys, so I'm not trying to "debunk" you or anything, I'm just trying to follow your reasoning: at first your beef was with the shape, then you agreed it may only be the result of the topography of the site (since other submissions had the same shape). Then, it was the word "crescent" that bothered you. Now it's "embrace".

If it's really "crescent" that bothers you, then how is one supposed to name something that is of a crescent shape? If it's "embrace", then it's just about esthetics.

You see where I'm going with this? Ultimately, when you think about it, your problem is really about nothing. :)

You're mistaking my trivial concern about the phrase "Crescent of Embrace" or "Bowl of Embrace" being a horrific name aesthetically, leaving aside for the moment the obvious symbolism of the "Crescent". As I said back in 2005 when this first came up, it's akin to "Circle of Hug". It makes no sense. You may find it poetic, I just find it strange.

I object to the word "Crescent" because of the obvious religious symbolism which is completely inappropriate specifically because fanatics of that religion are responsible for what happened that day. And I did not stipulate that the site requires a circular design of some kind; I just agreed that might be true. The other finalists (http://www.postgazette.com/pg/05036/453317.stm) did not feature a circular design.

Contrary to what people seem to believe, conservative bloggers weren't (http://www.tribune-democrat.com/local/local_story_253002557.html) the only ones to raise issues with the design:

Fundamentalist Christians aren’t alone in their concerns about an Islamic symbol being used in the design of the Flight 93 National Memorial.

Muslims would take affront as well, a professor of Middle Eastern studies at New York University said.

And:

Fouad El Bayly of Somerset, leader of the Islamic Center of Johnstown, has said Muslims immediately would recognize the symbolism in the design.

The crescent is a symbol of Islamic faith, El Bayly said.

“You pick something to be identified with,” he said.

Like I said earlier, some of the stuff is silly; the guy with the Crescent of Betrayal website claims that the crescent is perfectly aligned with Mecca, give or take 1.8 degrees. He also claims that if you draw a line between the ends of the crescent it points directly at the White House. That's the sort of "research" I'm used to seeing from Killtown.

My whole focus on the 9-11 conspiracy theories arose because I got pissed off about the Flight 93 section of Loose Change. I've mentioned several times that one of the things that lifted my depression after 9-11 was when I spent several hours on the Sunday after the attacks reading about Beamer, Bingham, Glick, Nacke, Burnett and all the other people on that flight. So I tend to be just a tad defensive of those people and their memory.

The people who died on that plane were heroes, and they deserve a monument that reflects that heroism. Like I said, the fact that Todd Beamer's dad has approved the design means a lot to me; I know he's not gone PC on us.

[Dr Adequate]

Contrary to what people seem to believe, conservative bloggers weren't (http://www.tribune-democrat.com/local/local_story_253002557.html) the only ones to raise issues with the design ... Quite so. And when conservative bloggers, Christian fundamentalists, and conspiracy theorists all agree ... are they ever right? Has this happened even once?

[Pardalis]

You're mistaking my trivial concern about the phrase "Crescent of Embrace" or "Bowl of Embrace" being a horrific name aesthetically, leaving aside for the moment the obvious symbolism of the "Crescent". As I said back in 2005 when this first came up, it's akin to "Circle of Hug". It makes no sense. You may find it poetic, I just find it strange.

I object to the word "Crescent" because of the obvious religious symbolism which is completely inappropriate specifically because fanatics of that religion are responsible for what happened that day. And I did not stipulate that the site requires a circular design of some kind; I just agreed that might be true. The other finalists (http://www.postgazette.com/pg/05036/453317.stm) did not feature a circular design.


You have a right to not like the design, or to not like the similitude with Islam's crescent, but to think that it was intentional is rather far-fetched.

As an atheist, I don't see it as a religious symbol, it's just a coincidence, unless proven otherwise.

[OldTigerCub]

]Like I said earlier, some of the stuff is silly; the guy with the Crescent of Betrayal website claims that the crescent is perfectly aligned with Mecca, give or take 1.8 degrees. He also claims that if you draw a line between the ends of the crescent it points directly at the White House. That's the sort of "research" I'm used to seeing from Killtown.

My whole focus on the 9-11 conspiracy theories arose because I got pissed off about the Flight 93 section of Loose Change. I've mentioned several times that one of the things that lifted my depression after 9-11 was when I spent several hours on the Sunday after the attacks reading about Beamer, Bingham, Glick, Nacke, Burnett and all the other people on that flight. So I tend to be just a tad defensive of those people and their memory.

The people who died on that plane were heroes, and they deserve a monument that reflects that heroism. Like I said, the fact that Todd Beamer's dad has approved the design means a lot to me; I know he's not gone PC on us.

Brainster,
Your sentiments about the design and name of the memorial sound very close to mine, in the sense that the name and the design (be it circle, or crescent or bowl...) of "embrace" seem to be aimed toward making the site a place of mourning and reflection. Granted, a great many visitors have gone there already to mourn and reflect, but a memorial to the crash of an airliner on which the passengers and crew fought back against the enemy, in the first victory against the terrorists who had declared war on our country, should evoke more of a sense of pride in the courage of those aboard Flight 93, and should honor their memory accordingly. In as much I would think that a simpler and more inspiring "battle monument" type of design would have been more fitting.
With Tom Burnett being the only ouspoken critic among the family members at this point, however, and with the vast majority of the design committee endorsing the revised design, I would be inclined to advocate getting started on the construction and just getting it built.
Just my opinion, anyway....:rolleyes:

Incidently, it appears that the temporary memorial may be moved across the road from where it sits right now. The the agreement between the landowner and the park service expires in a few weeks, and the park service will not stay on the land without a signed agreement.

Earlier this month, the park service said it is moving the temporary memorial after failing to reach a deal with the landowner.

By mid-August, all of the artifacts on or around the memorial’s chain-link fence, benches, flags, cross, angels, large stones and shelter will be moved across the road.


The landowner, Svonavec Inc. has indicated that they do not wish to kick anyone off the site, however, and that the public and park service may stay, though without some of the restrictions apparently imposed by the park service.

From the July 12, 2008 issue of the Tribune Democrat (http://www.tribune-democrat.com/local/local_story_194232526.html)
SOMERSET — The owner of land occupied by the Flight 93 temporary memorial vehemently denies that his company is forcing the tribute to be moved.

Although Svonavec Inc. invoked a clause to end a license agreement with the National Park Service on Sept. 5, a company official said it never ordered the memorial off its property.

“You know that we have at no time requested or required that the temporary memorial be removed, nor have we excluded the public, the families or your department from our lands,” Mike Svonavec, the company’s secretary treasurer, wrote in a letter to the chief of the park service’s northeast region realty division.

[Foolmewunz]

Doc A - Thanks. I used to have about fifty discussions of this non-issue archived, but I had a blackscreenofdeath in June and lost a whole lot of personal archives from my web files. The articles, which you've surmised fairly well, offer not one shred of evidence, including interviews with the designer and a check into his background, that the design was anything but an attempt to make a form that blended with the topography and simoultaneously lent itself to having "services" or "dedications" in an organized venue.

How many such designs exist? Seems that circular (arenas) or semi-circular (amphitheatres and most auditoria) have proved to be more condusive to good sight lines and hearing than squared-off (think classic church and classroom design) structures.

I say it's coincidence and the people who are objecting to it are people who'd see something evil and symbolic in, say, a guy scratching his cheek.

[ktesibios]

I've written before that genuine hard-core conspiracists often display the characteristics of authoritarian-follower personalities. This manufactroversy demonstrates the association of authoritarianism and conspiracism from the other direction, in that it involves certifiable RWAs cooking up a PCT that has many of the characteristics of the classic PCTs we spend so much time discussing here. In leaping from "huh-uh, huh-uh, he said "crescent"" to "OMFG! It's a secret mosque! The designer is an Islamofascist infiltrator! Treason! Conspiracy! 1111eleventy!", Rawls in particular demonstrates exactly the same broken thinking typical of twoofers poring over YouTube videos for "proof" that the Twin Towers were destroyed by CD, or Jack White "analyzing" Apollo photos.

I find it very difficult to see a meaningful difference between such creatures whipping up other maimed minds into hauling out the pitchforks and lighted torches and the antics of the WACjobs.

It does raise a question in my mind, one that I've thought about quite a bit lately, but have no answer for...

Why do authoritarian-follower personalities feel so compelled to parade their symptoms on the public Internet?

[Pardalis]

I say it's coincidence and the people who are objecting to it are people who'd see something evil and symbolic in, say, a guy scratching his cheek.

It's no different then the people who give some meaning to the crossed steel beams that were found in the rubble.

[GregHouseMD]

I'm not sure if it's a cresent any more than any ball park is a cresent.

The viewpoint from overhead will look like a cresent, maybe, but it's not the view that most people will see.

I recall watching the hearings on the design of the Viet Nam Memorial. There was a lot of people who thought The Wall was a black scar and fought against the design. The design winner objected to a flag pole, saying it would detract from he horisonal design. Despite her protests, there is a flag pole and an amazing looking statue as well.

I've visited the Wall, it's a humbling experince as I'm sure the visit to the crash site was.

If the famlies are receptive of the design, maybe we need to be open minded about it as well.

I see it as a semi circle surrounding the site of an act of incredible bravery on the part of 40 humans who put the lives of others above their own.

[Tweeter]

So, its just another coincidence.
*adds another to the pile

[Foolmewunz]

So, its just another coincidence.
*adds another to the pile

You have not yet explained how the objections to imaginary Islamic symbols represent a smoking gun or 'nother nail in the coffin.

Tweeter, I don't want you to have to go scrub out your cerebellum with Ajax cleanser or anything, but do you realize that you're arguing on the side of .....

.....REPUBLICANS ????

[Brainster]

No kidding, you guys really think it was just a coincidence and topography? That there was no crescent there, despite the name?

Wow, talk about confirmation bias.

And to be straight, I don't think the guy was setting up a mosque or something like that. I think he was being PC and doing the basic "Islam is a religion of peace," crap.

At any rate I'm out of patience with this thread and quite a few of the people here.

[Pardalis]

I think he was being PC and doing the basic "Islam is a religion of peace," crap.

Do you have any evidence for this?

[Foolmewunz]

No kidding, you guys really think it was just a coincidence and topography? That there was no crescent there, despite the name?

Wow, talk about confirmation bias.

And to be straight, I don't think the guy was setting up a mosque or something like that. I think he was being PC and doing the basic "Islam is a religion of peace," crap.

At any rate I'm out of patience with this thread and quite a few of the people here.

Brainster,

Confirmation bias? Are you sure you meant to type that? You know, pot... kettle... all that?

This is how you (and apparently a few others) and I (and apparently yet a few other others) are obviously wired differently. If you have anything, other than your incredulity to support his intentions, please post it. In everything I've read about this, thére's no reason, other than simply wanting to, to believe he had any ulterior motives,.... as I said, other than simply wanting/needing to believe it. I think that's sort of a textbook definition of confirmation bias, isn't it?

I think "crescent" is a word. It's a word that prior to this lunacy never had an abject association in my mind with Islam. While I can understand that some might take offense to it (if it was able to be proven to have been intentional), I think that'd be like a French Socialist refusing to buy Michelin tires because the Le Guide Michelin uses stars to rate restaurants and stars are part of the American flag.

No, I'm not an idiot. Yes, I'm aware that it's used as a symbol and had anyone showed me a flag with a crescent on it (notwithstanding the City of New Orleans and the State of South Carolina) I probably would've reckoned it to be from an Islamic state. But I would not have leapt to the conclusion that Pillsbury Crescents Rolls were an evil plot to pervert our nation. I mean... Pop 'N Fresh? He's as American as Mickey Mouse!

And would someone please try to remember that we're not at war with Islam.

[Dr Adequate]

So, its just another coincidence.
*adds another to the pile No, actually it's just another irrefutable smoking gun proving that Bush Did 9/11. I'll add it to the pile, along with "clunkity clunk", "dustification", holograms of planes, and the Keebler Elves.

[gumboot]

Granted, a great many visitors have gone there already to mourn and reflect, but a memorial to the crash of an airliner on which the passengers and crew fought back against the enemy, in the first victory against the terrorists who had declared war on our country, should evoke more of a sense of pride in the courage of those aboard Flight 93, and should honor their memory accordingly. In as much I would think that a simpler and more inspiring "battle monument" type of design would have been more fitting.


I hadn't considered that... a good point OldTigerCub... now I dislike the design even more... :p

[gumboot]

Wow... there's some unfathomably stupid posts getting offered in this thread...

So apparently the crescent is only an imaginary symbol of Islam, there's no crescent in the memorial at all despite being called Crescent of Embrace and anyone who doesn't like the design is the equivalent of a conspiracy theorist who thinks the designer is an Islamofascist intending to build a secret Mosque?

Seriously?

How about a designer produces a memorial to victims of the holocaust and purely for aesthetic reasons it involves a swastika, and the designer calls it "Swastika of Reconciliation".

That's okay right? Because that's the equivalent.

No, I don't think the designer necessarily intended for any reference to Islam. No I don't think the designer is a terrorist, or unpatriotic. No I don't think there was any intentional Islamic symbolism in the design. No I don't think there's going to be a secret mosque built at the site. But the designer appears to have won simply because every other design was terrible, and they should have thought about their design a bit more.

Didn't think about the symbolism? A memorial is all about the symbolism.

I don't have major issues with the memorial to be honest. In the end, if the family members are happy with it, then it should be built. That's the bottom line. They don't seem to be taking issue with it in any meaningful way.

But I do take issue with anyone who so ridiculously dismisses any criticism of the design as displayed by some posters in this thread. Engage your critical thinking skills people.

[gumboot]

But I would not have leapt to the conclusion that Pillsbury Crescents Rolls were an evil plot to pervert our nation.

This is akin to logic seen earlier in this thread, for example references to the crescent wrench. Context is everything. It's not just that it's a memorial in the shape of a crescent. I don't think anyone would universally object to a particular shape because it happens to be used by a particular group of people. That's stupid.

I, for example, despise the Christian church, and their symbol is the cross, but I'd take no issue with the use of a cross shape in all sorts of situations - it's a common and aesthetically pleasing shape.

However the case in point isn't a tool, it isn't a building, it isn't a delicious snack - it isn't even just some generic memorial. It's a memorial specifically to an event which is directly and undeniably linked to an entity that uses the given symbol to represent itself.

There's two distinct arguments here.

One is:

"You shouldn't use a symbol that is often associated with Islam for a memorial because Muslims are our enemies"

This is the argument of the conservative, the extreme right winger, and it's obviously an invalid argument.

But there's also:

"You shouldn't use a symbol that is often associated with Islam to commemorate victims of Islamic Terrorism"

I think this argument has far more validity than the first one.

And the distinction between these two arguments is not mere semantics, it's rather fundamental. So if you're going to bash Brainster for holding position 1, make sure he does actually hold position 1 first, because frankly to me it sounds more like he's arguing point 2. And whether you agree or not, he shouldn't be lumped in with idiots arguing point 1 if he's actually arguing point 2.

IMHO as always.

[Pardalis]

So, its just another coincidence.
*adds another to the pile

Yes.

Our very existence is the result of a series of coincidences.

Just like the religious person, you cannot accept that coincidences exist, and therefore you must ascribe them a purpose and an intent. Just like a religious person, it all must have been made up, a conspiracy.

I won't hold this against you, because humans seem to be hardwired to think this way, and it's very hard to get rid of this bad habit. But what I will hold against you is your total ineptitude and complacency in not intellectualizing your thoughts and ideas into a coherent theory, which has been asked of you multiple times in this thread.

[chillzero]

So, its just another coincidence.
*adds another to the pile

What exactly are your thoughts on this Tweeter?

That 7 years ago the govt deliberately pretended to fly a plane into the ground in a field, just so that ... 7 years later .... they could erect a shrine to their islam overlords?

[Foolmewunz]

This is akin to logic seen earlier in this thread, for example references to the crescent wrench. Context is everything. It's not just that it's a memorial in the shape of a crescent. I don't think anyone would universally object to a particular shape because it happens to be used by a particular group of people. That's stupid.

I, for example, despise the Christian church, and their symbol is the cross, but I'd take no issue with the use of a cross shape in all sorts of situations - it's a common and aesthetically pleasing shape.

However the case in point isn't a tool, it isn't a building, it isn't a delicious snack - it isn't even just some generic memorial. It's a memorial specifically to an event which is directly and undeniably linked to an entity that uses the given symbol to represent itself.

There's two distinct arguments here.

One is:

"You shouldn't use a symbol that is often associated with Islam for a memorial because Muslims are our enemies"

This is the argument of the conservative, the extreme right winger, and it's obviously an invalid argument.

But there's also:

"You shouldn't use a symbol that is often associated with Islam to commemorate victims of Islamic Terrorism"

I think this argument has far more validity than the first one.

And the distinction between these two arguments is not mere semantics, it's rather fundamental. So if you're going to bash Brainster for holding position 1, make sure he does actually hold position 1 first, because frankly to me it sounds more like he's arguing point 2. And whether you agree or not, he shouldn't be lumped in with idiots arguing point 1 if he's actually arguing point 2.

IMHO as always.

Andrew,
You hear what I'm saying, but you're not getting the meaning. I agree that crescent wrench, pillsbury crescent rolls, and croissants are absurd things to get one's shorts in a knot about. That's why I'm using them! To emphasize the absurdity. You're taking my words at face value and not reading the sarcasm and the absolute absurdity and moral outrage I feel over this issue.

The point I'm making is that we've allowed the word to be co-opted to represent just one thing. Are you actually going to the extreme to say that anyone using any design in the shape of a crescent or semi-circle, in any structure that might have something to do with history, civics, jurisprudence, health and well-being, etc... Is going to be eschewed because someone sees a political symbol for a religion which they seem to think they're at war with.

The crescent is seen in many structures. It's part of the design, as I mentioned in any wide-set amphitheatre. Are you going to give up theatre because of the imagined political connotations?

And I'd say you should think more about your example in the previous post. The swastika is a hated symbol for a reason. (None of that crap about it being a good luck symbol in some cultures, everyone knows which crooked cross we're talking about.) It was the emblem of the Democratic Socialist/Nazi Party in Germany.

And the crescent? I haven't noticed it as part of the logo of AQ, have you? It's a symbol to hundreds of millions of muslims the world over. It says to them "Here is a representation of your faith. It is important to our XXXXX (country, organization, state, whatever)." It does not say, "Hey let's strap on bombs and murder innocent toddlers in a mall." People says those things,... idiotic murderous malevolent people. And idiotic murderous malevolent jackals follow them. But they ARE NOT representative of the entire population that follows Islam.

The logic of ignoring a cross-shape in a design, does not work for me. On the one hand, you despise the church, yet seeing a cross embedded in something does not get your ire up. Even if you haven't stated that you despise Islam, let's assume that you hold the same opinions of that faith as you do Christianity. (I do, by the way.... I'm anti organized religion of any sort, so I'm not trying to sneak a rhetorical point in here.)

Why then would the crescent, a naturally occuring shape, a common design element, and just coincidentally a symbol of a religion.... Why would it get any more attention or reaction from you than the cross-shape used by many in modern architecture?

I'll let Brainster speak for himself.
But, yes... I think it was a coincidence of the design, much like Apple Mecca that got so much attention a few years ago, and people with axes to grind have taken over the discussion and made a mountain out of a mole hill. The argument would just be silly if it wasn't for the constant waffling of intelligent people trying to justify the utterances of their sacred cows, IMHO.


With apologies to Alan King, who I think I stole this from:

Guy has his first appointment with a shrink.
Doctor: "Well, Mr. Taylor, I'm going to show you some ink blots, here, and you just tell me the first thing that comes into your mind when I turn up the card. We're not looking for any particular answer. There is no right or wrong, just mention the first thing that you think of."
Taylor: 'Kay
Doctor: This one?
Taylor: Tits
Doctor: Okay, and then this one?
Taylor: A woman's ass.
Doctor: Another?
Taylor: More tits.
Doctor: And this one?
Taylor: Heh, heh, that's a vagina, doc!
Doctor: Mmm, okay, I think that's enough. It's quite obvious that you're obsessed with sex, Mr. Taylor.
Taylor: Me???? You're the one showing me all those dirty pictures!

[gumboot]

Are you actually going to the extreme to say that anyone using any design in the shape of a crescent or semi-circle, in any structure that might have something to do with history, civics, jurisprudence, health and well-being, etc... Is going to be eschewed because someone sees a political symbol for a religion which they seem to think they're at war with.

The crescent is seen in many structures. It's part of the design, as I mentioned in any wide-set amphitheatre. Are you going to give up theatre because of the imagined political connotations?

No. I would classify this as the "type 1" objection - and I think it's a totally ridiculous and unworthy objection, and I think you (and any sane person) are right to reject such an objection.

The type of objection that I think is valid - or at least valid enough that those with the objection shouldn't be dismissed out of hand, even if you don't agree - is when a potential connotation of the symbol is directly linked to the specific thing it is being used for.

Even the extreme case of the swastika (and I would agree with your comment that it's a more extreme case because the crescent represents islam as a whole, not Al Qaeda) is relevant to context - if the US navy has a building in the shape of a swastika I really don't care. If someone builds a memorial to the holocaust in the shape of a swastika I would.

Likewise, I don't care if a crescent is used for a building or a food, or a memorial to cheese makers, but it does raise an eyebrow when it's used in a memorial to victims of a Radical Islamic sect.


And the crescent? I haven't noticed it as part of the logo of AQ, have you? It's a symbol to hundreds of millions of muslims the world over. It says to them "Here is a representation of your faith. It is important to our XXXXX (country, organization, state, whatever)." It does not say, "Hey let's strap on bombs and murder innocent toddlers in a mall." People says those things,... idiotic murderous malevolent people. And idiotic murderous malevolent jackals follow them. But they ARE NOT representative of the entire population that follows Islam.

The logic of ignoring a cross-shape in a design, does not work for me. On the one hand, you despise the church, yet seeing a cross embedded in something does not get your ire up. Even if you haven't stated that you despise Islam, let's assume that you hold the same opinions of that faith as you do Christianity. (I do, by the way.... I'm anti organized religion of any sort, so I'm not trying to sneak a rhetorical point in here.)

Why then would the crescent, a naturally occuring shape, a common design element, and just coincidentally a symbol of a religion.... Why would it get any more attention or reaction from you than the cross-shape used by many in modern architecture?

Well, I treat them the same, and neither gets more attention. A crescent in a UA93 memorial is, to me, akin to a cross in a memorial to victims of, say, a Templar Knight massacre.

A cross in general doesn't bother me, and a crescent in general doesn't bother me. In both cases the perpetrators (Templars and Al Qaeda) are not representative of their faith as a whole, but motivated primarily by it. In both cases I would find the use of the religious symbol in bad taste.

I should reiterate that I find the use of the crescent in the UA93 memorial only mildly off-putting, and it frankly doesn't bother me overly, particularly if the relatives of those being commemorated are happy with it.

It was more the outright dismissal of objections to the memorial (and in particular the dismissal of those objecting as right wing nuts or conspiracy theorists) that were concerning me. :)

[Foolmewunz]

I think we sorta agree, then.
I can see why some people would have a visceral/gut reaction to the crescent, but I think it's just a little wrong-headed.

As I said, if there was even a shred of evidence that the designer was doing it to be PC and all that, I'd be out there demanding it be replaced. But as far as I have been able to discern, he had no such intentions. (And I wouldn't be lining up because it's my hated enemy represented, but because it's a known religious icon and we have this separation of church and state thing in the US, not to mention my strong atheist beliefs.)

Like the Alan King joke or the guys who fold twenty dollar bills or the faces in the smoke, you can trace all sorts of design elements in many objects. You just have to have a willingness to do so.

[Corsair 115]

So, its just another coincidence.
*adds another to the pileCoincidences happen. It's part of life.

An example: the odds of winning the top prize in the LottoSuper7 draw here in Ontario is roughly 21 million to 1. And yet in one drawing, when the prize was about $30 million, there were two winning tickets sold. A hell of an unlikely thing, but it happened nonetheless.

[Caustic Logic]

ANOTHER 9/11-related coincidence no one can debunk: Alexander Hamilton was sworn in as the first Secretary of the Treasury on September 11 1789. Coincidence? Add it to the pile! This one actually makes some sense as inside job evidence, since the Secret Service is part of treasury, and they were tracking the 9/11 planes while not rushing Bush from that school. Maybe the memorial was meant to look like one of Hamilton's toenail clippings?
:eek:

[CptColumbo]

I looked up in the night sky a few nights ago and saw a crescent shape.

COINCIDENCE?!

[Corsair 115]

An example: the odds of winning the top prize in the LottoSuper7 draw here in Ontario is roughly 21 million to 1. And yet in one drawing, when the prize was about $30 million, there were two winning tickets sold.It happened again! Only this time it was Lotto 6/49, where the odds of winning the top prize are a mere 14 million to one. Two winning tickets were sold for the $45 million jackpot.

Does this mean it's an inside job?